Lance Armstrong gave up.

[donner]

Something I can reference, at least physical evidence would be nice considering the magnitude of the implications.

I'll try to find the source, but keep in mind, there are several things going on with this 'web'. 1) is that there wasn't a test for EPO or HGH for most of the time lance was riding 2) there are accounts (again, see hamilton's book and other reports) that riders knew when they were going to be tested and there were lapses in the rules and oversight which allowed riders to dodge tests all together. Most of the tests were based on the levels of certain markers in the blood, which could easily be dropped by drinking enough water or by waiting a few hours to be tested. The books is full of reports of testers who'd call the night before to tell riders they were coming the next day.

The benefit of a lot of the doping wasn't for longterm gains, it was for quick recovery and extra energy during the last week of stage races (like the tour). Blood bags didn't give a rider super strength or anything, but simply allowed them to push past their previous limits because of the extra red blood cells they had and such. The system was flawed and riders took advantage of it.

again, i'll try to find more stuff for you.

 

[Glocktogo]

I also don't know why the USADA went after lance and not other athletes, and really i don't care. The information is out there now and is pretty damning, but i know there will be some that wouldn't even believe a confession from lance.

I'd completely believe a confession from Lance, I just wouldn't care one way or the other whether it happened or not. The only people who do seem to be stuck living in the past. You live, you learn and you move on.

 

[Lone Wolf '49]

I used to ride a bike for health reasons, and I can't now, but all this hoopla is worthless. Why waste the time about it? This is just like the politics and so bury it, please, just too many other important things is life than Lance.

 

[Werewolf]

Now that I've read the entire thread I've come to the conclusion that the real question is not whether LA or any othere athlete used performance enhancing drugs but

Why the HELL the freaking government is involved in the policing of it anyway!​

Shouldn't the responsibility for policing a sport be that of the owners of that sport or the associations setup to administer and police that sport.

It isn't any of the goobermints business and one wonders how they got into the business of policing athletes.

 

[donner]

Now that I've read the entire thread I've come to the conclusion that the real question is not whether LA or any othere athlete used performance enhancing drugs but

Why the HELL the freaking government is involved in the policing of it anyway!​

Shouldn't the responsibility for policing a sport be that of the owners of that sport or the associations setup to administer and police that sport.

It isn't any of the goobermints business and one wonders how they got into the business of policing athletes.

it's a good question, but who should police the olympic athletes then?

 

[PUMPKIN]

Is lance Armstrong the guy that rides skateboards?

 

[mightymouse]

Is lance Armstrong the guy that rides skateboards?

yuuup.

 

[ez bake]

it's a good question, but who should police the olympic athletes then?

Isn't that what the IOC is for?

 

[JD8]

Well, I don't think the world is black and white. I do not believe media is all bad or all good. I do believe the subject matter determines media honesty. Therefore, to say they're completely honest or completely misleading is naive. I would think this approach to media to be a more "common-sense" one and that how a person views the media is again, based on the content of the subject. So I feel your desire to bring up a completely different subject and my stance on media with that subject was a irrelevant.

Right I get that you see what you want to see, therefore it's irrelevant. The point as to what you are missing is that I don't believe you can completely persecute someone on the media's word. Now if they gave real reference and they rarely do, it would be a different story, but I'm still not seeing it here. Granted I'll go through what donner posted out of curiousity but nothing tangible has been given otherwise. However, I'm used to a different standard when it comes to "fact" than many others.

The benefit of a lot of the doping wasn't for longterm gains, it was for quick recovery and extra energy during the last week of stage races (like the tour). Blood bags didn't give a rider super strength or anything, but simply allowed them to push past their previous limits because of the extra red blood cells they had and such. The system was flawed and riders took advantage of it

I understand completely all of the biology behind all of this, even enough to apply come critical thinking. So how did he not look like a heroin addict? Several transfusions? and nobody noticed?

 

[whiskeysnoot]

Ok, after 8 pages there's a couple of things you're missing. One: when and if he is stripped of his titles, they will not be awarded to someone else because....well, hell, they were all blood doping and we just don't have the time to crucify them all.
Two: He came back after ball cancer to continue winning. Ball cancer!!