Armstrong gaining power

LA is riding pretty good for an old man. He is standing at 12th place after stage 17. I know that if they could freeze his urine and blood and then check it in the year 2025 it would be proof positive that he is still doping. How can a 36/37 year old who has been out of competitive cycling for 3 years come back and ride as well as he is. Not to mention that he just had surgery. We all know that the only way LA could have ever done anything in cycling is because of his doping. His attitude by supporting Levi is all an act when the water really hits the wheel he will show his true colors and want all the glory for himself. I just wish they could somehow get tests results that will show he is still doping. His form is improving as the race goes along...gee he must be doping. That guy...is so lucky...I mean how can he always get by on those tests. Of course he has tested positive so many times in the past and those tests have been disregarded for some reason. I don't see how the French could let all those positive tests be disregarded. They are valid and have been proven to withstand every question regarding them, why are they not considered?

leerobbs said:

LA is riding pretty good for an old man. He is standing at 12th place after stage 17. I know that if they could freeze his urine and blood and then check it in the year 2025 it would be proof positive that he is still doping. How can a 36/37 year old who has been out of competitive cycling for 3 years come back and ride as well as he is. Not to mention that he just had surgery. We all know that the only way LA could have ever done anything in cycling is because of his doping. His attitude by supporting Levi is all an act when the water really hits the wheel he will show his true colors and want all the glory for himself. I just wish they could somehow get tests results that will show he is still doping. His form is improving as the race goes along...gee he must be doping. That guy...is so lucky...I mean how can he always get by on those tests. Of course he has tested positive so many times in the past and those tests have been disregarded for some reason. I don't see how the French could let all those positive tests be disregarded. They are valid and have been proven to withstand every question regarding them, why are they not considered?

you really don't keep up on cycling news when it concerns the efficacy of doping controls, do you?

adamastor said:

First comments of "surprise" about the way Armstrong is gaining power during the actual Giro by Jef Bernard, former French pro, in today's L'Equipe online:

free translation

"..Armstrong seems to be gaining power, which surprises me, surprises me a lot even. If he maintains this form on the Tour, Astana will need to redefine their strategy. Even with Contador over the lot, I don't see Leipheimer racing for him, and not for Armstrong...But I don't believe he can win the Tour. For the guys who have been around for 4 years, it would be to despair of pro cycling ..."

lequipe.fr20090526 130120 menchov a l experience.htmlOpen ↗

Even if nothing said, this guy is clearly showing his scepticism. I'm starting to look forward to the Tour after all...plenty of news still to come before it starts.

With the way it's looking, Astana won't be at the Tour.

leerobbs said:

LA is riding pretty good for an old man. He is standing at 12th place after stage 17. I know that if they could freeze his urine and blood and then check it in the year 2025 it would be proof positive that he is still doping. How can a 36/37 year old who has been out of competitive cycling for 3 years come back and ride as well as he is. Not to mention that he just had surgery. We all know that the only way LA could have ever done an....... <whiny [censored] snipped>

Correct, he's very fortunate. Miracles happen when your wallet is fat.

Why?

swampy1970 said:

With the way it's looking, Astana won't be at the Tour.

azdroptop said:

Why?

Astana don't have the required $2million in the back as required by UCI - to make sure that riders get paid and races, such as the Tour, can be completed. The deadline set by the UCI to replenish this fund was May 31. If they don't meet that deadline then their license gets pulled.

Some of the sponors who failed to pay the team have coughed up some cash but it's not enough. It's one of the reasons why Astana are riding in 'sponsor faded' jerseys for the second half of the Giro.

Armstrong will pony up the didge.

leerobbs said:

They are valid and have been proven to withstand every question regarding them, why are they not considered?

I'm sure they are reaaaal valid. No tampering of any sort.

No_Positives said:

I'm sure they are reaaaal valid. No tampering of any sort.

Cui buono?
Ah! I'd almost forgotten about all that spiteful, Gallic envy; how those embittered, surrender monkeys seized the opportunity to bring down the hated occupier who had defiled their sacred mountains.

Gregers said:

Cui buono?
Ah! I'd almost forgotten about all that spiteful, Gallic envy; how those embittered, surrender monkeys seized the opportunity to bring down the hated occupier who had defiled their sacred mountains.

You left out "cheese eating" - cheese eating surrender monkeys. As in "the squeeky clean, never doped , which is why we never win anything, cheese eating surrender monkeys".

Educating the youth is so difficult these days 😄

slovakguy said:

you really don't keep up on cycling news when it concerns the efficacy of doping controls, do you?

No...not like someone like you. I have a life.

leerobbs said:

No...not like someone like you. I have a life.

First, his life is described as a "miracle."

Then, he "didn't dope."

Next, he "never tested positive."

After that, it became "Well, everyone doped, it was a level playing field."

And finally, "Who cares, it's entertainment."

If you were at the last step right from the get-go, then that's fine by me. But if you changed your story over the years, then you're a sycophantic chump.

jimmypop said:

First, his life is described as a "miracle."

Then, he "didn't dope."

Next, he "never tested positive."

After that, it became "Well, everyone doped, it was a level playing field."

And finally, "Who cares, it's entertainment."

If you were at the last step right from the get-go, then that's fine by me. But if you changed your story over the years, then you're a sycophantic chump.

I don't recall him morphing beyond I did not test positive.

leerobbs said:

I don't recall him morphing beyond I did not test positive.

Not him personally, but the suckers like yourself.

As for Armstrong, he's just a victim of his own borderline personality disorder.

jimmypop said:

Not him personally, but the suckers like yourself.

As for Armstrong, he's just a victim of his own borderline personality disorder.

Thanks for the kind words.

jimmypop said:

Not him personally, but the suckers like yourself.

As for Armstrong, he's just a victim of his own borderline personality disorder.

Are we feeling a little bitter jimmypop? Did mommy not hug you enough as a child or were you just beaten up by all the little girls and left to cry in the corner of the school yard?

swampy1970 said:

Are we feeling a little bitter jimmypop? Did mommy not hug you enough as a child or were you just beaten up by all the little girls and left to cry in the corner of the school yard?

Yes. This is why I hate sports cheats who prey on cancer sufferers and survivors to build their egos.

swampy1970 said:

Are we feeling a little bitter jimmypop? Did mommy not hug you enough as a child or were you just beaten up by all the little girls and left to cry in the corner of the school yard?

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

jimmypop said:

who prey on cancer sufferers and survivors to build their egos.

That's the spirit. Thank you for reminding me why I log on to this site once every few weeks or so. I love the creativity of circuitous reasoning for Lance hatred that is exhibited with such spittle-coated eloquence here.

You miserable [censored]. LOL.