Is Lance Doping?

Blind Mountain Climber Erik Weihenmeyer Summits Mt. Everest
Herman Maier Makes Incredible Comeback After Motorcycle Accident
13 Year Old Bethany Hamilton Loses Arm in Shark Attack, Returns to Surfing 3 Months Later
German Girl Swims English Channel After Having Both Legs Amputated

These are all stories of people who faced adversity and overcame it because of determination, oh but wait that can't be the only reason.

Erik must have used some wonder drug to restore his sight to be able to see his way to the top of Everest because it would otherwise be impossible.

The German girl must have taken some drugs that helped her regrow her legs while she was crossing the channel becuase I just don't buy it. How can you swim 22 miles without legs?

Now I can hear all of the naysayers coming up with witty responses

"Erik didn't set an ascent speed record..."
"Herman was already a great skier..." (Lance was already an elite cyclist)

etc. etc.

Come on people give the man the credit he deserves.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by birdman23
Of course I have heard of OT and your sarcasm is rather boring. I am not "imputing" that LA is not prone to "OT". Of course he is. Limerickman made a statement about other riders who train harder and I would simply like to know who.

What I am saying is that LA has an indomitable will to succeed. You can never underestimate human will power.

You parroted an absurd statement that LA's (1999-2003) successes, contrasted by others to his 1992-1996 palmares, is owed to his ability to train harder than any other cycling athlete. The subjective view is this innate ability should quash any suspicion of PED's.

The objective view is that this is bunkum due to the perils and limitations imposed by OT. Every athlete has a training limit. The view expressed by yourself and others in defensive mode can only be interpreted that LA is a uniquely gifted athlete with the only ability at elite pro cycling levels to reach this limit.

When it is a fact, as I have pointed out, that all athletes have the scope to train optimally but are limited by this line that could plunge them into an OT state, I was not ridiculing you. To make the statement you did it was obvious you must not know about OT and training limits.

Now you say:

What I am saying is that LA has an indomitable will to succeed. You can never underestimate human will power.

I am trying to be objective on this issue, but where was this will during 1992-1996 when LA abandoned all but one of the TdF tours? I thought willpower would be a gift at birth.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by VeloFlash
You parroted an absurd statement that LA's (1999-2003) successes, contrasted by others to his 1992-1996 palmares, is owed to his ability to train harder than any other cycling athlete. The subjective view is this innate ability should quash any suspicion of PED's.

The objective view is that this is bunkum due to the perils and limitations imposed by OT. Every athlete has a training limit. The view expressed by yourself and others in defensive mode can only be interpreted that LA is a uniquely gifted athlete with the only ability at elite pro cycling levels to reach this limit.

When it is a fact, as I have pointed out, that all athletes have the scope to train optimally but are limited by this line that could plunge them into an OT state, I was not ridiculing you. To make the statement you did it was obvious you must not know about OT and training limits.

Now you say:

What I am saying is that LA has an indomitable will to succeed. You can never underestimate human will power.

I am trying to be objective on this issue, but where was this will during 1992-1996 when LA abandoned all but one of the TdF tours? I thought willpower would be a gift at birth.

I guess some people are born with willpower and others get it after facing adversity.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by birdman23
Blind Mountain Climber Erik Weihenmeyer Summits Mt. Everest
Herman Maier Makes Incredible Comeback After Motorcycle Accident
13 Year Old Bethany Hamilton Loses Arm in Shark Attack, Returns to Surfing 3 Months Later
German Girl Swims English Channel After Having Both Legs Amputated


These are all stories of people who faced adversity and overcame it because of determination, oh but wait that can't be the only reason.

Erik must have used some wonder drug to restore his sight to be able to see his way to the top of Everest because it would otherwise be impossible.

The German girl must have taken some drugs that helped her regrow her legs while she was crossing the channel becuase I just don't buy it. How can you swim 22 miles without legs?

Now I can hear all of the naysayers coming up with witty responses

"Erik didn't set an ascent speed record..."
"Herman was already a great skier..." (Lance was already an elite cyclist)

etc. etc.


Come on people give the man the credit he deserves.

So where is the correlation between these three disabled persons (Herman Maier?) competing only against their unfortunate shortcomings and Lance Armstrong, without any known residual handicap, competing against elite able bodied persons?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by birdman23
Of course I have heard of OT and your sarcasm is rather boring. I am not "imputing" that LA is not prone to "OT". Of course he is. Limerickman made a statement about other riders who train harder and I would simply like to know who.

What I am saying is that LA has an indomitable will to succeed. You can never underestimate human will power.

I don't really want to get in to an argument about what constitutes training hard because it is a very individual thing.
Of course all pro cyclists train hard.
Armstrong and his fans always sight Armstrongs ability to train very hard.
I submit that LA does train hard - like a lot of cyclists.

Here are three examples from different eras :
I have deliberately selected three eras because it demonstrates that training hard, has been the professional cyclists staple regime for years :

Irish Indepenedent Newspaper May 2004 :
WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE WHO RETIRE ?

Sean kelly "I found retirement very difficult. Coming from a professional background, your whole life is conditioned to the bike.
My doctor told me that I had to "retire" in a controlled way.
My schedule when I was competing was as follows : when not racing, I trained 6 hours per day, every day, with one day off
when I would cycle for 3-4 hours.
My heart muscles were so developed that to stop compeletly when I retired was medically very dangerous.
I spent 18 months after retirement doing between 300-500 miles
per week, reducing to 200-400 per week, down to 100-200 miles per week"

Eddy Merckx : as described by Ernesto Colnago
" Merckx trained and trained. I know these days that everyone trains but Merckx was doing what they do now (2004) back in the
1960's.
His first Milan-San Romo : I went to his hotel to deliver a bike for him.
I knew he got up early - so I made sure I caught him as soon as he was up and about.
Imagine my surprise when the receptionist told me that I had missed him at 7.00am !
It turns out that EM was out on a training spin - which I later found out was 375kms.
375kms two days before his first Milan-San Remo !
And he won that too !"

Udo Bolts "I had to make training harder than racing. To do this,
i would train in all sorts of weather, each day every day.
You cannot replicate race conditions - but you can replicate the
depth of stress that one physically endures.
That's why I trained for 6,7,8 hours per day.
Foodis important - diet is essential.
Now that I am retiring, i will be able to taste for the first time in 18
years, apple studel.
my favourite food.
I love this cycling life - it will be hard to leave behind the discipline"

Need I go on ?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by VeloFlash
So where is the correlation between these three disabled persons (Herman Maier?) competing only against their unfortunate shortcomings and Lance Armstrong, without any known residual handicap, competing against elite able bodied persons?

Maier is not disabled and I never inferred he was. He was involved in a debilitating motorcycle accident and people said he would never return to competitive skiing. He did return and has done well.
Herman Maier is not competing solely against his unfortunate shortcomings, he is competing against the elite able bodied persons...the best skiers in the world and winning.

Obviously you know nothing about cancer to say there is no residual handicap. My wife has been cancer free for 10 years and she still has health issues related to the chemo and radiation. Ask any cancer patient and they will tell you abou the residual handicaps.

I was not trying to make any correlation between these people and Lance. Only that they have something in common, incredible drive and determination.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by limerickman
I don't really want to get in to an argument about what constitutes training hard because it is a very individual thing.
Of course all pro cyclists train hard.
Armstrong and his fans always sight Armstrongs ability to train very hard.
I submit that LA does train hard - like a lot of cyclists.

Here are three examples from different eras :
I have deliberately selected three eras because it demonstrates that training hard, has been the professional cyclists staple regime for years :

Irish Indepenedent Newspaper May 2004 :
WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE WHO RETIRE ?

Sean kelly "I found retirement very difficult. Coming from a professional background, your whole life is conditioned to the bike.
My doctor told me that I had to "retire" in a controlled way.
My schedule when I was competing was as follows : when not racing, I trained 6 hours per day, every day, with one day off
when I would cycle for 3-4 hours.
My heart muscles were so developed that to stop compeletly when I retired was medically very dangerous.
I spent 18 months after retirement doing between 300-500 miles
per week, reducing to 200-400 per week, down to 100-200 miles per week"

Eddy Merckx : as described by Ernesto Colnago
" Merckx trained and trained. I know these days that everyone trains but Merckx was doing what they do now (2004) back in the
1960's.
His first Milan-San Romo : I went to his hotel to deliver a bike for him.
I knew he got up early - so I made sure I caught him as soon as he was up and about.
Imagine my surprise when the receptionist told me that I had missed him at 7.00am !
It turns out that EM was out on a training spin - which I later found out was 375kms.
375kms two days before his first Milan-San Remo !
And he won that too !"

Udo Bolts "I had to make training harder than racing. To do this,
i would train in all sorts of weather, each day every day.
You cannot replicate race conditions - but you can replicate the
depth of stress that one physically endures.
That's why I trained for 6,7,8 hours per day.
Foodis important - diet is essential.
Now that I am retiring, i will be able to taste for the first time in 18
years, apple studel.
my favourite food.
I love this cycling life - it will be hard to leave behind the discipline"

Need I go on ?

Actually yes, please go on. Who in the peloton today (not 30 years ago) puts more preparation into the tour? Ulrich? I don't think so, not when he shows up overweight almost every year. Which is a good thing for Lance. I personally feel Ulrich is more gifted than Lance but he doesn't work as hard and that is why he has come in 2nd the last 5 years.

Or should I say Ulrich is "gifted" i.e. he knows how to get around the drug testing too? Because it is well established that noone can be riding at the speeds they are now without juicing right? So if everyone is going to accuse Lance of doping then there might as well be a blanket statement that says anyone who ever has a top ten finish has got to be on drugs!

1992-1996 is respect of Lance Armstrong is more reflective of Lance Armstrong than 1998-now.

This is ironic, David Walsh (the same DW who has written LA
Confidential) wrote a book called "Inside the TDF", published in
1994.
It was a collection of 10 essays about the TDF :
Essentially, DW entitled 10 chapters with titles like "Old Master"
(Stephen Roche), the "NeoPro" (LA), the Domestique (Sean Yates), the King (BigMig), the Patron (The Badger) etc.
each person is interviewed to give his view of cycling and the TDF.

The chapter on the "NeoPro" is very interesting.
LA talks about how he considered triathlons to be the toughest sport until he joined the pro cycling circuit in Europe.
I don't have my copy of the book to hand (it's in Dublin)
but I'll paraphrase : he says that even though he trains hard, he is unable to make an impact on Indurain, Rominger, Jalabert,
Bugno or Chiapucci.
he says he thought he trained hard but that pro cycling is at a higher, higher level.
He says that he doubts himself and his ability to stay the circuit.
He says that he wonder why even after all this training, he is abrely able to keep up with the leading racers.

1992-1996 is respect of Lance Armstrong is more reflective of Lance Armstrong than 1998-now.

This is ironic, David Walsh (the same DW who has written LA
Confidential) wrote a book called "Inside the TDF", published in
1994.
It was a collection of 10 essays about the TDF :
Essentially, DW entitled 10 chapters with titles like "Old Master"
(Stephen Roche), the "NeoPro" (LA), the Domestique (Sean Yates), the King (BigMig), the Patron (The Badger) etc.
each person is interviewed to give his view of cycling and the TDF.

The chapter on the "NeoPro" is very interesting.
LA talks about how he considered triathlons to be the toughest sport until he joined the pro cycling circuit in Europe.
I don't have my copy of the book to hand (it's in Dublin)
but I'll paraphrase : he says that even though he trains hard, he is unable to make an impact on Indurain, Rominger, Jalabert,
Bugno or Chiapucci.
he says he thought he trained hard but that pro cycling is at a higher, higher level.
He says that he doubts himself and his ability to stay the circuit.
He says that he wonder why even after all this training, he is abrely able to keep up with the leading racers.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by limerickman
1992-1996 is respect of Lance Armstrong is more reflective of Lance Armstrong than 1998-now.

This is ironic, David Walsh (the same DW who has written LA
Confidential) wrote a book called "Inside the TDF", published in
1994.
It was a collection of 10 essays about the TDF :
Essentially, DW entitled 10 chapters with titles like "Old Master"
(Stephen Roche), the "NeoPro" (LA), the Domestique (Sean Yates), the King (BigMig), the Patron (The Badger) etc.
each person is interviewed to give his view of cycling and the TDF.

The chapter on the "NeoPro" is very interesting.
LA talks about how he considered triathlons to be the toughest sport until he joined the pro cycling circuit in Europe.
I don't have my copy of the book to hand (it's in Dublin)
but I'll paraphrase : he says that even though he trains hard, he is unable to make an impact on Indurain, Rominger, Jalabert,
Bugno or Chiapucci.
he says he thought he trained hard but that pro cycling is at a higher, higher level.
He says that he doubts himself and his ability to stay the circuit.
He says that he wonder why even after all this training, he is abrely able to keep up with the leading racers.

Yes and that was 10 years ago when he was a naive 22 year old. He now has 10 more years of training and racing in his legs (which obviously helps. how many racers are at peak form at 22? Not many as far as I can tell)

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by birdman23
Yes and that was 10 years ago when he was a naive 22 year old. He now has 10 more years of training and racing in his legs (which obviously helps. how many racers are at peak form at 22? Not many as far as I can tell)

Well if you take the time to study our sport there are infact quite a number of cyclists who were achieving success at the age of 22
and 23.

here are some examples :

At 23 :
Merckx one his first TDF and all five classment jerseys in his first TDF.
(at 19 he was world amateur champion and at 22 wins the Giro
and Giro Points and Kom titles as well).
At 23
Hinault :
Winner of the TDF (7 stages) and the Green points jerseys
1st fleche Wallone, 1st Tour of Lombardy, Ist Criterium International (at 22 he won the Liege Bastonge Liege, Ghent Wevelgem, Dauphine Libere).
At 23 :
Fignon
Winner of the TDF (at 24 wins his second TDF)
At 23 :
Anquetil :
TDF (4 stages), 1st GP Nations, 1st Paris Nice, 1st 4 Days of Dunkirk.

At 23
Jan Ullrich :
He won his first TDF (at 22 he finished second in his first TDF)
(at 19 he was world amateur road race champion).

In the above instances (and there are many other cyclists who had already acquired titles in stage races by 22/23) I have highlighted only a small proportion of champions who were already building their palmares from a very young age,

Between 1992-1996, Armstrong managed to win the Tour Du Pont
twice.
Bit on the light side- don't you think ?

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by birdman23
Actually yes, please go on. Who in the peloton today (not 30 years ago) puts more preparation into the tour? Ulrich? I don't think so, not when he shows up overweight almost every year. Which is a good thing for Lance. I personally feel Ulrich is more gifted than Lance but he doesn't work as hard and that is why he has come in 2nd the last 5 years.

In your original question you asked me to provide you with instances of cyclists who train as hard as LA.
I provided you with three cyclists from different eras.
You asked a general question about cyclists training harder than
LA - you did not specify modern cyclists.

Now you want me to provide you with examples of cyclists in this era who train harder than LA ?

Are you still contending that LA - because he supposedly trains harder than anyone else in history ebales him to cycle more quickly than those who used drugs during the 1990's ?
Seems like you are moving the goalposts here.

The central issue here is that LA's excuse to explain his improvement in his palmares does not withstand close scrutiny.
LA's explanation that his results - results which destroy times only achieved within the last 10 years by cyclists known to have been using EPO - are solely based upon ahard training, diet etc,
do not stack up.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by birdman23
Or should I say Ulrich is "gifted" i.e. he knows how to get around the drug testing too? Because it is well established that noone can be riding at the speeds they are now without juicing right? So if everyone is going to accuse Lance of doping then there might as well be a blanket statement that says anyone who ever has a top ten finish has got to be on drugs!

Well I disagree with your view on this too.

If you look at Jan Ullrich's palmares, this man's palmares from his professional debut has been consistent.
He debuted in the peleton and he came second in his first TDF.
In his next year (at 23) he won his first TDF title.
(at 19 he was world amateur champion).
His performance levels have been at a consistent level throughout his career (like Merckx and Hinault and Anquetil).
His record is in line with his predecessors.

Unlike Ullrich, Armstrong was incapable of finishing the TDF
three times in his first four attempts.
Armstrong was incapable of even threatening the podium in any major stage race except, the relatively lowly Tour DuPont.
Armstrong was for the first four years of his career a no-entity as
regards stage race successes.

No, Jan Ullrich has been consistent and his palmares is therefore
more credible than Armstrongs.

it's Armstrong's palmares and recent successes which is undoubtedly in question here.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by limerickman
Well I disagree with your view on this too.

If you look at Jan Ullrich's palmares, this man's palmares from his professional debut has been consistent.
He debuted in the peleton and he came second in his first TDF.
In his next year (at 23) he won his first TDF title.
(at 19 he was world amateur champion).
His performance levels have been at a consistent level throughout his career (like Merckx and Hinault and Anquetil).
His record is in line with his predecessors.

Unlike Ullrich, Armstrong was incapable of finishing the TDF
three times in his first four attempts.
Armstrong was incapable of even threatening the podium in any major stage race except, the relatively lowly Tour DuPont.
Armstrong was for the first four years of his career a no-entity as
regards stage race successes.

No, Jan Ullrich has been consistent and his palmares is therefore
more credible than Armstrongs.

it's Armstrong's palmares and recent successes which is undoubtedly in question here.

Lets look at Big Mig's tour record:

1985 - dnf
1986 - dnf
1987 - 97th
1988 - 47th
1989 - 17th
1990 - 10th

He loses nearly 2 stones in body mass along the way and:

1991 - 1st
1992 - 1st
1993 - 1st
1994 - 1st
1995 - 1st

So Big Mig, Miguel Indurain must then be a cheat as well.

Maybe its guys like Jan Ulrich who come out right from the start as best as they ever get and never get any better who are doing the dope.

Based on JU's work ethic vs LA or MI there is absolutley no comparison.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if JU doesn't even make the podium this year.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by davidbod
Lets look at Big Mig's tour record:

1985 - dnf
1986 - dnf
1987 - 97th
1988 - 47th
1989 - 17th
1990 - 10th

He loses nearly 2 stones in body mass along the way and:

1991 - 1st
1992 - 1st
1993 - 1st
1994 - 1st
1995 - 1st

So Big Mig, Miguel Indurain must then be a cheat as well.

Maybe its guys like Jan Ulrich who come out right from the start as best as they ever get and never get any better who are doing the dope.

Based on JU's work ethic vs LA or MI there is absolutley no comparison.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if JU doesn't even make the podium this year.

If my memory serves me correct (and I am sure I will be corrected if it has failed me), was not Big Mig's team role in those early TdF's solely as a domestique and not as a team GC contender? Makes a difference to the interpretation if I am correct. Domestiques are team designated mules not prospective stage and tour winners.

Here is some excerpts of a review of a book that was released in 2002 that contains some interesting statistics.

There are no tips on how to raid a pharmacy in "Do you have what it takes to win the Tour de France?"*. Instead, former Festina team trainer Antoine Vayer and software engineer Frederic Portoleau team up to study the physical build of the last ten yellow jersey winners.

With the Tour won or lost in the mountain stages, they focus specifically on the energy produced by a rider to climb the toughest Alps and Pyrenees stages.

In cycling, power is measured in watts. Thanks to TV images, Vayer and Porloteau studied the speed of the peddling, the time it took to climb the mountain, the distance, the gradient of the climbs and the weight of the riders.

Rivals of three-time defending champion Lance Armstrong have reason to shudder: Vayner and Portoleau conclude that Armstrong is in constant progression since 1999 with an average power of 415 watts in 1999, 430 watts in 2000 and 445 watts in 2001. By contrast, when he climbed the Tourmalet mountain in 1994 - before his cancer treatment - he produced an average power of 381 watts.

The authors’ main aim is to provide a mountain-climbing measuring tool for the everyday bike rider. What they find along the way is a spectacular increase in the average power of the last 10 years Tour de France winners with a spectacular 20% jump from 1991 to 1995.

Was it the mineral water? Evidence is circumstantial, but the 445 watt-average that year did coincide with the heyday of EPO use. Following the introduction of blood testing in 1997 and the 1998 Festina doping scandal, the average power falls to 400 watts, increasing again to 430 watts in last three Tours.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by birdman23
Actually yes, please go on. Who in the peloton today (not 30 years ago) puts more preparation into the tour? Ulrich? I don't think so, not when he shows up overweight almost every year. Which is a good thing for Lance. I personally feel Ulrich is more gifted than Lance but he doesn't work as hard and that is why he has come in 2nd the last 5 years.

If JU is overweight and unfit now (June 2004) just out from the prologue of the 2004 Tdf, I will be interested to see him fit!

Here is a pic of him in the Tour de Suisse in yellow that is still running -

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by davidbod
Lets look at Big Mig's tour record:

1985 - dnf
1986 - dnf
1987 - 97th
1988 - 47th
1989 - 17th
1990 - 10th

He loses nearly 2 stones in body mass along the way and:

1991 - 1st
1992 - 1st
1993 - 1st
1994 - 1st
1995 - 1st

So Big Mig, Miguel Indurain must then be a cheat as well.

Maybe its guys like Jan Ulrich who come out right from the start as best as they ever get and never get any better who are doing the dope.

Based on JU's work ethic vs LA or MI there is absolutley no comparison.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if JU doesn't even make the podium this year.

Miguel Indurain's career exemplifies those who progress on a gradual basis toward their palmares.
If you consider BigMIgs career, you will see that at Banesto, he debuted in 1985.
(They were known as Reynolds then).
From 1987, his manager Jose Miguel Echavarria stated that Miguel's job "was to devote himself totally to the service of his
leader "Pericio" Delgado".
In the book "A life on wheels - Miguel Indurain" the spanish author tells how Indurain's physical capacities (lung capacity,
low resting heart beat, optimum blood pressure and general physical strength) was documented as early as 1986 and that
effectively Reynolds-Banesto were tapering his progress so that
he would assume the mantle of TDF winner when Delgado's
tenure was due to finish.
(as it happened Delgado only won one TDF in 1988).

Yeah! I'd say that early sensations in the TdF are not likely veteran sensations. There seems to be favoring of a gradual transition culminating in the late 20's for dominant champions, like Armstrong, Indurain, Lemond. Jan, on the other hand, flashed young and grabbed one, but has failed to follow through, although his seconds have been dominant. Another example is 1989 Tour loser Laurent Fignon, who lost it by seconds to the American sensation Greg Lemond. Laurent Fignon won Tour victory too young, as I see it, in his early twenties. He may have had a more lustrious career if he had been patient like Big Mig, Lemond and Armstrong, each of whom showed early promise and may have flamed out for the crowds at early ages instead of wisely learning how to walk before they run.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by VeloFlash
If JU is overweight and unfit now (June 2004) just out from the prologue of the 2004 Tdf, I will be interested to see him fit!

Here is a pic of him in the Tour de Suisse in yellow that is still running -

I watched yesterday's final TT stage of Tour de Suisse and one thing is sure: Lance will suffer *a lot* during next tour!!! I've rarely seen Ullrich that fit.