"sure fire" supplements

Bill Baka said:

bryanska said:

Quoted message said:

Care to share your real experience here?

Dimethyltriptamine. Like being shot out of an atomic cannon.

I just looked it up and it seems to be illegal.
Bill

yabut, they don't test for it.
--
zk

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 15:16:01 GMT, "rms" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

My question is, how to prevent muscle cramping in the latter half of a
marathon run. Are there minerals or somesuch that would alleviate this.

rms

Umeboshi will balance your pH.

http://home.iae.nl/users/lightnet/paramahamsa/umeboshi.htm
--
zk

Zoot Katz said:

Bill Baka said:

bryanska said:

>Care to share your real experience here?

Dimethyltriptamine. Like being shot out of an atomic cannon.

I just looked it up and it seems to be illegal.
Bill

yabut, they don't test for it.

Still, it could be a sure fire heart attack, even for a fit rider.
I remember during last years TDF, they mentioned a pro cyclist dying
from a heart attack, so nobody is above nature.
Caution in what you take. You may feel super one minute and nothing the
next (and forever).
Bill

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Some old european dinosaur named Eddy Merckx used to recommend "Ride
Lots". I'm not sure if it's still available in the US.

Not to mention Pot Belge...

That was never proven, was it?

Back in the day, about the only way they could prove doping was if you
showed up at the starting line with the needle still stuck in your arm.

Quoted message said:

......and, of course, Lance was as pure as the driven snow, right?

The most-tested athlete in history, yet we still don't have conclusive proof
either way, due in no small part of [censored] Pound. If [censored] Pound would step
back a bit and set standards, and then stick to those standards, we'd be in
a better place. Instead, he allows retroactive use of samples that were
never intended to be used for proof of guilt or innocence... samples that
weren't subjected to the same chain-of-custody requirements etc.

It's really stupid to even have to guess at the answer to that question
(whether Lance took illegal drugs while racing... we'll assume that he took
advantage of every-possible legal technique & substance, and that alone
kills off the idea that he's "pure" in most eyes). We should know. Instead,
we suspect. And the more we hear about others, the greater the feeling that
Lance is tainted. Every time an athlete says he didn't, and then later
admits his/her guilt, it removes that much more credibility to someone else
who says they didn't... to the point where we assume they did, even when
they didn't.

Clear as mud on that one?

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Davykoh wrote:
> Hi there,
> Besides solid training, vitamins and the illegal stuffs, I would like
> to
> find out what are
> the 'sure fire' supplements that really enhances performance. Things
> like
> L-
> carnitine, L- glutamine, Coenzyme Q10 and the likes.
> Care to share your real experience here?
>

Some old european dinosaur named Eddy Merckx used to recommend "Ride
Lots". I'm not sure if it's still available in the US.

Not to mention Pot Belge...

That was never proven, was it?

......and, of course, Lance was as pure as the driven snow, right?

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Some old european dinosaur named Eddy Merckx used to recommend "Ride
> Lots". I'm not sure if it's still available in the US.

Not to mention Pot Belge...

That was never proven, was it?

Back in the day, about the only way they could prove doping was if you
showed up at the starting line with the needle still stuck in your arm.

Then why mention it, Mike?

Tell me, all commercial, "what does Lance ride?" considerations aside,
is there any doubt in your mind that were they both in their prime,
equally trained, equally clean and on identical bikes that The Cannibal
would eat lil' Lance's lunch?

Merckx didn't just win, he dominated. Not just the Yellow Jersey, but
the Green and the Polka Dot, too, all in the same year. And he didn't
just win at the TdF, but everywhere he went.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

......and, of course, Lance was as pure as the driven snow, right?

The most-tested athlete in history, yet we still don't have conclusive proof
either way

<mercifully snipped>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Back in the day, about the only way they could prove doping was if you
showed up at the starting line with the needle still stuck in your arm.

Then why mention it, Mike?

Because someone suggested that Eddy Merckx recommended to "Ride Lots" in
response to someone else asking about chemical means of improving
performance, the implication being that... oh heck, why do I even bother
sometimes? Must resist. But I can't. 1969, Giro d'Italia. Denied, of course.
And, who knows, possibly legitimately so.

It needs to be made very clear that drugs are anything but a new problem to
cycling.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

> > Some old european dinosaur named Eddy Merckx used to recommend "Ride
> > Lots". I'm not sure if it's still available in the US.
>
> Not to mention Pot Belge...
>

That was never proven, was it?

Back in the day, about the only way they could prove doping was if you
showed up at the starting line with the needle still stuck in your arm.

Then why mention it, Mike?

Tell me, all commercial, "what does Lance ride?" considerations aside,
is there any doubt in your mind that were they both in their prime,
equally trained, equally clean and on identical bikes that The Cannibal
would eat lil' Lance's lunch?

Merckx didn't just win, he dominated. Not just the Yellow Jersey, but
the Green and the Polka Dot, too, all in the same year. And he didn't
just win at the TdF, but everywhere he went.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

......and, of course, Lance was as pure as the driven snow, right?

The most-tested athlete in history, yet we still don't have conclusive
proof
either way

<mercifully snipped>

Quoted message said:

Tell me, all commercial, "what does Lance ride?" considerations aside,
is there any doubt in your mind that were they both in their prime,
equally trained, equally clean and on identical bikes that The Cannibal
would eat lil' Lance's lunch?

Merckx didn't just win, he dominated. Not just the Yellow Jersey, but
the Green and the Polka Dot, too, all in the same year. And he didn't
just win at the TdF, but everywhere he went.

Sorry, didn't respond to that part of your post. If I had to choose the
greatest cyclist ever, unquestionably I would choose Merckx as well. As you
point out, he did it all. Lance is a specialist, and does everything he can
to achieve a very specific goal. If the contest was to pick just one event,
well ahead of time, and have Lance and Merckx go at it, I'd put my money on
Lance. But, as I said, Merckx did it all. Lance, I'm convinced, would still
with the TdF going up against Merckx. But Merckx would win the ProTour, he'd
lead in UCI points, he'd hold the hour record, probably win the Olympics and
Worlds.

Both are incredible athletes. I would also toss in Hinault (the French ought
to have at least one guy in that club).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

> > Some old european dinosaur named Eddy Merckx used to recommend "Ride
> > Lots". I'm not sure if it's still available in the US.
>
> Not to mention Pot Belge...
>

That was never proven, was it?

Back in the day, about the only way they could prove doping was if you
showed up at the starting line with the needle still stuck in your arm.

Then why mention it, Mike?

Tell me, all commercial, "what does Lance ride?" considerations aside,
is there any doubt in your mind that were they both in their prime,
equally trained, equally clean and on identical bikes that The Cannibal
would eat lil' Lance's lunch?

Merckx didn't just win, he dominated. Not just the Yellow Jersey, but
the Green and the Polka Dot, too, all in the same year. And he didn't
just win at the TdF, but everywhere he went.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

......and, of course, Lance was as pure as the driven snow, right?

The most-tested athlete in history, yet we still don't have conclusive
proof
either way

<mercifully snipped>

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Tell me, all commercial, "what does Lance ride?" considerations aside,
is there any doubt in your mind that were they both in their prime,
equally trained, equally clean and on identical bikes that The Cannibal
would eat lil' Lance's lunch?

Merckx didn't just win, he dominated. Not just the Yellow Jersey, but
the Green and the Polka Dot, too, all in the same year. And he didn't
just win at the TdF, but everywhere he went.

Sorry, didn't respond to that part of your post. If I had to choose the
greatest cyclist ever, unquestionably I would choose Merckx as well. As you
point out, he did it all. Lance is a specialist, and does everything he can
to achieve a very specific goal. If the contest was to pick just one event,
well ahead of time, and have Lance and Merckx go at it, I'd put my money on
Lance. But, as I said, Merckx did it all. Lance, I'm convinced, would still
with the TdF going up against Merckx. But Merckx would win the ProTour, he'd
lead in UCI points, he'd hold the hour record, probably win the Olympics and
Worlds.

Both are incredible athletes. I would also toss in Hinault (the French ought
to have at least one guy in that club).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

OK, Here's my plan. Tell Bush it would be great for international
politics and enter him. 190th place. At least it would keep him out of
trouble for a month <grin>.

Seriously, Hinault is a good candidate, and having a French guy win
would put the France back in Tour de France.
Lance was maybe not totally a specialist but he definitely was a
strategist, and had a manager who thought strategy. Win this stage, give
up the next, don't burn out to prove a point on one day, etc.
If they all had good 'strategic' managers they might have a chance.
Bill

"Davykoh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi there,
Besides solid training, vitamins and the illegal stuffs, I would like to
find out what are
the 'sure fire' supplements that really enhances performance. Things like
L-
carnitine, L- glutamine, Coenzyme Q10 and the likes.
Care to share your real experience here?

Thanks in advance.
Davy

In my opinion, suppliments are useless.
The main reason is the suppliment manufacturers don't even put the stuff
advertised in the pills or capsules or whatever.
A number of the companies have already been caught red handed putting
cornstarch or sugar in the pills already with no purported ingredients.
All the companies do, is say they had a manufacturing error or problem and
they have corrected it. yeah right.
So when you buy that $120.00 bottle of pills, how do you know you really got
the suppliment that you bought instead of fake sugar pills?
Do you really trust the manufacturer to put the ingredients they say they
did in the pills? The FDA doesn't care actually.
There are no regulations or enforcement that the suplliment manufacturers
have to obey. The FDA only ensures the facilities might be sanitary.
The second reason is the artificial vitamins and suppliments have and are
being shown in studies to have little or no effect on helping you in various
ways.
Of course that may be because the suppliment pills are sugar pills or
something from the main reason above.
Doesn't L-Glutamine come from cow flesh? Heck eat some good beef instead. I
think a good grilled steak is a lot better than a pill anyway.
Doesn't L-Carratine come from carrots or something?

So the only sure way to get all these vitamins and suppliments is to eat
lots of fruits and vegetables along with a balanced diet and get out there
and ride and ride.

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

......and, of course, Lance was as pure as the driven snow, right?

The most-tested athlete in history, yet we still don't have conclusive proof
either way, due in no small part of [censored] Pound. If [censored] Pound would step
back a bit and set standards, and then stick to those standards, we'd be in
a better place. Instead, he allows retroactive use of samples that were
never intended to be used for proof of guilt or innocence... samples that
weren't subjected to the same chain-of-custody requirements etc.

Funny how we didn't learn the lessons from OJ's defense team. If you
can't prove the evidence has been safeguarded, the evidence doesn't
prove anything.

Pat

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Back in the day, about the only way they could prove doping was if you
showed up at the starting line with the needle still stuck in your arm.

Then why mention it, Mike?

Because someone suggested that Eddy Merckx recommended to "Ride Lots" in
response to someone else asking about chemical means of improving
performance, the implication being that... oh heck, why do I even bother
sometimes?

"Someone" was me. What I said was directed at the American mentality
(I'll go faster if: I take this pill/ I eat this GU/ I get that new
plastic bike/etc.) of wanting a quick fix. I wasn't even thinking of
Lance and all those allegations.

(Maybe Lance and Barry Bonds should get together for a pity party.)

Must resist. But I can't. 1969, Giro d'Italia. Denied, of course.

Quoted message said:

And, who knows, possibly legitimately so.

IIRC, there was something about blood samples being forwarded to a lab.
Merckx and 2-3 other riders. Ultimately, they were found to be clean.
Was that the '69 Giro?

Quoted message said:

It needs to be made very clear that drugs are anything but a new problem to
cycling.

And anyone who thinks they are should Google Tom Simpson 1967.

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Tell me, all commercial, "what does Lance ride?" considerations aside,
is there any doubt in your mind that were they both in their prime,
equally trained, equally clean and on identical bikes that The Cannibal
would eat lil' Lance's lunch?

Merckx didn't just win, he dominated. Not just the Yellow Jersey, but
the Green and the Polka Dot, too, all in the same year. And he didn't
just win at the TdF, but everywhere he went.

Sorry, didn't respond to that part of your post. If I had to choose the
greatest cyclist ever, unquestionably I would choose Merckx as well. As you
point out, he did it all. Lance is a specialist, and does everything he can
to achieve a very specific goal. If the contest was to pick just one event,
well ahead of time, and have Lance and Merckx go at it, I'd put my money on
Lance.

And I would happily take your money.

Quoted message said:

But, as I said, Merckx did it all. Lance, I'm convinced, would still
with the TdF going up against Merckx.

IMO, the presence of a Merckx or Hinault in the peloton would have
rendered the Armstrong TdF strategy moot. Those guys would have been
out to put time on him every day. He never faced that kind of
relentless pressure.

Quoted message said:

But Merckx would win the ProTour, he'd
lead in UCI points, he'd hold the hour record, probably win the Olympics and
Worlds.

Both are incredible athletes. I would also toss in Hinault (the French ought
to have at least one guy in that club).

I agree, Hinault is very under appreciated, at least here in the US.
Most US cyclists don't even know the name. Sad.