LANCE ARMSTRONG TESTED POSITIVE! [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

LANCE ARMSTRONG TESTED POSITIVE!

Mrs. B
08-23-2005, 09:05 AM
sorry this is in German, but you get the sense. will try to translate eventually, unless some German native speaker would do it. ;)

Armstrong positiv getestet
1999 gewann Lance Armstrong die Tour de France zum ersten Mal

Paris/München - Die Radsport-Welt unter Schock: Lance Armstrong steht unter Doping-Verdacht!

Der siebenmalige Sieger der Tour de France soll 1999 bei seinem ersten Erfolg in Frankreich mit EPO nachgeholfen haben. Das berichtet die französische Zeitung "L'Equipe".

Sechs Urinproben positiv

Im französischen Labor in Chatenay-Malabry wurde dem Bericht zufolge in sechs Urinproben des Amerikaners EPO festgestellt.

Die A-Proben des 33-Jährigen waren damals noch negativ ausgefallen. Diese Proben wurden vernichtet, die B-Proben jedoch aufbewahrt.

Mit neuesten Test-Methoden machten sich die Wissenschaftler später in den B-Proben auf sie Suche nach unerlaubten Mitteln - und wurden fündig.

Schon beim Prolog positiv?

Die Vorwürfe werfen einen Schatten auf die Karriere des "Tourminators". Immer wieder hatte Armstrong beteuert, nie mit unerlaubten Mitteln nachgeholfen zu haben.

Auch jetzt wehrt er sich vehement gegen die Vorwürfe: "Ich habe niemals leistungssteigernde Mittel genommen. Das ist purer Skandaljournalismus der L'Equipe", erklärte Armstrong auf seiner Internetseite.

Doch in den Proben nach dem Prolog der Tour 1999 am 3. Juli in Puy-du-Fou, nach der ersten Etappe von Montaigu nach Challans, dem neunten Teilstück von Grand-Bornand nach Sestrières, Etappe Nummer zehn Sestrières - L'Alpe d'Huez, zwölf Saint-Galmier - Saint-Flour und 14 Castres - Saint-Gaudens fanden sich erhöhte EPO-Werte.

EPO wird seit 1983 synthetisch hergestellt


Erythropoetin (EPO) ist ein in der Niere produziertes körpereigenes Hormon, das die Bildung roter Blutzellen in den Stammzellen des Knochenmarks anregt.

Diese Erythrozyten binden in der Lunge Sauerstoff und transportieren diesen zur Versorgung der Zellen in die verschiedenen Körperregionen wie die Muskulatur. Seit 1983 ist es möglich, EPO synthetisch herzustellen.

Unter anderem wurde Ex-Tour-Sieger Marco Pantani des EPO-Doping überführt.

Anschuldigungen seit Jahren

Seit mehreren Jahren muss sich Armstrong mit Doping-Anschuldigungen auseinander setzen.

Unmittelbar vor der Tour de France 2004 erschien zu diesem Thema das Buch "L.A. Confidential - die Geheimnisse des Lance Armstrong".

Darin bezichtigen eine ehemalige Masseurin, frühere Teamkameraden und der ehemalige Tour-de-France Sieger Greg LeMond Armstrong des EPO-Dopings.

Armstrong geht gegen den Autoren David Walsh juristisch vor.

Anklage gegen Dr. Ferrari scheitert

2000 musste der Amerikaner eingestehen, dass ihn der italienische Arzt Dr. Michele Ferrari seit 1995 berät. Diesem wurde vor Gericht vorgeworfen, Radsportler mit Dopingmitteln zu versorgen.

Die Anklage scheiterte jedoch aus Mangel an Beweisen.

Positiver Test von 1999 ohne Folgen

Ein dokumentierter positiver Doping-Befund von Armstrong existiert jedoch. Er datiert pikanterweise vom 4. Juli 1999.

Damals wurde schon während der Rundfahrt ein erhöhter Kortikoid-Wert festgestellt, der mit einem Rezept erklärt wurde.

Das Rezept soll vordatiert worden sein. Der positive Test blieb folgenlos.

Michael Schwartz/sport1.de

Action Jackson
08-23-2005, 09:09 AM
Yes, I have heard about this, but they won't take away his title and it was an open secret that he had the high haemoglobin levels which weren't due to hormonal problems.

The only thing that is almost surprising is that he might have got caught.

Choupi
08-23-2005, 09:21 AM
Here's the link to the original article published in l'Equipe this morning. They have made the research...

http://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme/DOPAGE_ARMSTRONG_2.html

I'm not worried, given the importance of the issue, it's gonna be soon available in many other languages than German or French!

Deivid23
08-23-2005, 09:34 AM
Nothing new at the sun...

Mrs. B
08-23-2005, 09:35 AM
merci, Choupinsky. here's from the bbc:

Armstrong denies drug allegations

Armstrong wins seventh Tour
Seven-times Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong has denied claims in French newspaper L'Equipe that he was using blood-boosting drugs in 1999.
"Yet again, a European newspaper has reported that I've tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs," he told his website www.lancearmstrong.com.

"L'Equipe is reporting that my 1999 samples were positive.

"I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs."

Armstrong added: "Unfortunately, the witch hunt continues and the article is nothing short of tabloid journalism.

"The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself.

"They state 'There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant's rights cannot be respected'."

The 33-year-old American retired from racing after claiming an unprecedented seventh Tour victory last month.

Armstrong, who won his first Tour in 1999 after recovering from life-threatening cancer, has never tested positive for a banned substance.

Action Jackson
08-23-2005, 09:36 AM
Nothing new at the sun...

Rain is wet and Lance took drugs, that is right that there is nothing new here.

Deivid23
08-23-2005, 09:37 AM
Rain is wet and Lance took drugs, that is right that there is nothing new here.

Cycling is so full of shit it´s scary

Action Jackson
08-23-2005, 09:40 AM
Cycling is so full of shit it´s scary

It's the sport where they do the latest experiments in substances that can give an edge to the athlete.

Deivid23
08-23-2005, 09:43 AM
It's the sport where they do the latest experiments in substances that can give an edge to the athlete.

Sure, I used to like it but these things made me take it out from my sports menu.

BTW, watch out this Spanish football season, I have some nice feelings about my team doing well :)

Action Jackson
08-23-2005, 09:45 AM
Sure, I used to like it but these things made me take it out from my sports menu.

BTW, watch out this season I have some nice feelings about my team doing well :)

I understand I have the same feelings about most sports but for different reasons.

Nothing will happen to Armstrong that's the thing, even if it has been 100 % proven.

its.like.that
08-23-2005, 10:01 AM
But hes American, he cant be a cheat, can he?

Corinna
08-23-2005, 10:29 AM
:eek:

Nikki♥
08-23-2005, 11:35 AM
Lance :rolleyes:

sigmagirl91
08-23-2005, 11:35 AM
Get outta here!!!

Marine
08-23-2005, 12:20 PM
Well, I dunno why l'Equipe's (french medias in general) always hounding poor Armrstrong. 4 months of inquiry to prove what ? Everybody (maybe except mr bush) knows Lance is like all the cylists... :rolleyes:

SuperFurryAnimal
08-23-2005, 12:29 PM
This was bound to get out in public anyway. What strikes me most is that it happens AFTER he retires... Like it was a deal that was signed or something.

Choupi
08-23-2005, 12:36 PM
Well, I dunno why l'Equipe's (french medias in general) always hounding poor Armrstrong. 4 months of inquiry to prove what ? Everybody (maybe except mr bush) knows Lance is like all the cylists... :rolleyes:
Lance isn't like all the other cyclists. He's been caught when retired! Others haven't been that lucky...but it's true, they haven't been considered a half god because they had been able to win the Tour 7 times in a row! ;)

Action Jackson
08-23-2005, 12:43 PM
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cycling/story/0,10482,1554662,00.html

Armstrong denies drug claims

"I will restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs"

Paul Doyle
Tuesday August 23, 2005

Armstrong has hit out at what he calls a "witch hunt".

One month after winning a record seventh Tour de France, cycling legend Lance Armstrong has angrily rejected allegations that he tested positive for a performance-enhancing drug, and insisted he is the victim of a "witch hunt."

Despite undergoing regular tests, Armstrong has never before tested positive for a banned substance. And he dismissed today's claims in French newspaper L'Equipe emphatically.

"Yet again, a European newspaper has reported that I have tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs," he told his official website. "A French sports daily, is reporting that my 1999 samples were positive. Unfortunately, the witch hunt continues and the article is nothing short of tabloid journalism.

"The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself. They state, 'there will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant's rights cannot be respected'.

"I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs."

Armstrong has been dubbed by many as the greatest athlete of all time, after recovering from testicular cancer to win one of the world's toughest endurance races more times than anyone else. Just before announcing his retirement last month, he delivered a message to people who questioned hoiw he achieved such a feat.

"For the people who don't believe in cycling - the cynics, the sceptics - I'm sorry for you," he said. "I'm sorry you can't dream big and I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles."

Choupi
08-23-2005, 01:03 PM
"For the people who don't believe in cycling - the cynics, the sceptics - I'm sorry for you," he said. "I'm sorry you can't dream big and I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles."
The only miracle related to Mr Armstrong I wanna strongly believe in is his victory over that cancer that has threatened his life. That fight was a tough one and he's won it with panache. He'll get my everlasting admiration and respect for that. But, denying the truth to that point is a true shame, and reading that l'Equipe is a daily tabloid, well, that's been the joke of the day!

Action Jackson
08-23-2005, 01:08 PM
The only miracle related to Mr Armstrong I wanna strongly believe in is his victory over that cancer that has threatened his life. That fight was a tough one and he's won it with panache. He'll get my everlasting admiration and respect for that. But, denying the truth to that point is a true shame, and reading that l'Equipe is a daily tabloid, well, that's been the joke of the day!

Well he survived the cancer and accusing l'Equipe of being a tabloid is funny.

sampaio
08-23-2005, 01:22 PM
L'Equipe? A tabloid?? :rolleyes:

Neely
08-23-2005, 01:28 PM
Reads like the "I'm not guilty statements" of anybody. Armstrong gets hunted his whole career with doping allegations. No surprise, somebody who is so successful in this sport gets automatically questioned because this sport is a branded child.

but they won't take away his title
of course they won't, it's not possible and Armstrong has a loophole in his favour because he was not detected positive within an anti-doping inquiry or investigation, but his samples got anonymously analysed while doing new scientific researches.

Action Jackson
08-23-2005, 01:43 PM
I mean Armstrong has more drugs in him than the Bayer factory, and well there was always a cloud over him and now the cloud will become bigger and darker.

Marine
08-23-2005, 01:53 PM
L'Equipe? A tabloid?? :rolleyes:

Well, I never saw any off sport gossip in l'Equipe so the term tabloid sounds like a big joke, yes. ;)

Choupi
08-23-2005, 02:28 PM
L'Equipe? A tabloid?? :rolleyes:
Do you know that famous saying? The best way to defend yourself is to attack first! ;)

Bilbo
08-23-2005, 06:12 PM
Anyone surprised he was doped?

tangerine_dream
08-23-2005, 06:15 PM
LOL. The European press is still desperate to discredit that evil American Armstrong who owned their prestigious tournament for years. To quote Naldo, keep on :drive:

Bilbo
08-23-2005, 06:26 PM
I'm sure a lot of American athlets use illegal drugs whic hcan not be found today. Who knows what they develope in their factories. Scary to see all those Americans win at Track and Field.

As to Armstrong. They used a new method which was not able in 1999, just 5 years later to prove he was druged.

Socket
08-23-2005, 06:50 PM
I'm just trying to imagine how bad 6-year-old piss must smell. :eek:

Nice to see Lance getting some support from Miguel.

France out to get Armstrong for years, says Indurain
Aug 23 12:46 PM US/Eastern

MADRID (Reuters) - Five-times Tour de France winner Miguel Indurain says the accusations of doping made by sports newspaper L'Equipe against Lance Armstrong are part of a campaign designed to discredit the American rider.

"They have been out to get him in France for a number of years," Indurain was quoted as saying on the website todociciclismo.com on Tuesday.

"He's the one who knows about it, but it seems wrong that they are starting to dig over tests from years ago.

"It's all very strange and I don't know to what extent it is legal to keep specimens like this."

L'Equipe, saying it had access to laboratory documents, reported on Tuesday that six of Armstrong's urine samples collected on the 1999 Tour de France showed "indisputable" traces of EPO (erythropoietin).

There were no tests to detect EPO, a drug that increases the level of red blood cells and endurance, in 1999.

However, samples from the 1999 Tour were kept and have been recently retested by the specialist anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry outside Paris.

SEVENTH TIME

Armstrong, who won the Tour for the seventh time in succession this year, has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs.

Indurain, who won the Tour five times in succession between 1991 and 1995, raised doubts about the testing procedure.

"Anything about Armstrong is news these days, but the question is whether all this is true or not. There are question marks over the reliability of the test (for EPO) and there are a lot of doubts about the whole thing."

Germany's Jan Ullrich, the 1997 Tour de France winner, told German television: "I heard about it, but these are speculations so you can't really say anything about it. It's been six years, and, if it's true, I would of course be disappointed.

"But I can't say anything on it right now. Lance is the greatest of our time and maybe somebody's trying to put him down. I don't know what it's about, so all of this is very speculative."

Swiss Alex Zuelle, who finished second behind Armstrong in the 1999 Tour, told Reuters: "I won't say anything about it because my career as a professional is over.

"I'm not Armstrong. All of this is speculation. Sometimes they have proof, then they haven't ... I'm not interested in it anymore.

"For me, the Tour is over and done with; it's just too many years back."

hablovah19
08-23-2005, 07:19 PM
Do you know that famous saying? The best way to defend yourself is to attack first! ;)

and he's pretty good at that... I wonder if he will try to sue l'équipe as well :scratch::lol:

RodLo
08-23-2005, 08:29 PM
Hm, this is all news to me. :scratch: Wonder where I've been? :o

the cat
08-23-2005, 09:46 PM
You tell 'em Tangy! :yeah: This is a somewhat misleading thread because once I read the thread title I thought Lance Armstrong had recently tested positive. But thankfully that's not the case. And the last time I looked 1999 was in the last century. Also, doesn't the French newspaper L'Equipe have anything better to do than try to discredit Lance Armstrong? :rolleyes: I have feared for years that certain European forces would try to plant drugs on Armstrong or in his hotel or luggage because they were possibly desperate enough to try to keep Armstrong from winning the Tour de France year after year. :eek: :mad: But that thankfully never happened.

Well said Miguel Indurain. :) :worship:

tennisman.
08-23-2005, 09:49 PM
All the top athletes are on juice,why is it so hard to understand?

the cat
08-23-2005, 09:50 PM
That's just not true tennisman. I suppose the top tennis players are all on "juice" too. :rolleyes:

Neely
08-23-2005, 09:56 PM
Also, doesn't the French newspaper L'Equipe have anything better to do than try to discredit Lance Armstrong? :rolleyes:
Since they can't write about a French cyclist winning the Tour de France for 20 years, they at least have to stay occupied ;) :p... and what could be better than reporting about this American jerk Armstrong who doped and bring this 6 year old sample to light now after he retired?

There is no 2nd sample from 1999 available, so neither can Armstrong prove his innocence, nor can they prove his guilt.

the cat
08-23-2005, 10:07 PM
Good point Neely. I think discrediting Lance Armstrong would have been so much easier in recent years if he had failed a drug test while dominating the Tour de France. But that didn't happen and now his incredible cycling career is over and Armstrong is regarded as an American hero like it or not. And by the way all Armstrong's great cycling success pales in his remarkable comeback from near death with Testicular cancer! :)

tennisman.
08-23-2005, 10:21 PM
That's just not true tennisman. I suppose the top tennis players are all on "juice" too. :rolleyes:


I cant say it as a fact but i have a strong feeling that they are

Castafiore
08-23-2005, 10:24 PM
L'Equipe is not just an ordinary tabloid but a serious sports newspaper with a good reputation.

You may feel that it's just the French being pissed off that an American has won the TdF so many times and that they have no real French rival but you are speculating just as much by doing so.

L'Equipe talks about a number of anonymous urine samples, with each a specific number on it with which you can identify the cyclist, dating back to the 1999 tour (and if I'm not mistaken, it was a sample taken after a tough etape - an ride through the Alps or something...I still have to read the article in French). According to the news here, l'Equipe managed to track down documents with those ID numbers and names so they know that this particular sample with EPO has been identified as coming from Lance Armstrong. The trouble is that this can't be used as evidence just because those samples are supposed to remain anonymous.

Now, the proof is not crystal clear. I agree.
However, it's far too easy to just dismiss this as French jealousy or a 'witch hunt by some tabloid because that's using a double standard IMO.
Some of you claim that the French are just throwing mud against the wall and see what sticks just because they resent the fact that an American won it? Fine, but aren't you doing the same thing by calling it a tabloid, by refusing to believe whatever they may claim just because you ASSUME that it's done out of jealousy?

Why are you so sure that L'Equipe is wrong and they have no proof at all?
Isn't it biased and a bit too easy to assume that they are wrong and those evil French just can't handle an American victory?

This case is interesting. A urine sample, traced to Lance Armstrong that tested positive on EPO? Hell, I'm interested.
The articles talks about other urine samples with positive doping test results and I would be interested in finding out these names (or rather, I would love to see this investigated properly).

On the other hand, I sure hope that L'Equipe knows what they're talking about because it's very low to just drag the good reputation of Lance through the mud based on very little evidence.
You only do that if you're absolutely sure of yourself IMO so I hope that they know what they are talking about.

Neely
08-23-2005, 10:39 PM
Castafiore, I'm not speculating at all. I was a bit sarcastic with this "American jerk Armstrong comment" talking with a loose tongue and I don't live in the Middle Age to think that the French couldn't handle an American victory and I agree that it's wrong to call a paper like l'Équipe a tabloid, but as long as they don't have a 2nd sample or something better than Armstrong's name coming from probes that normally should remain anonymous and God knows what methods were used to track Armstrong's name back, everything else is speculation for me until somebody brings a REAL prove of Armstrong's guilt like it's normally done.

Stevens Point
08-23-2005, 11:12 PM
Well, this is still just an allegation from whoever, and Armstrong denies that he used drugs in 1999, which is 6 years ago, right?

We don't know the truth, yet...

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 12:00 AM
Of course l'Equipe did not name any French athletes and the only one they named was Armstrong. Probably he did take EPO but he certainly was not the only one and why didn't the drug committee say anything about this?

Bilbo
08-24-2005, 12:14 AM
Best picture is Armstrong together with Bush on a bicycle. Two liars at their finest. :rolleyes:

Jennay
08-24-2005, 12:25 AM
I'm just trying to imagine how bad 6-year-old piss must smell. :eek:
:haha:

Tennis Fool
08-24-2005, 12:31 AM
Here's the AP version. They say the French mag is suspect, not Lance.

Lance Armstrong Denies Doping Allegations By ANGELA DOLAND, Associated Press Writer
16 minutes ago



PARIS - Faced with yet another report that he cheated his way to a Tour de France victory, Lance Armstrong responded Tuesday the same way he has since the doping whispers began during the first of his seven straight wins: "I never took performance enhancing drugs."

ADVERTISEMENT

In a four-page article headlined "The Armstrong Lie," the French sports daily L'Equipe printed copies of documents suggesting six urine samples he provided during his first championship in 1999 tested positive for the red blood cell-booster erythropoietin, or EPO.

The drug was on the list of banned substances at the time but there was no effective test to detect it.

Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc said the report published Tuesday appeared "credible" and meticulously researched, adding that Armstrong must have a chance to rebut the claims.

"We are very shocked, very troubled by the revelations we read this morning," Leblanc told RTL radio.

Armstrong, a frequent target of L'Equipe, vehemently denied the allegations.

"Unfortunately, the witch hunt continues and tomorrow's article is nothing short of tabloid journalism," Armstrong wrote on his Web site. "I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs."

The allegations surfaced seven years later because EPO tests on the 1999 samples were carried out only last year — when scientists at a lab outside Paris used them for research to perfect EPO testing. The national anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry said it promised to hand its finding to the World Anti-Doping Agency, provided they were never used to penalize riders.

L'Equipe's investigation was based on urine B samples — the second of two samples used in doping tests. The A batch was used in 1999 for analysis at the time. Without those samples, any disciplinary action against Armstrong would be impossible, French Sports Minister Jean-Francois Lamour said.

The governing body of world cycling did not begin using a urine test for EPO until 2001, though it was banned in 1990. For years, it had been impossible to detect the drug, which builds endurance by boosting the production of oxygen-rich red blood cells.

Jacques de Ceaurriz, the head of France's anti-doping laboratory, which developed the EPO urine test, told Europe-1 radio that at least 15 urine samples from the 1999 Tour had tested positive for EPO.

Separately, the lab said it could not confirm that the positive results were Armstrong's. It noted that the samples were anonymous, bearing only a six-digit number to identify the rider, and could not be matched with the name of any one cyclist.

However, L'Equipe said it was able to make the match.

On one side of the page, it showed what it claimed were the results of EPO tests from anonymous riders used for lab research. On the other, it showed Armstrong's medical certificates, signed by doctors and riders after doping tests — and bearing the same identifying number printed on the results.

"It will be very interesting to see what UCI does and what the U.S. Cycling Federation does and what Lance Armstrong has to say," WADA chairman Dick Pound said. "If the evidence is seen as credible then, yes, he has an obligation to come forward and specifically give his comments, especially after his previous comments that he has never used drugs.

"If anything were found, we couldn't do anything because we didn't even exist in 1999. But it's important that the truth must always be made clear," Pound added.

Representatives for Armstrong said he was in Austin, Texas, where he lives and did not wish to comment beyond the statement on his Web site.

A year before Armstrong won his first Tour title, the race faced its worst doping scandal after police caught a Festina team employee with a stash of drugs. Riders were ejected and others quit, almost forcing the Tour to collapse.

Armstrong has been dogged by questions in the French media about how someone whose testicular cancer had spread to his lungs and brain could rise to the top of one of the most grueling sporting events in the world.

Armstrong angrily appeared at a news conference that year to explain that trace amounts of cortisone found in his system were from a prescription skin cream to treat saddle sores.

The following year, Armstrong and his U.S. Postal Service team became the subject of a French investigation into whether they used banned substances during the 2000 race. The probe was closed in 2002 for lack of evidence.

L'Equipe, whose parent company is closely linked to the Tour, often questioned Armstrong's clean record and frequently took jabs at him — portraying him as too arrogant, too corporate and too good to be for real.

"Never to such an extent, probably, has the departure of a champion been welcomed with such widespread relief," the paper griped the day after Armstrong's record seventh straight win.

A former L'Equipe journalist, Pierre Ballester, was co-author of a book published last year that contained doping allegations against Armstrong. He wrote "L.A. Confidential, the Secrets of Lance Armstrong" with The Sunday Times sportswriter David Walsh.

In the book, one of Armstrong's former assistants claimed that the American once asked her to dispose of used syringes and give him makeup to conceal needle marks on his arms.

Armstrong has taken libel action against The Sunday Times after the British newspaper reprinted allegations in a review of the book in June 2004. The case is to go to trial in London's High Court in November.

Victor Hugo Pena, Armstrong's former U.S. Postal Service teammate, said the French were bad losers who could never accept his supremacy on the Tour.

"What Lance achieved nobody can take away," Pena, who helped Armstrong to three of his seven Tour victories, told Colombia's Caracol radio Tuesday. Pena said Armstrong was so closely watched during the Tour that it would have been impossible for him to use performance-enhancing drugs.

"Not only did the sports laboratories constantly test him, but video cameras were set up in his room and police agents constantly monitored Lance's movements and who was visiting him and even his phone conversations," Pena said.

Armstrong retired from cycling after his record seventh Tour victory last month. In his parting speech, he addressed the people who believe he was doping.

"I'm sorry for you," Armstrong said. "I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles."

Tennis Fool
08-24-2005, 12:33 AM
It's interesting to note the American/European divide on this thread.

Tennis Fool
08-24-2005, 12:35 AM
Following up, the only thing that annoys me is how Lance has been crowned the God of All Sports, and nobody here will recognize Federer for his achievements last year :(

Tennis Fool
08-24-2005, 12:38 AM
I mean Armstrong has more drugs in him than the Bayer factory, and well there was always a cloud over him and now the cloud will become bigger and darker.
Just admit your anti-Americanism :rolleyes:

El Legenda
08-24-2005, 12:46 AM
They got nothing, untill the get solid proof.
rumors are always around amazing athletes

Scotso
08-24-2005, 01:18 AM
They didn't even test for EPO six years ago, so this is all irrelevant anyway. You can't use 6-year old samples to accuse someone of something, especially when they can't even prove that those samples really did come from Armstrong.

This thread title needs to be changed, because it's complete bullshit.

Socket
08-24-2005, 01:19 AM
Following up, the only thing that annoys me is how Lance has been crowned the God of All Sports, and nobody here will recognize Federer for his achievements last year :(
A very significant part of Lance's appeal is that he is a cancer survivor, which really sets his athletic achievements apart from everyone else.

Tennis Fool
08-24-2005, 02:17 AM
A very significant part of Lance's appeal is that he is a cancer survivor, which really sets his athletic achievements apart from everyone else.
Yeah, I think the will to beat cancer was what gave him the edge over the other cyclists. However, I doubt the American media would have given a crap if he weren't one of ours. Of course if Fed were American...

Tennis Fool
08-24-2005, 02:20 AM
You can't use 6-year old samples to accuse someone of something, .
l'Equipe just did :D

They want to throw him off the podium, like how a year ago everyone was out for Paul Hamm...

Bilbo
08-24-2005, 02:38 AM
funny how CNN has not even reported about it :rolleyes:

Bilbo
08-24-2005, 02:40 AM
They got nothing, untill the get solid proof.
rumors are always around amazing athletes

bro, it's an official proof and they said there's no doubt about it

El Legenda
08-24-2005, 03:02 AM
bro, it's an official proof and they said there's no doubt about it

"they" "them" "she" "he". those 4 people are really cretiable sources.

Scotso
08-24-2005, 04:27 AM
bro, it's an official proof and they said there's no doubt about it

It's not official and it's not proof. And who are "they" that decided? The French press? Please.

its.like.that
08-24-2005, 04:42 AM
Anyone surprised he was doped?

I suppose that means we can no longer say that Roger will win the US Open - as clear as Lance's drug test.

:haha::haha::haha:

its.like.that
08-24-2005, 04:49 AM
You tell 'em Tangy! :yeah: This is a somewhat misleading thread because once I read the thread title I thought Lance Armstrong had recently tested positive. But thankfully that's not the case. And the last time I looked 1999 was in the last century. Also, doesn't the French newspaper L'Equipe have anything better to do than try to discredit Lance Armstrong? :rolleyes: I have feared for years that certain European forces would try to plant drugs on Armstrong or in his hotel or luggage because they were possibly desperate enough to try to keep Armstrong from winning the Tour de France year after year. :eek: :mad: But that thankfully never happened.

Well said Miguel Indurain. :) :worship:

well, if its in the past, then of course it doesn't count.

Ben Johnson is getting his World Record back tomorrow.

its.like.that
08-24-2005, 04:55 AM
Here's the AP version. They say the French mag is suspect, not Lance.

Lance Armstrong Denies Doping Allegations By ANGELA DOLAND, Associated Press Writer


WOW!

And the AP are always correct, aren't they?

What does Jon Wertheim have to say about this?

:haha::haha:

KoOlMaNsEaN
08-24-2005, 04:57 AM
Don't trust news papers......

Action Jackson
08-24-2005, 05:17 AM
Just admit your anti-Americanism :rolleyes:

Not until you admit you are an arse clown and of course you missed the fact that I have criticised the whole sport of cycling consistently. He's doped up as most of the other cyclists, especially the top ones, but hey it's just better to overlook that.

Action Jackson
08-24-2005, 06:25 AM
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/columnists/story/0,10260,1555047,00.html

A hotline to the White House but France hangs up on Armstrong

Richard Williams
Wednesday August 24, 2005
The Guardian


Just over a century ago, in its earlier guise as L'Auto, the French daily sports paper L'Equipe was responsible for founding the Tour de France. Its feelings of proprietorship towards the great race, then, are hardly surprising. And one way of interpreting yesterday's allegations of traces of EPO discovered in samples of urine taken from Lance Armstrong during the 1999 Tour is to see it as the French cycling establishment's attempt to take back the race from an American who colonised their most precious sporting event as effectively as Hollywood, rock 'n' roll and Levi jeans took over the minds of French teenagers 50 years ago, to the disadvantage - some would say - of the indigenous culture.

In France, a certain element has always resisted this kind of US imperialism. For Greg LeMond to win the Tour three times was one thing. It was quite another for Armstrong to obliterate the record of five wins first established by one great French cyclist, Jacques Anquetil, and equalled by another, Bernard Hinault, as well as by Eddy Merckx of Belgium and Miguel Indurain of Spain, all representatives of cycling's Old World. The absence of a single Frenchman among the pretenders to the Texan's throne is another source of frustration to L'Equipe's writers and, perhaps, its readers.
After initially finding him difficult to love, eventually the French cycling public more or less capitulated to the cowboy with - as one of the newspaper's correspondents put it yesterday - the voice like ice cubes, the steely gaze, and the lips forever on the brink of a smile full of menace. Not to mention the posse of bodyguards and the hotline to the White House.

On the centenary Tour two years ago there was certainly little sign of resentment as Armstrong drew level with the record held by his four great predecessors. Only the tidal wave of spectators from the other side of the Atlantic, turning the verges of the routes départmentales into a sea of stars and stripes, might have irked them during the two more recent tours. They were there to celebrate as Armstrong first set a new mark and then, in a crushing example of American might, doubled the distance between himself and those he had surpassed.

Yesterday's publication of what are claimed to be the a posteriori tests of Armstrong's B samples, however, reawakens all the old doubts that led to cries of "dopeur!" being directed at him from the roadside earlier in the decade. Those were the days when L'Equipe could only express its doubts about the nature of some performances in coded headlines referring to "Le Tour à deux vitesses" - the two-speed Tour, meaning one speed for the dopers and another, slower, gear for those who raced clean.

There is also, perhaps, the question of moral revenge for the shadows cast over French cycling in 1998 by the Festina affair, when the discovery of drugs in the vehicle of Willy Voet, one of the team's soigneurs, led to the disgrace of Richard Virenque, France's pin-up boy. Virenque spent years adamantly denying that he had used illegal substances. But then he cracked, and served a nine-month suspension before being welcomed back as a prodigal son when he won the climb up Mont Ventoux in the 2002 Tour.

Armstrong's first Tour victory came the year after the Festina scandal, at a time when the race organisers were attempting to promote a new, drug-free image for the event. EPO was already illegal, but there was no test capable of determining its existence. That arrived in 2000, although the authorities were not ready to use it on samples from the Tour's riders until a year later.

Yesterday L'Equipe published the results of Armstrong's Tour dope tests between 2001-2004, in other words after EPO had become detectable. In 36 separate tests during the four Tours, no illegal substances were discovered.

In 1999, however, riders using EPO had no reason to suppose that it would ever be detected. And even now the retrospective analysis of that year's tests cannot be used as the basis for stripping riders of their prizes, since only the B samples have been tested. The A samples, which would be used to corroborate the initial findings, no longer exist. So Armstrong's lawyers could presumably claim that while evidence may exist, proof does not.

Questions hang in the air, and some of them will probably remain there. In the light of the lengthy investigation conducted by the Paris police into the possible use of drugs by Armstrong's US Postal team in 2000, why did the French authorities wait until December 2004, more than four years after the test was developed by scientists in the national drug-screening laboratory at Châtenay- Malabry, before examining samples that were already five years old? And why has it taken until now for the results to be leaked to L'Equipe?

Those preparing to confront Armstrong's legal team in the variety of court proceedings in which the rider is bringing actions for defamation will heartened by yesterday's news. For one or two of them it will be like seven Christmasses arriving at once. Less easy to assess is the effect it will have in the wider world on the reputation of a man whose victory over a virulent form of cancer inspired countless thousands of fellow suffers around the world.

To make a historical analogy is to venture on to treacherous ground. But it can be said with some confidence that L'Equipe is unlikely to be casting similar aspersions on the achievements of Anquetil, whose five Tours were won on amphetamines and goodness knows what else.

It is almost half a century since Maître Jacques posed the most famous rhetorical question in the history of cycling: "Do they expect us to ride the Tour on mineral water?" His Legion d'honneur ribbon, and his sacred status, went to the grave with him. Armstrong might not be so fortunate.

Choupi
08-24-2005, 08:29 AM
It's always amazing how fast old clichés come back in such mediatic twisters!
And it's always fun to read how ppl can talk about sthg they don't even have a clue what it deals with. For those who really are interested to comment on what is the true bottom line of that issue, let me send you back to the link I've posted on the 1st page, which is THE article at the root of all that mediatic storm. Use Babelfish or any other way to translate that article, and only then, make yourself your own opinion. Because, asserting things without knowing what you're talking about isn't much better than what some here have criticized coming from L'Equipe...Only then, you'll be able to get the whole meaning of that issue. But if you don't make that effort, don't complain if you get ignored, because you simply won't know what you're talking about.

Action Jackson
08-24-2005, 08:37 AM
I posted the article and not as a reflection of person views and it's very simple EPO can't be detected by urine tests and for those who actually care, there is a natural level of haemoglobin within humans found in any blood test and once it's over that limit then it gets investigated, just like nandrolone which is a natural product, but with elevated haemoglobin levels then EPO (at the time) and other improved products since then once it has been over the limit then there is a doping case as long as both A and B sample are over the legal limit.

Then again this doesn't surprise in the sport of cycling, but hey I must be anti-American, cause cycling is full of doping.

Choupi
08-24-2005, 08:59 AM
You're anti-American and I hate Armstrong because he's been the naughty one who has stopped some Frenchy from winning the Tour! Like Virenque or Voeckler. And if all goes well, Chirac will soon give a medal to the journalist of l'Equipe who has finally been successful in making Armstrong, an evil American, fall from his throne.

If some of you get shocked by what is stated above, I'm curious to know from which part exactly it begins...

Action Jackson
08-24-2005, 09:14 AM
A few things the AP article didn't mention. Also the mistake about the detection of EPO samples was missed at worst and an oversight at best.

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cycling/story/0,10482,1555218,00.html

Yesterday L'Equipe printed results of tests carried out in the Paris laboratory of Châtenay-Malabry, which is registered with the World Anti-Doping Agency. The samples were recently retested as part of scientific research co-ordinated with Wada.

They had been preserved at -20C to prevent molecular transformations that could lead to false positive results.

"There is no possible doubt about the validity of the result, even though the analysis was carried out five years after the sample was taken," the newspaper quoted Professor Jacques de Ceaurriz, the director of Châtenay-Malabry laboratory, as saying.

The EPO test was first introduced at the Olympic Games in Sydney and has been used since the 2001 Tour de France. None of the tests have subsequently showed Armstrong as being positive.

The Wada president Dick Pound said he was looking into the allegations. "It's a pretty serious story if it is true," he said. "We have not decided what we would do because I have not looked at all the details. We will look at the information available and then we will decide the best way to get as much light on this as possible."

Just how L'Equipe obtained the test results and identified Armstrong's urine samples and results remains unclear. The laboratory denied leaking the information but confirmed tests on samples from the 1998 and 1999 Tour have recently been carried out. L'Equipe refused to reveal its sources.

The L'Equipe journalist Jean-Pier Bidet, who followed Armstrong closely during his Tour de France victories, said that the paper had been investigating the test results for four months but only received the final piece of the jigsaw on Monday afternoon when official documents showed the samples were taken from Armstrong.

Although a total of 12 positive samples were discovered during testing, L'Equipe only made the allegations against Armstrong because the newspaper could confirm his identity with the official anti-doping test documents.

The laboratory said all tests were anonymous and had been transmitted to the Wada providing they would not take disciplinary action.

When a rider gives a urine sample he signs documents admitting that it is his sample. A copy of the document goes to the International Cycling Union and another to the Ministry of Sport in France, while the sample is sent to the laboratory marked by a code so that the testers do not know the identity of the rider. L'Equipe had claimed to have matched leaked documents to the codes on the laboratory samples.

Because the tests were not part of official anti-doping testing and because no counter-analysis can be carried out Armstrong cannot be disciplined and banned.

However he could be placed under police investigation in France and the United States Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) told L'Equipe the tests results could be used against him.

The accusations could also hurt Armstrong in the pocket. The US insurance company SCA refused to pay out a $5m (£2.8m) bonus when he won a sixth Tour de France in 2004 following allegations made in the book, LA Confidentiel: Les Secrets de Lance Armstrong, which contained allegations of doping.

Armstrong is already involved in seven legal battles against the writers of the LA Confidentiel book, fellow riders and former assistants.

The director of the Tour de France, Jean Marie Leblanc, told the French radio station RTL he felt let down by Armstrong and said L'Equipe's report seemed "very complete, very professional, very meticulous" and that it "appears credible".

However, he warned that Armstrong, his doctors and his aides should be heard out before any final judgment was made.

The International Cycling Union president Hein Verbruggen said: "We have to wait and see if this is true. Only then will we be able to ask ourselves whether there should be any legal action and whether this is a further blow for cycling. I have to say this is not pleasant but, for the moment, it only involves Lance Armstrong and France."

Armstrong has always dismissed the allegations against him and criticised those who refused to believe in his comeback from cancer and in his seven Tour victories.

Marine
08-24-2005, 10:12 AM
Well, if I don't doubt at all of Armstrong's guilt (it's not possible to make a cyclist carrier without taking any doping, so win Le Tour 7 times just with water...ugh :rolleyes: ), yes I think l'Equipe's proofs are good etc... but I don't understand this fierceness against Lance. It's always have been like that I think, I wonder why all this inquiry just for a cyclist, and not for the others ? I mean, Ullrich and'co are doped... they all get drug, so why to admit Armstrong is just the best though ?
I'm a loyal reader of l'Equipe, this newspaper is very serious etc..but there I don't like the polemic they created. It's like if they were very proud to pinch Armstrong finally, like if it was an obssession since a long time.
That's ridiculous, did they do the same for another suspicious sportmen ? No.

(I hope my speech is understanding)

*Elsie*
08-24-2005, 10:20 AM
I hate Armstrong because he's been the naughty one who has stopped some Frenchy from winning the Tour! Like Virenque or Voeckler.Choupi, sweetie, remind you that Virenque was doped too.

Great post Marine. I couldn't agree more.

Action Jackson
08-24-2005, 10:27 AM
Well, if I don't doubt at all of Armstrong's guilt (it's not possible to make a cyclist carrier without taking any doping, so win Le Tour 7 times just with water...ugh :rolleyes: ), yes I think l'Equipe's proofs are good etc... but I don't understand this fierceness against Lance. It's always have been like that I think, I wonder why all this inquiry just for a cyclist, and not for the others ? I mean, Ullrich and'co are doped... they all get drug, so why to admit Armstrong is just the best though ?
I'm a loyal reader of l'Equipe, this newspaper is very serious etc..but there I don't like the polemic they created. It's like if they were very proud to pinch Armstrong finally, like if it was an obssession since a long time.
That's ridiculous, did they do the same for another suspicious sportmen ? No.

(I hope my speech is understanding)

What you say is logical and makes sense and is understood, the thing is if l'Equipe could prove Armstrong was doped up during the tour even better for them. The cyclists and the teams aren't stupid, the main reason well he won the tour 7 times in a row, so extra scrutiny is natural.

Choupi
08-24-2005, 10:42 AM
Choupi, sweetie, remind you that Virenque was doped too.

Don't worry, I haven't forgotten about it and how it all began, with strong denyings and then, admitting what was the obvious. That's precisely why I have named him, and why I have added the name of Voeckler, who dared wearing the yellow shirt for 11 days last year. A French is unable of such a thing, he surely was doped. Somebody should investigate.

Marine
08-24-2005, 10:51 AM
Virenque is always presented as the guy who "paid" for all the other cyslists. Like a martyr. arghh maybe he paid more than the others, but I remember his palaver in 1997, his tears "à l'insu de mon plein gré :lol: , well he was pityful.
I can't stand him :o

*Elsie*
08-24-2005, 10:58 AM
A French is unable of such a thing, he surely was doped. Somebody should investigate. :lol:

*julie*
08-24-2005, 11:47 AM
Of course l'Equipe did not name any French athletes and the only one they named was Armstrong. Probably he did take EPO but he certainly was not the only one and why didn't the drug committee say anything about this?

Some french cyclists were suspended in the past...and don't worry...it made the headlines of L'equipe too.
But for the current case, what is more shocking? an athlete who took EPO and finished at the 72nd rank or an athlete who took EPO and won the Tour de France :confused:

But yes I agree if there are other athletes involved in this inquiry they should be mentionned as well...not only Armstrong's.

Virenque is always presented as the guy who "paid" for all the other cyslists. Like a martyr. arghh maybe he paid more than the others, but I remember his palaver in 1997, his tears "à l'insu de mon plein gré :lol: , well he was pityful.
I can't stand him :o

Virenque was not considered as a victim by the medias...like with the "guignols"........"A l'insue de mon plein grès"... So cult :lol:

Neely
08-24-2005, 12:50 PM
It's always amazing how fast old clichés come back in such mediatic twisters!
And it's always fun to read how ppl can talk about sthg they don't even have a clue what it deals with. For those who really are interested to comment on what is the true bottom line of that issue, let me send you back to the link I've posted on the 1st page, which is THE article at the root of all that mediatic storm. Use Babelfish or any other way to translate that article, and only then, make yourself your own opinion. Because, asserting things without knowing what you're talking about isn't much better than what some here have criticized coming from L'Equipe...Only then, you'll be able to get the whole meaning of that issue. But if you don't make that effort, don't complain if you get ignored, because you simply won't know what you're talking about.
Nice try, Choupi. But I would think most people commenting here aren't as badly informed as you try to label them here and are aware about what they are talking. Different opinions arise, something normal.

Choupi
08-24-2005, 01:33 PM
Nice try, Choupi. But I would think most people commenting here aren't as badly informed as you try to label them here and are aware about what they are talking. Different opinions arise, something normal.
Different opinions, you're right. But how many of the posters here do have read the article in l'Equipe? Because that's the bottom line of the issue, isn't it? So, if all the posters I'm allegedly trying to label as badly informed, as you say, have read that article, then, it's fine for me. Yet, I'm more than sceptical. Otherwise, they would have been able to point out that even the very respectable Guardian has made a mistake, hinting at urine tests, whereas only blood tests have been referred too, all through the original article. Nice try, you're right.

Neely
08-24-2005, 01:47 PM
I've seen articles in German and English that basically give exactly what l'Équipe was writing in their online content, I don't think it's fair to say you need to read the original article in order to understand and to share your opinion or beliefs on that. Of course, at best you shouldn't trust some yellow press paper, but there are good articles in at least two other languages other than French.

Castafiore
08-24-2005, 01:57 PM
LOL

Everybody shoves the blame for this mess in another direction and who ends up with the blame?
Yes, the press. Why not? Easy target.
Hey, it's very reasonable to ask questions about their methods but it's also a bit too easy to dismiss it. It's not just a claim made by some frustrated journalist.
So, they have taken 12 samples and 6 of them were from Armstrong, right?
The lab found positive results and the newspaper explained how you can test those samples years after they were given by the cyclists.

Why is it that a newspaper (L'Equipe) had to do this investigation and bring it all out and where are the officials (the UCI for example?) in all this?

This mess has to be investigated by objective people who have no relation whatsoever with the sport of cycling.

Action Jackson
08-24-2005, 01:57 PM
http://sport.independent.co.uk/general/article307833.ece

Cycling: Armstrong dismisses latest drug allegations
By Alasdair Fotheringham
Published: 24 August 2005

Lance Armstrong has made a categorical denial of a report in the French newspaper L'Equipe yesterday that claimed the American had used the banned performance-enhancing drug EPO to help him win his first Tour de France.

Speaking on his website, the seven-times Tour winner stated tersely that the "witch-hunt continues" and the article is "nothing short of tabloid journalism". According to L'Equipe, six of Armstrong's urine samples he provided to anti-doping officials during the 1999 Tour showed "unequivocal" indications of EPO use.

Armstrong's alleged consumption of EPO was timed, the paper claimed, to coincide with three critical periods of the Tour.

L'Equipe argues that the American took EPO before the prologue - which he won - and then before the Alps and Pyrenean stages, where he sealed his overall victory.

Why the story has taken so long to emerge is that at the time there were no tests for EPO, a substance which boosts red-blood cell production and which was synonymous with the scandals that nearly brought the 1998 Tour to a premature halt.

However, samples were kept and a test developed - first used in the 2000 Olympics - which prompted a Paris-based laboratory to begin re-testing.
L'Equipe has published what it claims to be a paper from the World Anti-Doping Agency accredited laboratory, which states six uses of EPO by Armstrong.

The American's response has been in his usual terse, laconic line to accusations of illegal drug use - which have never been lacking during his seven straight Tour wins since 1999, but never actually contained more than circumstantial, inconclusive, evidence.

"I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs," said Armstrong, who retired from the sport this summer.

With battle lines between those believing Armstrong and those who feel there is room for doubt already well-established, support for L'Equipe's report came quickly from the French Sports Ministry.

"Athletes who want to cheat will now be under permanent pressure anywhere in the world," the French minister for sport, Jean-François Lamour said.
"This is sad, but it's also a great step forward in the fight against doping."
Defence of Armstrong came from the world's greatest ever cyclist, Belgian Eddy Merckx. "If I had to take a journalist's word or Armstrong's, I'd take Lance's," Merckx said.

Among those arguing that more time should be taken before condemning Armstrong is the director of the Tour de France, Jean-Marie Leblanc. He stated that even if the report was "meticulous and well-structured", Armstrong's directors and doctors should be allowed an opinion. However, when asked if he felt disappointed by the American, his answer was "yes".
One question raised by the report was whether a test of seven-year-old samples could be accurate, something confirmed by the laboratory director Jacques de Ceaurriz.

De Ceaurriz did, however, refuse to confirm that the figures published by L'Equipe corresponded to Armstrong's urine samples.
Other unanswered questions concern the identity of up to six other Tour riders L'Equipe also claims tested positive or EPO in 1999, and the nature of Armstrong's longer-term reaction.

Disciplinary action is extremely unlikely, given that the laboratory only released the paper to Wada on condition they did not use them for sanctions.
What is beyond doubt in the wake of this latest affair, is that the pro- and anti-Armstrong camps are pitched even further apart than ever before.

alfonsojose
08-24-2005, 02:04 PM
If u want, i can take new urine samples from Lance :angel: .... Sheryl, ¡¡ get out !! :devil:

Neely
08-24-2005, 02:36 PM
To make it clear: I don't want to be understood that I'm saying that Armstrong is innocent, the thing that bothers me are that there are too many unknown variables part of this calculation.

Show me an A and B sample from 2005 or from something more recent than 1999 that were indenpendently tested postive according to common procedures so that somebody can be prosecuted legally. But don't dig up things from the past that most likely will result in no legal consequences anyway and where probably nobody can juristically prove his guilt nor his innocence; but the defamation will always remain.

Castafiore
08-24-2005, 03:18 PM
First of all, regarding the witch hunt against Armstrong.
Maybe it is a bit :shrug: but L'Equipe has been working on this for years and they are not just making wild claims but they are trying to back them up with evidence. Nope, they weren't present when Armstrong was giving the sample but they are trying to get as close to proof as they can get.

Was it in 1999 that L'Equipe came up with another story? They found out that Armstrong tested positive but it had been hushed by the officials. He was caught with some sort of substance but nothing was done against Lance. (I think it was corticoide but I'm not sure).
Lance accused them of jumping the gun and afterwards, he came up with a medical prescription to give him the authorisation to use the banned substance (I think it was for saddle pains).

That was just one element in their ongoing investigation.
You want proof?
They have these samples they can trace back to Armstrong, tested in a very reliable lab. It's not conclusive evidence, I'll give you that but it's not just a wild speculation either.
It merits further investigation (not just for Lance's samples but also those other names).

Secondly, it's not just a wild goose chase after Lance either. I can't speak for the US, but the fight against doping has been increased dramatically here.
Virenque & the Festina case: who can forget his tears because of the great injustice and then having to witness him admitting the guilt in public. :rolleyes:
Marco Pantani: it's about as tragic as you can get.
Johan Museeuw: the Lion of Flanders and a huge hero tumbling from his pedestal. They have his conversations with his...wait for it...veterinary (!)...in coded language but it's quite clear what they are talking about (not conclusive evidence either but you only need to add 1 and 1)
Frank Vandenbroucke: they found a substantial amount of EPO at his home, including a supply right beside his bed. How dumb can you be if you know that you're under investigation but wait...it gets better: his excuse = "it's for my dogs"
(just because it's a fairly huge amount, they are treating him as a 'dealer')
Tyler Hamilton: remember him? Former team mate of Armstrong (not that there has to be a direct link between the two cases of course).

Pffft...so many big scandals and every time the sport crawls back, it's hit with another scandal.
You won't see me pointing my fingers at any other names in the sport (or in any other sport) because it's unfair to shout 'doper' without any form of evidence but just because you don't think he's clean. That's BS.
However, in Armstrong's case...you have now a bit more than just an accusation out of jealousy and without any foundation.

It's not a chase after one man but when you get more than just a wild speculation against the main man of the sport, of course he's going to get a lot of attention and scrutiny.
This case has to be investigated by objective officials, who have no direct link with the sport.
Of course, people who do have a direct link with it are going to want to protect the sport. Willy Voet was caught red-handed in the Festina case. He wrote a book about it and for that he is now treated as an outcast (for breaking the silent code).

On the other hand, a lot of these guys are treated worse than many criminals. It would be great to catch the system behind the cheating instead of just targetting the big names of the sport but that's easier said than done.

Choupi
08-24-2005, 03:21 PM
I've seen articles in German and English that basically give exactly what l'Équipe was writing in their online content, I don't think it's fair to say you need to read the original article in order to understand and to share your opinion or beliefs on that. Of course, at best you shouldn't trust some yellow press paper, but there are good articles in at least two other languages other than French.
Let me clear my point...I've never asserted that the only article worth reading was the one in l'Equipe. I'm more than aware that there are other interesting ones in other languages and in other papers. But, the polemic has its root in 1 precise article. I think that it's by reading that article that any well-informed discussion or debate can start upon.

Neely
08-24-2005, 03:25 PM
You're right Castafiore, most of all it also demages the whole sport and as you said it's frustrating to see this (or any other sport) hit again and again by a new scandal/rumour whenever you think you see again a light at the end of the tunnel.

Was it in 1999 that L'Equipe came up with another story? They found out that Armstrong tested positive but it had been hushed by the officials. He was caught with some sort of substance but nothing was done against Lance. (I think it was corticoide but I'm not sure).
Lance accused them of jumping the gun and afterwards, he came up with a medical prescription to give him the authorisation to use the banned substance (I think it was for saddle pains).
Yes, it was corticoide that was found and it was "explained" with an oilment that he received for saddle pains.
I agree, that could be seen as very fishy.

On the other hand, a lot of these guys are treated worse than many criminals. It would be great to catch the system behind the cheating instead of just targetting the big names of the sport but that's easier said than done.
:worship: :worship: !!!!

tangerine_dream
08-24-2005, 03:46 PM
Since they can't write about a French cyclist winning the Tour de France for 20 years, they at least have to stay occupied ;) :p... and what could be better than reporting about this American jerk Armstrong who doped and bring this 6 year old sample to light now after he retired?

There is no 2nd sample from 1999 available, so neither can Armstrong prove his innocence, nor can they prove his guilt.
Yep. The Ugly European press and the Tour de France director has had a personal vendetta against Armstrong for years. Their insinuations have always reek of anti-Americanism. They'll be whiffing and drinking Lance Armstrong's piss for years trying to dig up any crumb to discredit him. :lol:

French lab cannot confirm tests were Armstrong's

PARIS, Aug 23 (Reuters) - A French specialist doping laboratory said on Tuesday it could not confirm that tests it had conducted for the blood-boosting drug EPO belonged to Lance Armstrong.

L'Equipe newspaper, saying it had access to laboratory documents, reported on Tuesday that six of Armstrong's urine samples collected on the 1999 Tour de France showed "indisputable" traces of EPO (erythropoietin).

In response seven-times Tour de France winner Armstrong has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs.

"The lab cannot link the results to a sportsman and can therefore not confirm the link made by L'Equipe between the test results and the (French federation) documents they publish," the Chatenay-Malabry laboratory said in a statement.

The lab said all tests were anonymous and had been transmitted to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) providing they would not take disciplinary action.

There were no tests to detect EPO, a drug that increases the level of red blood cells and endurance, in 1999. However, samples from the 1999 Tour de France were kept and have been recently retested by the lab based outside Paris.

"The lab can confirm that it has conducted EPO tests on samples from the 1998 and 1999 Tour de France races," it added.

L'Equipe published what it claimed to be a results sheet from the lab which appeared to show six figures from Armstrong's samples revealing traces of EPO.

The newspaper also published documents from the French cycling federation showing exactly the same figures under Lance Armstrong's name.

the cat
08-24-2005, 05:12 PM
That's so true Tangy. L'Equipe comes accross as desperate in trying to create a story out of speculative drug tests from 6 years ago that might have been tampered with for all we know. Lance Armstrong was the most often drug tested athlete in the world. He has been tested hundreds of times in recent years and if Armstrong was on performancing enhancing drugs he would have tested positive at some point. But he didn't. This comes accross as a L'Equipe smear campaign against Lance Armstrong and I hope he sues them. And to top things off a French drug testing laboratory admitted they cannot confirm that the anonymous drug samples from 1999 belonged to Armstrong. That means they will never have 100% proof that Lance Armstrong used EPO in 1999. They can only speculate about it and write stories about that speculation. And that's not right or fair. Gee, I wonder if this story would have been written if Armstrong were French. :rolleyes: But we all know the answer to that.

Castafiore
08-24-2005, 06:19 PM
That's so true Tangy. L'Equipe comes accross as desperate in trying to create a story out of speculative drug tests from 6 years ago that might have been tampered with for all we know.
First of all, the lab in question is a very serious international and recognized one. It has one hell of a reputation.

Secondly, desperate? Why desperate? Do they look like one of those pitbulls perhaps? You know, once they catch their victim between the teeth, they won't let go? Yes, but why desperate if they can point towards a drug test from a renound lab?

Thirdly, anti-American? OK, I'm guessing that you're kidding. What's your reason to assume that except perhaps for anti-French feelings?
L'Equipe has been looking into doping stories regardless of nationality. Yes, they have been hunting down this story for quite some time but have you read their articles during the Festina case? That was a very French affair.
Have you read their articles when the italian Pantani was caught?
This has very little to do with Lance being an American and having anti-American feelings. That answer is too easy and too paranoid. This story just caught the attention of the Anglo-American press more so it's easy to assume that the French are just targetting the American because they can't stand that he won their event 7 times and no French guy can come even close.


He has been tested hundreds of times in recent years and if Armstrong was on performancing enhancing drugs he would have tested positive at some point
Erm...you haven't read the article, have you?
It's like this:
those samples were frozen in 1999 (-20C°). He hasn't been tested positive back then because in those days, they had no way to recognize EPO doping with their tests. The frustrating aspect of the fight against doping is that the 'cheaters' are always a couple of steps ahead and they are using products that can't be found with a test. So, they froze a couple of samples to see what happens once they get the proper tests.

This will make the fight against doping a bit easier. "We may not catch you now, but we have time and science on our side".


Edit: I know that not everybody appreciates Jan Ullrich but he can be such a classy guy at times.
His reaction was that Lance remains one of the greatest athletes of our time and he was cautious towards these allegations. "Vielleicht will man ihm was anhängen." (free translation: "maybe, they are just out to get him").

the cat
08-24-2005, 10:01 PM
Good post Casta. Very well written. But I'm not anti French even though I could be considered anti L'Equipe. There is a difference. Iv'e read that it's been reported a French doping agency says they can't confirm the the supposedly EPO postive urine samples from 1999 are Lance Armstrong's. L'Equipe was out to make a major international story and they did. They have done alot of research but they still cannot prove that Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 1999. And Armstrong gets slandered worldwide because of the L'Equipe story that might not be true. I contend that's just not fair. But that's the media driven world we live in. All news media wants to break a major story. But L'Equipe's story about Lance Armstrong does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty.

And don't the subsequent hundreds of drug tests Armstrong has taken and passed all these years mean anything?

David Kenzie
08-24-2005, 10:35 PM
But L'Equipe's story about Lance Armstrong does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty.
Actually, it does. I have been a strong Armstrong supporter and admirer for years, and I still am. But this is irrefutable evidence whether one likes it or not. Because of the current regulations, this is not officially a positive test as the title of this thread says, but the truth remains.

And don't the subsequent hundreds of drug tests Armstrong has taken and passed all these years mean anything?

This is why the international anti-doping agency should make it possible to re-examine samples years after they were taken, because technology evolves and makes it posible to detect drugs that were undetectable at the time of the original test.

This will make athlestes think more than twice before taking drugs, because they know they will evetually be caught, and their reputatiion shattered even after their carrear is over.

Action Jackson
08-25-2005, 07:00 AM
It seems that some people don't get that a positive EPO test can't be detected by taking urine samples.

its.like.that
08-25-2005, 07:03 AM
You're anti-American and I hate Armstrong because he's been the naughty one who has stopped some Frenchy from winning the Tour! Like Virenque or Voeckler. And if all goes well, Chirac will soon give a medal to the journalist of l'Equipe who has finally been successful in making Armstrong, an evil American, fall from his throne.

If some of you get shocked by what is stated above, I'm curious to know from which part exactly it begins...

:lol: I thihk Jan Ullrich would be the one buying the drinks. And will rightfully join Indurain, Hinault and co.

Fedex
08-25-2005, 07:19 AM
Ah, good, yet another cheat has been unveiled. I dont know if steriod use is as common in cycling as it is in baseball( I really coulden't give a damn about cycling), but it seems to be a problem here too. Wasn't there another cyclist from the US that tested positive for steriods?

its.like.that
08-25-2005, 07:25 AM
Well, if I don't doubt at all of Armstrong's guilt (it's not possible to make a cyclist carrier without taking any doping, so win Le Tour 7 times just with water...ugh :rolleyes: ), yes I think l'Equipe's proofs are good etc... but I don't understand this fierceness against Lance. It's always have been like that I think, I wonder why all this inquiry just for a cyclist, and not for the others ? I mean, Ullrich and'co are doped... they all get drug, so why to admit Armstrong is just the best though ?
I'm a loyal reader of l'Equipe, this newspaper is very serious etc..but there I don't like the polemic they created. It's like if they were very proud to pinch Armstrong finally, like if it was an obssession since a long time.
That's ridiculous, did they do the same for another suspicious sportmen ? No.

(I hope my speech is understanding)

hey man, dont be a hater.

Lance is one of the greatest athletes in the history of mankind - along with Ben Johnson, the Chinese womens national swimming team of the mid 90's, Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, Marion Jones' former husband, Jenny Thompson, the list goes on...

its.like.that
08-25-2005, 07:30 AM
Well, if I don't doubt at all of Armstrong's guilt (it's not possible to make a cyclist carrier without taking any doping, so win Le Tour 7 times just with water...ugh :rolleyes: ), yes I think l'Equipe's proofs are good etc... but I don't understand this fierceness against Lance. It's always have been like that I think, I wonder why all this inquiry just for a cyclist, and not for the others ? I mean, Ullrich and'co are doped... they all get drug, so why to admit Armstrong is just the best though ?
I'm a loyal reader of l'Equipe, this newspaper is very serious etc..but there I don't like the polemic they created. It's like if they were very proud to pinch Armstrong finally, like if it was an obssession since a long time.
That's ridiculous, did they do the same for another suspicious sportmen ? No.

(I hope my speech is understanding)

well said mind you. :)

and yes, the message was crystal clear.

Fedex
08-25-2005, 07:34 AM
Marion Jones
Speaking of cheats. :lol:

its.like.that
08-25-2005, 08:07 AM
He has been tested hundreds of times in recent years and if Armstrong was on performancing enhancing drugs he would have tested positive at some point. But he didn't.

Look champ, I can see the colours of your flag, and understand your patriotism, but consider this:

Up until the 16th century, when the globe was first circumnavigated, explorers, astronomers and scientists all believed the Earth was flat. Anyone who went around saying that the Earth was round, was deemed to be a madman. Just because something is a common belief and nobody can produce evidence to prove otherwise, doesn't mean that it is true.

Only time and the progress of science will tell.

its.like.that
08-25-2005, 08:27 AM
Personally, I hope Armstrong's reputation is obliviated worse than the Baghdad landscape. The guy just has a jackass of a personality. I'm quite fond of other yanks, Brett Favre, Gary Hall Jnr, Matt Biondi, to name a few, but Lance is nothing short of a pompous tool.

I don't care if he survived cancer, jackasses survive cancer too. Just because someone survives cancer, doesn't make them a good person.

Alvarillo
08-25-2005, 09:01 AM
:o

Castafiore
08-25-2005, 10:16 AM
It seems that some people don't get that a positive EPO test can't be detected by taking urine samples.
Hey, I'm certainly no expert on these matters but as I understand it:
The urine test is done to check for residuals of synthetic EPO and often you also find masking products. The key is to look for EPO that comes from outside the body (exogenous) and that can be found in urine.
Fortunately, testing technology has now caught up and promises to stem the tide of abuse. There is now an accurate urine test that can detect the differences between normal and synthetic EPO
http://www.rice.edu/~jenky/sports/epo.html

Action Jackson
08-25-2005, 10:21 AM
Hey, I'm certainly no expert on these matters but as I understand it:
The urine test is done to check for residuals of synthetic EPO and often you also find masking products. The key is to look for EPO that comes from outside the body (exogenous) and that can be found in urine.

That's why the blood test is actually needed to detect elevated haemoglobin levels and that's the main advantage of EPO use, is that it can't be detected by urine tests. You can find masking products in any cold tablet for example that's the thing, not to say that this is the case in this one.

It needs a combo of both tests to be truly accurate.

Castafiore
08-25-2005, 10:36 AM
It needs a combo of both tests to be truly accurate.

Yes and it's why they will never strip Armstrong of his titles (also because there was no counter-expertise) but a positive urine test is the first step in realising that we could be dealing with a cheater here and that we have some substantial proof to back up that claim.

But, like I said before, they are treating Armstrong worse than many criminals. The way Pantani was treated was aweful. He was hunted down after they first caught him.
Vandenbroucke is mentally as fragile as can be. The penalty he recently received was very severe.
Hey, I'm not saying that they should give a reward to these guys. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime (or something of that nature) but they are targetting those big names too much and focussing not enough on the system behind it.
In the Festina case, when they caught Willy Voet red-handed. Everybody in that team initially put their hands in the air pretending innocence :angel: and said (*use Manuel's voice from Fawlty Towers*): "I know nothing...NOTHING" and some time later we could see how much they actually knew.
All those team leaders for example, claiming that they knew nothing when one of his riders gets caught. Does anybody actually believe that?

Action Jackson
08-25-2005, 10:46 AM
Yes and it's why they will never strip Armstrong of his titles (also because there was no counter-expertise) but a positive urine test is the first step in realising that we could be dealing with a cheater here and that we have some substantial proof to back up that claim.

This maybe the case and as for my own views about this will only be deemed as anti-American if I say Armstrong is a cheat, but the sport isn't clean and what pro sport is. They can't strip him of titles anyway as has been clearly established.

But, like I said before, they are treating Armstrong worse than many criminals. The way Pantani was treated was aweful. He was hunted down after they first caught him. Vandenbroucke is mentally as fragile as can be. The penalty he recently received was very severe.

The question is whether they actually care about doping or just making it look like they care, perception seems to be more important. As for targetting for big names I don't have a problem with that at all, as long as they can prove it and as for the system. Ok, here it is, there is money to be made out of this and it's fine to take whatever risks possible to get the financial benefits and they are always going to be people who will try and cheat, whether we like it or not.

Cycling is the testing ground for performance enhancing drugs and as for the team owners, they'll do it what it takes to get the financial rewards for it, the riders are just commodities and once used for its worth, then discarded.

Castafiore
08-25-2005, 10:53 AM
Cycling is the testing ground for performance enhancing drugs and as for the team owners, they'll do it what it takes to get the financial rewards for it, the riders are just commodities and once used for its worth, then discarded. :sad:
Sad but true, and you also have to wonder about the consequences to their health in the long run.

I remember a poll done here with young and upcoming talents in various sports and they asked a question like this one: "if you could win an important event and get an important title in your career by doping but you knew in advance that this would imply giving up a couple of years of your life (a premature death), would you take that risk?"
I don't remember the exact statistics but the majority of those guys actually were willing to sacrifice years of their life for a title so, if you know that money and ambition is involved, you also know that a lot of people are going to be eager to take the risk.


Edit to add this quote from The Chicago Tribune in reply to all those 'it's an anti-Amercan thing' comments:
Armstrong has always known what buttons to push. You can never lose in this country by blaming the French, the media and what he would call "haters" had he grown up in another culture. He's even sued detractors, which takes matters far beyond the patented Palmeiro finger-wag.
So, I'm not alone in thinking that the 'they are anti-American' excuse is lame. :o
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-0508250165aug25,1,4426256.story?coll=chi-sportsnew-hed

Angle Queen
08-25-2005, 01:07 PM
Here's a little more tempered piece from an American writer in an American magazine.

1) A French newspaper says Lance Armstrong used performance-enhancing EPO in 1999, during the first of his seven Tour de France victories. Should we believe this or should we ignore this?

Not just any French newspaper, but L`Equipe, the respected daily sports newspaper and sports magazine. L'Equipe reported in its Tuesday edition that it had obtained copies of six medical documents from the '99 Tour that showed an unnamed Tour rider had tested positive for red blood cell-boosting EPO, a popular drug among endurance athletes (runners, cyclists) until a test for detecting the substance was developed in 2001. The paper said the samples were Armstrong's and that they had been preserved and tested last year.

The report should be neither believed nor ignored. It should not be accepted outright because L'Equipe has not provided first-hand evidence that the samples are Armstrong's. The laboratory that performed the test has not verified that the samples were Armstrong's. It should not be ignored because, despite Armstrong's profile and popularity, it would be naïve -- in any high level sport in '05 -- to dismiss the possibility that a successful athlete used performance-enhancing substances. Fans should be relentlessly skeptical, and the larger the performance, the more skeptical they should be. Armstrong, who has been the subject of numerous allegations of doping, has always denied using them, and repeated that denial Tuesday on his website.

2) Will the report seriously damage Armstrong's credibility?

Not likely. There is little doubt that sports fans are living through an era of unprecedented doping exposure, largely the result of the now-finished BALCO case. Much of what was once behind a curtain is now very much out in the open. Baseball has been dragged through an embarrassing spectacle in front of Congress and implemented an embarrassingly weak steroid policy. Fans are asked every day to solve a moral dilemma: How to feel about the athletes who are accused, or who test positive.

The range of reactions has been fascinating. Track star Marion Jones, who was implicated in the BALCO scandal but never tested positive, has been literally shunned within her own sport. Meet promoters in Europe banded together and agreed not to invite her (or any other BALCO-connected runners) to their competitions. Yet Rafael Palmeiro tested positive for a banned steroid and some writers said that they would still elect him to the Hall of Fame. (This is not to say that Palmeiro has not suffered significant public humiliation; he has).

The most significant test case had been Barry Bonds, frequently implicated in BALCO-related steroid talk, but ever-denying. Armstrong is a more fascinating case, because he is far more than just a star athlete. He is a source of hope and belief for millions (count the yellow wristbands) of cancer survivors and patients. Through his victories in le Tour, through the publication of two bestselling books, through the yellow bracelets, Armstrong has grown into a larger-than-life folk hero in the U.S.A. He is nearly bulletproof against any allegations of doping, short of an admission on his part. I don't think any media investigation can damage the Legend of Lance in this country.

Personally, I will apply the same standard to his feats as to those of any other outsized performer: Skeptical admiration.http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/tim_layden/08/24/five.and.out/index.html

Mr Layden makes may of the same points my fellow posters have already made (which again, proves your collective knowledge and intelligence :) ). He refutes the label of L'Equipe as a tabloid and cautions any sport fan to disregard the notion that cheating doesn't exist.

I want to believe Armstrong's denials and am heartened by the fact that he continues to make them regardless of what's said or written...but like Mr Layden suggests, I have only a skeptical admiration. I continue to believe, drugs or no, he is/was one of the best Tour de France riders of all time.

Purple Rainbow
08-25-2005, 01:15 PM
Wow, a voice of reason coming from across the pond! What a refreshing read after all the Jealous-Euro-Commie-Conspiracy-Talk.

SuperFurryAnimal
08-25-2005, 01:36 PM
Several more great riders have tested positive on doping in the past... Coppi, Anquetil, Thévenet, Zoetemelk, Moser, Pantani... Even Eddy Merckx! One should wonder whether a ban on doping is usefull... I guess sports on a level this high forces people to take drugs. Sad but true.

Action Jackson
08-25-2005, 01:41 PM
Edit to add this quote from The Chicago Tribune in reply to all those 'it's an anti-Amercan thing' comments:

So, I'm not alone in thinking that the 'they are anti-American' excuse is lame. :o
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-0508250165aug25,1,4426256.story?coll=chi-sportsnew-hed

No, it's just we are stupid anti-Americans who just thing that Armstrong is the only one doped up, but doping doesn't happen in cycling.

Marine
08-25-2005, 02:08 PM
I continue to believe, drugs or no, he is/was one of the best Tour de France riders of all time.


2 suggestions:
1/ All riders are doped, they're equal so Armstrong is probably one of the best riders though.
2/ He used other new dopings, more oustanding than EPO, and so in this case he dumped his opponents.

the cat
08-25-2005, 03:21 PM
I want Lance Armstrong to take and pass a lie detector test to prove he is innocent of the speculative doping charges levied at him by only L'Equipe.

Tennis Fool
08-25-2005, 04:23 PM
guy just has a jackass of a personality.
Obviously you didn't like him before the allegations, which makes it even more pleasurable to see him go down in flames.

Where did you get that he is pompous?

tangerine_dream
08-25-2005, 05:12 PM
Thanks for that article, Angle Queen.

The report should be neither believed nor ignored. It should not be accepted outright because L'Equipe has not provided first-hand evidence that the samples are Armstrong's. The laboratory that performed the test has not verified that the samples were Armstrong's.

Too bad Mrs B's thread title is misleading and does not correlate at all to what has actually been reported.

Jorge
08-25-2005, 09:43 PM
No, it's just we are stupid anti-Americans who just thing that Armstrong is the only one doped up, but doping doesn't happen in cycling.
hehehe, BTW I think that most cyclists have used or still uses some kind of doping substance. At least since the 70's and yes that includes my idols: Perico Delgado, Lucho Herrera, Raúl Alcalá and Miguel Induráin and of course Lance Armstrong as well.
The question is WHY they doesn't test positive never??? does the doping substance is still too new to be detected? does the UCI covers it to avoid a bigger scandal? is doping considered "normal" like it was considered in MLB, so nobody really takes/took seriously doping tests?

I would like to know the answers to those questions.

Action Jackson
08-25-2005, 09:49 PM
hehehe, BTW I think that most cyclists have used or still uses some kind of doping substance. At least since the 70's and yes that includes my idols: Perico Delgado, Lucho Herrra, Raúl Alcalá and Miguel Induráin and of course Lance Armstrong as well.
The question is WHY they doesn't test positive never??? does the doping substance is still too new to be detected? does the UCI covers it to avoid a bigger scandal? is doping considered "normal" like it was considered in MLB, so nobody really takes/took seriously doping tests?

I would like to know the answers to those questions.

Yes, there always questions surrounding these things, but yes my feelings about doping and cycling are very clear, it's probably harder to find clean athletes than ones that are doped. Back in the old days the drugs were so far ahead of the tests and they didn't care about it.

An example of this was the State sponsored doping from the former DDR and the Soviet countries who at the time, were the world leaders in sports science, that's the thing, drugs itself won't do anything, there needs to be some talent in the athlete for them to be effective and knowing when to load and not to lad up.

its.like.that
08-26-2005, 02:36 PM
I want Lance Armstrong to take and pass a lie detector test to prove he is innocent of the speculative doping charges levied at him by only L'Equipe.

lie detector tests are infallible aren't they

alexito
08-26-2005, 04:07 PM
I don't think the test, I believe lance amstrong.

the cat
08-26-2005, 06:34 PM
its., lie dector tests are about 98% infallible which is good enough for me.

Marine
08-26-2005, 07:50 PM
I don't think the test, I believe lance amstrong.

Argentinian tennismen, cyslists, united ... ! In your case it's good to have faith but be careful to blinkers :o

Devotee
08-27-2005, 04:15 AM
Lance's Thursday interview on CNN's Larry King Live will be reshown this Sunday, Aug. 28 at 9:00 P.M. Eastern time in the United States.


================================================== ========

AMERICAN-STATESMAN (Austin, Texas daily newspaper)

By Suzanne Halliburton

Tuesday, June 14, 2005


There is scientific evidence as to why Lance Armstrong is the best of the best

University of Texas scientist has concluded that the Tour de France cyclist is 18 percent better than he was before he was diagnosed with cancer in 1996


It's often speculated how six-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong could come back from his illness and dominate a sporting event considered to be the most arduous in the world.

While some whisper about drug use -- although Armstrong has yet to test positive after dozens of in-race and out-of-competition screenings of blood and urine -- a University of Texas scientist who has studied the champion cyclist since 1992 says he has come up with scientific explanations for Armstrong's success.

"Lance is arguably the best endurance athlete on the planet," said Ed Coyle, director of UT's Human Performance Laboratory, whose findings are featured in the June edition of "The Journal of Applied Physiology."

According to Coyle, Armstrong is 18 percent better than before he was diagnosed with testicular cancer Oct. 2, 1996. Half of that increase is the better development and efficiency of his muscles. The other half can be attributed to a significant weight loss.

Armstrong is currently at it again -- training these days in the Alps in preparation for the July 2 start of the Tour de France, the last of his career.

In the nine years since his cancer diagnosis, Armstrong has significantly increased his power and muscle efficiency, Coyle reports.

His heart is bigger, capable of pumping 200 beats per minute, allowing his body to pump high levels of oxygen-rich red blood cells.

The ability of Armstrong's heart to beat that fast for an extended period of intense activity -- such as cycling up a steep mountain pass in the Alps -- gives him a 5 percent advantage over his competition at the Tour and puts him in the 95th percentile for men his age, Coyle said.

At the same time, Armstrong dropped his weight, competing at 159 pounds at the Tour, as opposed to his pre-cancer competitive frame of 174. This weight loss increased his power wattage -- the ability to pedal the bike faster.

Coyle estimates that Armstrong's power wattage is greater than Spain's Miguel Indurain, who had owned the previous record of five Tour victories in a row.

Armstrong is in the same range as Eddy Merckx, the legendary Belgian and winner of five Tours who is considered the greatest cyclist of his time, Coyle said.

Since his illness, Armstrong gained more slow-twitch muscle fibers, which are so vital to endurance athletes who cycle long distances and run marathons. Slow-twitch fibers are more efficient in that they need less energy than fast-twitch muscles to function at a high level.

Coyle estimates that Armstrong has increased the proportion of his body's slow-twitch muscles from 60 percent to 80 percent.

Most Tour cyclists are between 60 and 70 percent, while non-athletes are in the 40 to 50 percent range.

And, Armstrong's focus on training has allowed him to take advantage of these physiological changes.

It all adds up to six consecutive Tour championships, something no other cyclist in the event's 101-year history has accomplished.

Coyle said of Armstrong's change: "It's a huge amount, simply phenomenal."

lau
08-27-2005, 05:00 AM
Argentinian tennismen, cyslists, united ... ! In your case it's good to have faith but be careful to blinkers :o
:rolleyes:

Castafiore
08-27-2005, 10:34 AM
I don't think that anybody is in doubt that Armstrong is a phenomenal athlete. You can not make a race horse out of a donkey just by doping.
However, I don't know what this statement from that lab from Texas proves in this discussion. That lab from Texas hasn't seen the entire peloton so they can't exactly say scientifically why Armstrong was so much better in the TdF.
For example, I don't know how he can say the following without having had the opportunity to check out the other cyclists: The ability of Armstrong's heart to beat that fast for an extended period of intense activity -- such as cycling up a steep mountain pass in the Alps -- gives him a 5 percent advantage over his competition at the Tour and puts him in the 95th percentile for men his age, Coyle said.
:scratch: Where does he get the 5% from?
And how can they say that he's "the best of the best" without having seen the others? Hardly a scientific statement but maybe the journalist who wrote the article put it out of context.

Have you seen reports on Ullrich for example? According to labs (statistics on heart beat at rest and heart beat at peak performance + recovery rate, long capacitiy,...), he more than matches Armstrong in the physical department. Ullrich lacks the willpower but his body is phenomenal in terms of athletic ability.

the cat
08-27-2005, 03:03 PM
Interesting article Devotee. Thanks.

Casta, I'm also not sure what that article proves. But I enjoyed reading it.

Neely
08-30-2005, 01:24 AM
On Saturday evening, they interviewed the chief editor of l'Équipe via a live transmission on "ZDF Sportstudio", a German sports programm.

And not surprisingly for me, this guy had no answers at all or talked around on all the key questions that were asked:

"Why did it require l'Équipe to investigate on this matter?"
"Where do you take the right from to do a test on these probes, to publish it as if it was an official test with official results and then make it public before letting know the athlete and his defence?"
"How did l'Équipe get hold of the records that prove that the codes on the anonymous samples can be accurately backtraced to Lance Armstrong?" (of course a newspaper normally can't)
"Who are your sources?" (obvious answer: "sorry we cannot tell that" :lol: )
"Among the samples that have been retested, the ones of Lance Armstrong were not the only ones. Why did you only publish his name so far?" (cheap answer: because we do not have enough prove and evidence yet for the other cyclists to publish :rolls: ) :retard: (maybe the honest answer would have been: because the headline with Armstrong alone sold better for the issue)
"When will you publish the other names?" (answer: as soon as possible when we are sure) probably this is done in a small row on page 24, different to the big 'the Armstrong lie' on the front page.


To me, this was all very fishy to say the least and not very convincing at all.
I still think the same as at the beginning: I don't want to say that Armstrong is guily or innocent, but most of all the whole method and way beyond this investigation stinks and arises questions.

its.like.that
08-31-2005, 05:44 AM
its, lie dector tests are about 98% infallible which is good enough for me.

:lol: ok champ :kiss:

the cat
08-31-2005, 11:34 PM
its., would you please stop calling me champ? Lance Armstrong is the champ afterall! :D ;)

Good post Neely. And thanks for the info. All proper drug testing laws and privacy protocal was broken by L'Equipe and whoever they were working with. And that is shameful. :( This rumoured positive drug test of what is thought to be an Armstrong urine sample from 1999 will never be acknowledged by any cycling organization because nothing was done on the up and up.

its.like.that
09-01-2005, 06:59 AM
its., would you please stop calling me champ? Lance Armstrong is the champ afterall! :D ;)

Good post Neely. And thanks for the info. All proper drug testing laws and privacy protocal was broken by L'Equipe and whoever they were working with. And that is shameful. :( This rumoured positive drug test of what is thought to be an Armstrong urine sample from 1999 will never be acknowledged by any cycling organization because nothing was done on the up and up.

:lol:

the cat
09-01-2005, 06:14 PM
I thought you would find that funny. ;)

wipeout
09-02-2005, 01:54 AM
Lance Armstrong has in the past sued people who have made accusations against him.

Now we have the most serious accusations ever made against him and yet he's not going to sue. Why? Surely if he has to sue anyone, he has to sue now.

It perhaps suggests that he believes the accusations will stand up to a full investigation and also that he somehow knows this in advance.

I don't want it to be true that he cheated but it's certainly not a good sign that a man who has never been afraid to sue now wants to avoid the courts.

Castafiore
09-02-2005, 11:28 AM
All proper drug testing laws and privacy protocal was broken by L'Equipe and whoever they were working with. And that is shameful. This rumoured positive drug test of what is thought to be an Armstrong urine sample from 1999 will never be acknowledged by any cycling organization because nothing was done on the up and up.
It's easier to just blame this entirely on L'Equipe than to consider the possibility that they may be on to something?
I hate to see this happening but at the same time, you can't just close your eyes and hope that this will go away. It's not just Armstrong. Lots of cyclists are under suspicion. To me, all the others are innocent until proven guilty (just like Armstrong has the right to defend himself against this) but I'm very aware that doping is a problem within this sport.

What drug testing laws did they break? I can understand your point about the privacy protocol but drug testing laws?
L'Equipe did not test the samples but a lab with a very good reputation did.
You're shooting at the messenger here. The testing itself was done within the laws. It's the way the results are revealed that you could question.
Despite the dodgy way in which this news was revealed, you can not just ignore the positive samples.

Shabazza
09-02-2005, 12:03 PM
Lance Armstrong has in the past sued people who have made accusations against him.

Now we have the most serious accusations ever made against him and yet he's not going to sue. Why? Surely if he has to sue anyone, he has to sue now.

It perhaps suggests that he believes the accusations will stand up to a full investigation and also that he somehow knows this in advance.

I don't want it to be true that he cheated but it's certainly not a good sign that a man who has never been afraid to sue now wants to avoid the courts.
you have a point here

the cat
09-02-2005, 03:14 PM
Casta, none of L'Equipe's charges are going to stand up against Lance Armstrong. Doping agencies have said that no proper drug testing protocol was done in this case and that makes L'Equipe's charge that Arnstrong tested positive for EPO with a 1999 urine sample that might not even be his somewhat dubious to say the least. It doesn't mean Armstrong is innocent. But I think it's supsect that L'Equipe has to go back to the previous century to try to dig up doping dirt on Armstrong the most thoroughly drug tested athlete of all time. And Casta, Armstrong seems to be L'Equipe's target and not other cyclers.

Is there some doubt in my mind that Armstrong didn't use EPO at some time? Yes there is some doubt. But there is also no solid proof that he did. And I contend that what L'Equipe came up with is not solid proof that he did but solid speculation.

As for a law suit that still may happen. We'll just have to wait and see. Or maybe since Lance is retired he may just say the hell with eveyone and sail off into the sunset with Sherly Crow. :) :singer:

tangerine_dream
09-02-2005, 05:10 PM
L'Equipe's might have more credibility if they hadn't been so vociferous in their "getting" Armstrong since the first year he had the gall to win the Tour de France. This "respected" sports paper has hardly ever had anything good to say about Armstrong and even went to so far as exclaim that his retirement couldn't have been more welcome. That's not exactly unbiased reporting, is it? The publishers and owners of L'Equipe/Tour de France have always been outspoken against Armstrong which automatically makes their findings questionable and suspect. Their rabid obsession to capture Lance Armstrong red-handed reveals their investigation to being nothing more than a witch-hunt. Perhaps if they had been more professional and weren't so obvious with their anti-Armstrong slant, they would have more credibility and support from the sports community at large.

'L'Equipe' readers show support for Armstrong nice last-minute touch, L'Equipe :lol:

PARIS (AP) — Lance Armstrong drew wide support from French fans who criticized the newspaper that accused the seven-time Tour de France winner of doping, with one letter writer pleading that the cyclist be left alone.

L'Equipe published letters to the editor in its weekend magazine Saturday in response to last week's cover story that Armstrong used a banned blood booster in his first Tour victory in 1999. The cyclist has denied the charges, suggesting he is the victim of a "setup" and places no trust in the lab that handled the test.

Of the seven letters published, six backed Armstrong and expressed varying degrees of anger at the newspaper.

"Leave him alone!" wrote Eugenie Hays from the Brittany town of La Forest-Landerneau. Like many readers, she noted many athletes take banned products these days but not everyone inspires like Armstrong. "Don't shatter our dreams."

Louis Riche, another reader, wrote that "these accusations (true or false having little importance) only show one thing: that scientific research is seven years late."

He questioned whether French cyclists would face the same scrutiny as the American star.

"So, in six years we'll know if Thomas Voeckler was doped on the 2004 tour," Riche asked about the rider who held the yellow jersey for 10 stages that year. "Ah, no, am I crazy? He's French."

L'Equipe reported Tuesday that new tests on six urine samples he provided during the 1999 tour resulted in positive results for the red blood cell-booster EPO.

William Dubois noted that he does fair amount of cycling and understands the need for an energy boost.

"For me, my EPO, from time to time is (a licorice-flavored aperitif) and, at Sunday dinner, a good glass of wine! I know that professionals don't only drink mineral water," he said.

Not everyone spared Armstrong from judgment.

"You were my hero," wrote Rahila Abdul. "Why did you do it?"

the cat
09-02-2005, 06:42 PM
Great post Tangy. You speak the truth. And thanks for that article. It's great that some French people are down on L'Equipe for their negative reports on Lance Armstrong and realize they've been out to get him for years. And once French person Louis Riche even wrote in to L'Equipe doubting that in 6 years whether we would know if a French cyclist tested positive. The astute Monsiuer Riche knows what's going on. And so do many others.

Castafiore
09-02-2005, 06:46 PM
Doping agencies have said that no proper drug testing protocol...
No, the lab who did the testing followed all the right procedures.
The way it was revealed is questionable but not the testing of the samples. They do have positive samples, tested in a scientific and professional way.

Armstrong seems to be L'Equipe's target and not other cyclers.
And how do you know that?
Are you a regular reader of L'Equipe?

They have been on the case of Armstrong for a long time. True. But, that doesn't mean that they are talking nonsense all that time.

Furthermore, if you have read that sports newspaper more (I'm not a regular reader myself but I do read it from time to time) you would know that they DO target other cyclists.
Have you followed the Festina case?
Have you followed the Pantani case?
Have you followed the Simeoni case?

My guess is that you think that they target Armstrong and no other cyclist because a) you only focus on the Armstrong stories and b) the Anglo-saxon press focusses on the Armstrong stories.

Did the Armstrong case get more attention than most other cases? Yes, but that's because he's such a high profile cyclist (but the Festina case got even more attention where I live)

And once French person Louis Riche even wrote in to L'Equipe doubting that in 6 years whether we would know if a French cyclist tested positive. The astute Monsiuer Riche knows what's going on. And so do many others.
Are you surprised by the support of some of the French readers or did you actually think that the cliché "the French hate Armstrong for winning their TdF" was true?
He has many supporters in France but the opinion of readers is not the same thing as proving that L'Equipe is wrong.

Devotee
09-06-2005, 05:37 AM
Armstrong is engaged and contemplating a comeback

Seven-time Tour de France champ says he might ride again.




http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/01/07/15/image_1815071.jpg (http://www.statesman.com/sports/content/sports/stories/other/09/ENTER_ALONGCAMEPOLLY__60Copy_1.html)

Lionel Hahn/2004 ABACA PRESS
(enlarge photo) (http://www.statesman.com/sports/content/sports/stories/other/09/ENTER_ALONGCAMEPOLLY__60Copy_1.html)
Cyclist Lance Armstrong and Rocker Sheryl Crow are now engaged.


Complete Tour coverage (http://www.statesman.com/sports/content/shared/sports/tourdefrance/index.html)

By Suzanne Halliburton (shalliburton@statesman.com)

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Cycling champion Lance Armstrong is engaged to rock star Sheryl Crow and is considering coming out of retirement to try for an eighth consecutive Tour de France victory, he told the Austin American-Statesman on Monday.

Since Armstrong and Crow have been living together for 18 months, their engagement may have been expected, though the couple has been dispelling breakup rumors since May.

But a spring wedding followed by a summer Tour?

"I'm thinking about it," Armstrong said. "I'm thinking it's the best way to piss (the French) off."

Armstrong said he has entertained the idea for only the past two weeks. He said he began thinking about it when a French newspaper reported Aug. 23 that he had tested positive six times for a banned blood booster as he was winning his first Tour in 1999.

When asked how serious he was about another Tour, Armstrong said, "I'm exercising every day."

Armstrong has made a career of proving people wrong, winning a record seven Tours after surviving advanced testicular cancer in 1996. And he often is at his best when he's got a motivational chip on his shoulder.

Since the articles appeared in L'Equipe, an all-sports daily newspaper based in Paris, Armstrong has vehemently denied ever using erythropoietin, a blood booster that has been illegally used by cyclists for years.

A French laboratory outside Paris, trying to perfect relatively new testing procedures for EPO, used urine samples provided by Tour cyclists in 1999 in its research. All samples were anonymous and assigned a number, and all were B — or backup — specimens, the A samples having been tested and discarded in 1999.

Armstrong provided 17 urine samples in 1999, representing every day he wore the leader's yellow jersey in the three-week Tour.

Researchers have concluded that EPO can stay in the body and be detected by a urine test for up to one week. According to L'Equipe, which claimed it was able to match up the numbers with the names of the cyclists, Armstrong tested positive six times. It did not mention the other 11 samples.

The International Cycling Union began investigating the matter Aug. 29. The nonprofit regulatory organization, based in Switzerland, is expected to announce its results this week. USA Cycling already has issued a statement supporting Armstrong.

Last April, Armstrong announced that this year's Tour would be his final race. He stayed conservative throughout the Tour, winning only one stage, but still coasted to a 4-minute, 40-second margin of victory over Italy's Ivan Basso.

As for the engagement, Armstrong said he popped the question to Crow on Wednesday while they were vacationing in Sun Valley, Idaho.

"We've told family and friends, stuff like that," he said. Armstrong added that he discussed the engagement with his three children before he asked Crow.

It will be Armstrong's second marriage and Crow's first.

Although still officially retired, Armstrong hasn't been able to spend much time in Austin. He said he will maintain a busy schedule at least through mid-September. Armstrong is set to tape an interview with Oprah Winfrey on Wednesday, and he'll return to Idaho next week to meet with the Dalai Lama.

Stevens Point
09-06-2005, 02:31 PM
Congratulations, Lance for engaging! :D

I am still believing that you didn't dope...

Devotee
09-07-2005, 03:34 AM
I wonder if he's teasing about trying for an 8th. Tour de France championship?

Choupi
09-07-2005, 08:53 AM
I bet he isn't teasing! He'll take part. Just wish him good luck this time because he'll know why he doesn't get the support of the crowd! It won't be only an impression this time.

Choupi
09-07-2005, 03:21 PM
From www.eurosport.com

Armstrong return: The peloton reacts

Lance Armstrong is reportedly ready to come out of retirement and race another Tour de France to hush his contractors as he stands firm against the recent doping allegations levelled against his name. A ploy to annoy the French, or a distinct possibility? Hear what the world of cycling thinks...

On Tuesday, Lance Armstrong's spokesman Mark Higgins refuted claims that the seven-time Tour de France winner was seriously considering a return to the sport, claiming that his client was "100% retired." Yet Discovery Channel directeur sportif Johan Bruyneel claimed that it was "not impossible."

Then, late on Tuesday night, Armstrong then made a second announcement - following his initial passing comment to the American Statesman - in which he refused to rule out a possible return.

"While I'm absolutely enjoying my time as a retired athlete with Sheryl [Crow] and the kids, the recent smear campaign out of France has awoken my competitive side," said the 33-year-old.

"I'm not willing to put a percentage on the chances but I will no longer rule it out..."

So, what has the reaction been from within the peloton and around the world of cycling? Eurosport gives you a few sound-bites from the men that matter...

Dan Osipow (Discovery manager)

An off-guard Osipow admitted: "That to me sounds very Lance-like. It leaves things open and the motivation seems pretty clear. He is immensely proud of his reputation.

"Lance was pretty definitive when he announced his plans for retirement. But circumstances change. Who knows? I leave that to him. We all know he planned on staying fit."

"He owns part of the team. If there's a certain rider from Texas who wants to join the team, we'll have space."

Dirk De Mol (Discovery directeur sportif)
"You can never say never. Lance still goes mountain biking for three hours a day. That's quite a lot for someone who's retired. What's more, he will participate actively in our team get-together at Austin in December. Who knows what he will decide then..."

Roberto Heras (Liberty rider currently racing Vuelta)
"I think Armstrong's decision is very good. The only problem that I see is that if the French people do the same thing when the next season ends, he would be in the same situation. Anyway, I perfectly understand his position of defending everything he achieved with so much sacrifice. It's a very sporting position."

Bernard Hinault (grouchy five-time winning Tour legend)
"I don't give a sh*t about any supposed return. We'll see whether it happens... whether he actually turns up at the start. It's not my problem."

Eric Boyer (Cofidis manager)
"I have no opinion on such a story. I don't want to make a reaction because then we fall into polemical sterility. It just becomes a game of ping-pong and it doesn't interest me one jot. It's ridiculous."

Jean-René Bernaudeau (Bouygues Telecom manager)
"Armstrong is not cycling's sole representative. What is important is that cycling is in a good state after him. He is no more guilty than certain others, and he has even brought a lot of interesting things to the sport. Let's leave it to the authorities to do their job now. My hopes lie with the world anti-doping agency. That said, I probably would have reacted in the same way as Armstrong. It's a reply. What's important is to fight the suspicion."

Manuel Beltran (team-mate of Armstrong)
"Personally, I would find it awesome if he came back on the Tour. I have a lot of respect for him and you must know the guy personally to understand his human value. No champion does as much for his team-mates as Armstrong. If he returns, helping him once again on the Tour would be the best thing that could happen for me."

Jean-Marie Leblanc (Tour de France director)
"I don't want to make any comment on such speculation. I will only react if I hear an official communication."

Christian Prudhomme (Tour de France director)

"I have nothing to say. As far as we are concerned, Lance Armstrong has retired from the sport since the evening of the 25th July. If he warns us officially about his desire to return and race in the Tour de France, we will listen to what he has to say."



Eurosport - FL - 07/09/05

its.like.that
09-07-2005, 03:25 PM
when did Lance break up with his former wife? :eek:

I didn't know that.

Devotee
09-07-2005, 03:53 PM
when did Lance break up with his former wife? :eek:

I didn't know that.


at least a year and a half ago

its.like.that
09-07-2005, 04:00 PM
at least a year and a half ago

:sad:

poor kids

Vanity
09-08-2005, 05:25 AM
Now if only they'd catch those pesky Williams sisters....

Devotee
09-08-2005, 06:07 AM
Armstrong to train with team this winter

By JEROME PUGMIRE
AP Sports Writer


PARIS — Lance Armstrong plans to train with his team this winter, increasing speculation he will end his retirement and attempt an eighth straight Tour de France win.

"It's definitely an open possibility, I know he is on the bike," Discovery Channel team director Johan Bruyneel told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Wednesday.

"He absolutely wants to be part of the training camp in December and wants to get fit to compete with the guys there," Bruyneel said, adding that Armstrong can decide to return as late as February.

When Armstrong retired in July after his seventh straight Tour win, Bruyneel had to decide whether to recruit a new team leader. He opted not to do so, suggesting the door may have been kept open for the Texan.

"We didn't really look for somebody to replace him," Bruyneel said. "For one there is nobody, not a strong leader like he was. Without him we have a very good team ... but not the favorites."

The Amaury Sport Organization, which organizes the Tour, would not comment on the speculation.

"We will express ourselves only if and when he decides to come out of retirement," spokesman Christophe Marchadier said. "There is nothing to stop him coming back on the Tour as a professional cyclist."

Armstrong, who turns 34 later this month, won this year's Tour by a comfortable margin — 4 minutes, 40 seconds ahead of Italian Ivan Basso and 6:21 ahead of Jan Ullrich of Germany.

"I'm sure he could win (another Tour)," Bruyneel said. "The way he won this year ... everything pretty much under control and he never showed any weakness. He has another Tour in his legs yet."

Armstrong, who announced his engagement Monday to rock singer Sheryl Crow, issued a statement Tuesday confirming that he's considering a comeback in part to rankle French media.

On Aug. 23, sports daily L'Equipe, which is owned by the Tour organizer, reported it had evidence that six of Armstrong's urine samples from the 1999 Tour tested positive last year for the blood booster EPO. The substance was banned in 1999, but there was no reliable test at the time.

"I think he's been very offended," Bruyneel said. "If you know him he doesn't need a lot to find some motivation. I think it woke up the competitive side of him."

Should Armstrong return, the media scrutiny surrounding him would be intense and he would likely receive a hostile reception from the French public.

"He proved in the past that he can deal with that. He is at his maximum under pressure," Bruyneel said. "Physically and mentally he can deal with a lot."



___

September 7, 2005 - 5:51 a.m. CDT

vincayou
09-08-2005, 08:51 AM
That's so true Tangy. L'Equipe comes accross as desperate in trying to create a story out of speculative drug tests from 6 years ago that might have been tampered with for all we know. Lance Armstrong was the most often drug tested athlete in the world. He has been tested hundreds of times in recent years and if Armstrong was on performancing enhancing drugs he would have tested positive at some point. But he didn't. This comes accross as a L'Equipe smear campaign against Lance Armstrong and I hope he sues them. And to top things off a French drug testing laboratory admitted they cannot confirm that the anonymous drug samples from 1999 belonged to Armstrong. That means they will never have 100% proof that Lance Armstrong used EPO in 1999. They can only speculate about it and write stories about that speculation. And that's not right or fair. Gee, I wonder if this story would have been written if Armstrong were French. :rolleyes: But we all know the answer to that.

Lance is a cheater. Get over it. What found L'Equipe is a FACT -> he took EPO in 1999. At that time, there were no EPO test yet so riders were not careful about the way they were taking it. The laboratory has only numbers but L'Equipe managed to make the links with the name. But there is no uncertainty here, it belongs to Lance.

And he won't sue L'equipe because he can't win here. Mark my words, he won't sue them.

What people should understand is all these Armstrong victories have been a big "f*** y**" to all the people who tries to fight against doping in sport. But cycling is in a desperate state on this issue.

And many people who are accusing him (Greg Lemond, his mechanics, his ex masseuse, the insurance company which does not want to pay him) are american. It really gets on my nerve the people who put that on anti americanism... I supported Lemond over Fignon in the 90's, cycling is not a sport where nationality is that important and I couldn't care less if no French wins it in the next 100 years.

Action Jackson
09-08-2005, 08:54 AM
:sad:

poor kids

Maybe, it would be good if Lance sued the L'Equipe but why won't he do that?

its.like.that
09-08-2005, 09:11 AM
Maybe, it would be good if Lance sued the L'Equipe but why won't he do that?

because he's innocent?

Action Jackson
09-08-2005, 09:14 AM
because he's innocent?

He has to be innocent and I believe in him like Agassi.

its.like.that
09-08-2005, 09:37 AM
He has to be innocent and I believe in him like Agassi.

now that's saying a lot, are you sure you want to lay all your faith on the line like that?

:eek:

Action Jackson
09-08-2005, 09:38 AM
now that's saying a lot, are you sure you want to lay all your faith on the line like that?

:eek:

There have been so many convincing arguments that I believe in the power of Lance and there is a witchunt out to get him.

its.like.that
09-08-2005, 10:07 AM
There have been so many convincing arguments that I believe in the power of Lance and there is a witchunt out to get him.

A man with one testicle will always be controversial, as it raises the question of, is this person still a man?

Choupi
09-08-2005, 10:11 AM
He has to be innocent and I believe in him like Agassi.
:eek: I must be dreaming...

tangerine_dream
09-09-2005, 06:10 PM
Congrats to Lance on his engagement to Sheryl Crow. They make a fine, hyper-competitive, Type-AAA couple. ;) Hope it works out great for them.

Congrats again to Lance for continuing to be vindicated in the never-ending witch hunt by the French to bring him down. :cool:

Cycling body says it has no doping evidence against Lance Armstrong
September 9, 2005

GENEVA (AP) -- Cycling's governing body said Friday it had received no evidence of doping by Lance Armstrong and criticized world doping authorities and a French sports newspaper for making allegations against the seven-time Tour de France champion.

"The UCI has not to date received any official information or document'' from anti-doping authorities or the laboratory reportedly involved in the testing of urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France, the cycling federation said.

Allegations that EPO was found in Armstrong's 1999 urine samples were first reported by the French sports daily L'Equipe last month.

Armstrong has angrily denied the charges, saying he was the victim of a "witch hunt.'' He questioned the validity of testing samples frozen six years ago, and how the samples were handled.

UCI said it was still gathering information and had asked the World Anti-Doping Agency and the French laboratory for more background. It also wanted to know who commissioned the research and who agreed to make it public.

"How could this be done without the riders' consent?'' the UCI said.

It also asked WADA to say if it allowed the results to be disseminated, which UCI says is a "breach of WADA's anti-doping code.''

"We have substantial concerns about the impact of this matter on the integrity of the overall drug testing regime of the Olympic movement, and in particular the questions it raises over the trustworthiness of some of the sports and political authorities active in the anti-doping fight,'' the UCI said.

UCI president Hein Verbruggen has asked for harsh sanctions against dopers and suggested Armstrong should face sanctions if here were shown to be guilty.

He also told Friday's Le Figaro that Armstrong had proposed before the Tour that all of his urine samples be kept for tests over the next 10 years.

UCI said it was still "awaiting plausible answers'' to its requests to WADA and the laboratory.

"We deplore the fact that the long-established and entrenched confidentiality principle could be violated in such a flagrant way without any respect for fair play and the rider's privacy,'' it said.

UCI singled out WADA president Dick Pound for making "public statements about the likely guilt of an athlete on the basis of a newspaper article and without all the facts being known.'' :cool:

It also criticized the article in L'Equipe as "targeting a particular athlete.'' :p

L'Equipe said it would react of UCI's criticism in Saturday editions. Tour de France organizers had no immediate reaction, spokesman Matthieu Desplats said.

Claude Droussent, the editor of L'Equipe, denied his newspaper targeted Armstrong because he is American, and said it would have treated a French rider the same. :spit: :haha: yeah, right

Armstrong retired after winning his seventh straight Tour title in July, but said this week he is considering a comeback. He plans to attend the Discovery Channel team training camp this winter.

Angle Queen
09-09-2005, 06:33 PM
when did Lance break up with his former wife? :eek:

I didn't know that.Here's the relevant time tables:

from: http://marriage.about.com/cs/celebritymarriages/a/lancekristin.htm

How Lance and Sheryl Met:
Lance and Sheryl met at the Grand Slam for Children event in Las Vegas in October, 2003. Armstrong and Crow flirted with one another through their Blackberries.

Their relationship became public shortly after his divorce from Kristin.

Engagement:
Lance and Sheryl announced their engagement on September 5, 2005. Lance popped the question on August 31, 2005, while they were in Sun Valley, Idaho on vacation. They have plans for a spring wedding.

...

Children with Kristin:
Before he began chemotherapy for testicular cancer, Lance banked sperm. His children were conceived with that banked sperm through in vitro fertilization.

Luke (b. 10/12/1999), Isabelle Rose (b. 11/20/2001), and Grace Elisabeth (b. 11/20/2001).

He stated that he would not compete at the 2004 Athens Olympics because he wanted to spend the summer with his children in the United States.

...

Previous Marriages:
Sheryl has not been previously married. She has been romantically associated with Eric Clapton and Owen Wilson.

Lance was married to Kristin Richard.

Marriage to Kristin Richard
How Lance and Kristin met: They met in January 1997 at the "Ride for the Roses" charity event, which was a few weeks after Lance had completed intense chemotherapy to treat testicular cancer. Kristin has been a public relations executive.

Wedding Date: Lance and Kristin were married on May 8, 1998, in Santa Barbara, California. He is said to have taken his bike to the wedding.

Divorce: Kristin and Lance announced their separation from one another on February 24, 2003. After a brief reconciliation in June, 2003, the couple filed for divorce in September, 2003 and divorced in December.

Castafiore
09-10-2005, 06:41 PM
Claude Droussent, the editor of L'Equipe, denied his newspaper targeted Armstrong because he is American, and said it would have treated a French rider the same. :spit: :haha: yeah, right
I believe that they would have treated a French rider the same.
They were relentless in their pursuit to dig holes in Virenque's defence when he was being accused of doping and while he claimed his innocence. Virenque was one of the most popular French riders back then.

The 'The French hate me' defence of Armstrong & co. is pathetic. :(


Besides that, you can laugh and point to L'Equipe and feed a popular "We hate the French" bias that lives in certain ango-saxon circles, you can deplore the unethical way at which this story was leaked but you can not ignore the positive samples (yes, they still need proof of that, but I have difficulty believing that L'Equipe just invented this - knowing Armstrong's reputation to go to court over allegations - and I have even more difficulty believing that the lab was just taking part in that so-called witch hunt. I may be wrong but that remains to be seen).

Furthermore, there is no vindication yet:
L'Equipe:
Sur le fond de l'affaire, les accusations de dopage contre Armstrong, l'UCI se garde de prendre position, affirmant ne pas avoir à sa disposition les informations suffisantes.

The entire affair should be investigated properly but the UCI is not the best organisation to do so. This requires an independant investigation.

Devotee
09-12-2005, 12:55 AM
Lance was in the audience at Ashe Stadium watching Federer and Agassi!

Devotee
09-20-2005, 07:02 PM
Schedule: Sun Oct 2



Venue: Zilker Park


Cost: Free

Information: (512) 476-9044



From SherylCrow.com

One might have thought that he would celebrate the day he was announced all clear of the cancer rather than the day he was diagnosed. But sometimes to see how far you've come it's pays to look back to see where the journey started. For example, rumor has it that Lance Armstrong keeps his old driving licence featuring a pic of him, his head bald from chemo, in his wallet. Perhaps it's a constant reminder of how far he's come.

Now, 11 years later on October 2nd in Zilker Park Austin we are all invited to catch a glimpse of Lance when Sheryl and her band perform a free concert in part to thank the City of Austin for the incredible support that her future husband has received over the years. He has been proud to call Austin his home and Sheryl is proud to be part of the celebration.

2:00pm Doors
4:00pm Lance speaks
5:30 - 7:00pm Sheryl Crow

its.like.that
09-20-2005, 08:12 PM
Schedule: Sun Oct 2



Venue: Zilker Park


Cost: Free

Information: (512) 476-9044



From SherylCrow.com

One might have thought that he would celebrate the day he was announced all clear of the cancer rather than the day he was diagnosed. But sometimes to see how far you've come it's pays to look back to see where the journey started. For example, rumor has it that Lance Armstrong keeps his old driving licence featuring a pic of him, his head bald from chemo, in his wallet. Perhaps it's a constant reminder of how far he's come.

Now, 11 years later on October 2nd in Zilker Park Austin we are all invited to catch a glimpse of Lance when Sheryl and her band perform a free concert in part to thank the City of Austin for the incredible support that her future husband has received over the years. He has been proud to call Austin his home and Sheryl is proud to be part of the celebration.

2:00pm Doors
4:00pm Lance speaks
5:30 - 7:00pm Sheryl Crow

I would be sure to BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO him as loud as I could if I was anywhere on the continent.

its.like.that
09-20-2005, 08:13 PM
Lance was in the audience at Ashe Stadium watching Federer and Agassi!

talk about double standards - allowing Amstrong into the stadium and refusing Canas entry.

ClaycourtaZzZz.
09-20-2005, 08:24 PM
:haha::yeah: Armstrong:retard: Ullrich:woohoo::rocker2:

Marine
09-20-2005, 10:21 PM
talk about double standards - allowing Amstrong into the stadium and refusing Canas entry.

:lol:

thrust
09-21-2005, 03:20 AM
Pure French bull shit! How come they didn^t prove it in 1999. Not only are the French losers, they are sore losers. Believe I am sure if they could have caught Lance cheating over the years, they would have. I hope he comes back and wins again which he threatened to do. The next day the international cycling organization stated there was no evidence that Lance ever cheated.

its.like.that
09-21-2005, 03:35 AM
Pure French bull shit! How come they didn^t prove it in 1999. Not only are the French losers, they are sore losers. Believe I am sure if they could have caught Lance cheating over the years, they would have. I hope he comes back and wins again which he threatened to do. The next day the international cycling organization stated there was no evidence that Lance ever cheated.

research the Fesina team scandal back in around 97-98, then have a think about why cycling officials might not wish to further tarnage the image of the sport.

mindboggling stuff...

tangerine_dream
06-01-2006, 05:56 PM
Oops, another blow to the Lance-bashers. :tears: It's understandable that the French can't stand having an American win "their" Tour de France seven years in row but the fact remains: the disgraced tabloid L'Equipe and its backers are going to have to suck up the fact that they were dead wrong about Armstrong, he's been vindicated several times now, and the Frenchies will have to find some new piss to smell and taste that will go with their whine. The witch-hunt is over. :dance:

http://www.theeagle.com/stories/060106/sports_20060601055.php

Report clears Lance Armstrong

By ARTHUR MAX
Associated Press

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - A Dutch investigator's report cleared Lance Armstrong of doping in the 1999 Tour de France on Wednesday, calling the accusations against him "completely irresponsible" and raising the possibility of misconduct by anti-doping authorities.

The 132-page report recommended convening a tribunal to discuss possible legal and ethical violations by the World Anti-Doping Agency and to consider "appropriate sanctions to remedy the violations."

The French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that six of Armstrong's urine samples from 1999, when he won the first of his record seven straight Tour titles, came back positive for the endurance-boosting hormone EPO when they were retested in 2004.

Armstrong has repeatedly denied using banned substances.

"Today's comprehensive report makes it clear that there is no truth to that accusation," Armstrong said in a statement. "I have now retired, but for the sake of all athletes still competing who deserve a level playing field and a fair system of drug testing, the time has come to take action against these kinds of attacks before they destroy the credibility of WADA and, in turn, the international anti-doping system."

The International Cycling Union appointed Dutch lawyer Emile Vrijman last October to investigate the handling of urine tests from the 1999 Tour by the French national anti-doping laboratory, known by its French acronym, LNDD.

Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France."

The report said tests on the samples were conducted improperly, and they fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest that the results "constitute evidence of anything."

It said no proper records were kept of the samples. There had been no "chain of custody" guaranteeing their integrity, with no way of knowing whether the samples had been "spiked" with banned substances.

The report said WADA and the LNDD may have "behaved in ways that are completely inconsistent with the rules and regulations of international anti-doping control testing," and may also have been against the law. It accused WADA of putting pressure on the LNDD to summarize the results of the tests, and said both agencies violated rules of confidentiality by openly discussing them.

It said neither Armstrong nor any of the other riders that were tested retroactively could fairly be accused of violating anti-doping regulations based on the LNDD's examination.

WADA chief Dick Pound said he hadn't received the report yet but, based on what he had read in news accounts, was critical of Vrijman's findings.

"There was no interest in determining whether the samples Armstrong provided were positive or not," he told The Associated Press by telephone from Montreal. "We were afraid of that from the very beginning."

Pound reiterated his claim that the UCI had leaked the forms to a reporter from L'Equipe and was responsible for the doping samples being linked to Armstrong.

"Whether the samples were positive or not, I don't know how a Dutch lawyer with no expertise came to a conclusion that one of the leading laboratories in the world messed up on the analysis. To say Armstrong is totally exonerated seems strange," Pound said.

The report also said the UCI had not damaged Armstrong by releasing doping control forms to the French newspaper. Vrijman said a further investigation was needed regarding the leaking of the results.

He said a tribunal should be created to "provide a fair hearing" to the people and organizations suspected of misconduct and to decide on sanctions if warranted. Vrijman's statement did not specify what the alleged violations were.

"The report confirms my innocence, but also finds that Mr. Pound along with the French lab and the French ministry have ignored the rules and broken the law," Armstrong said. "They have also refused to cooperate with the investigation in an effort to conceal the full scope of their wrongdoing."

booa
06-01-2006, 07:43 PM
The report only says that using old samples was not in accordance with the rules. It does not say whether he was clean or not. But we all know the answer :devil:

Yoda
06-01-2006, 08:26 PM
yep Lance was vindicated a la 'O J Simpson'

the cat
06-02-2006, 12:52 AM
I knew Lance Armstrong would be vindicated. :) I hope he files as many lawsuits as possible against those who deserve to be sued. :yeah:

You tell 'em Tangy! :shout:

shotgun
06-02-2006, 02:27 AM
talk about double standards - allowing Amstrong into the stadium and refusing Canas entry.

:lol:

Yeah, Agassi shouldn't be allowed into the stadium either. :devil:

tangerine_dream
06-30-2006, 04:55 PM
Doping scandal strips Tour de France of its favorites
By JAMEY KEATEN, Associated Press Writer
June 30, 2006

STRASBOURG, France (AP) -- A doping scandal knocked Tour de France favorites Jan Ullrich and Ivan Basso out of the race Friday and threw the world's most glamorous cycling event into chaos.

The decision to bar Ullrich, Basso and others implicated in a doping probe in Spain also sent a strong signal that cheating, or even suspicions of cheating, will not be tolerated.

Tour director Christian Prudhomme said organizers' determination to fight doping was "total."

"The enemy is not cycling, the enemy is doping," he said the day before the start of the Tour.

Riders being excluded will not be replaced, meaning a smaller field than the 189 racers originally expected. And that's not even counting the absence of Lance Armstrong, who retired after winning his seventh straight Tour last year.

It is the biggest doping crisis to the hit the sport since the Festina scandal in 1998 nearly derailed the Tour. The Festina team was ejected from the race after customs officers found a large stash of banned drugs in a team car.

Basso, winner of the Giro d'Italia, and Ullrich -- the 1997 Tour winner and a five-time runner-up -- were among more than 50 cyclists said to have been implicated in the probe that has rocked the sport for weeks.

Basso and Ullrich's teams said Friday that because their names had come up in the probe they were being withdrawn from the Tour. Ullrich's T-Mobile squad said it also suspended rider Oscar Sevilla and sporting director Rudi Pevenage because of their involvement.

Basso was heading back to Italy, his team said.

The team of Spanish racer Francisco Mancebo said its rider was being pulled out, too. Mancebo finished fourth in the last year's Tour.

A total of nine riders who signed up for the Tour were implicated in the Spanish probe, said cycling's governing body, the UCI. Five of the riders were with the Astana-Wurth team, whose former director was among those arrested in Spain.

The UCI identified the implicated Astana riders as Joseba Beloki of Spain, runner-up at the 2002 Tour and third in 2001 and 2000; Allan Davis from Australia; Alberto Contador and Isidro Nozal from Spain; and Sergio Paulinho from Portugal.

The team said it was trying to decide whether to withdraw them. Doing so would leave Astana with fewer than the minimum of six riders needed to start the Tour, which would force out the entire team -- including its pre-race favorite Alexandre Vinokourov from Kazakhstan.

At Astana, "it looks like a system of team doping," Prudhomme said.

Just a day earlier, the Court of Arbitration for Sport had ruled against Tour organizers' call for Astana to be barred from the race.

The Spanish scandal erupted in May when police carried out arrests and raids, seizing drugs and frozen blood thought to have been readied for banned, performance-enhancing transfusions.

Since then, the names of riders said to have had contacts with Eufemiano Fuentes, a doctor among those arrested, have leaked in Spanish media.

Then, after more leaks on Thursday, Spanish authorities released details from the probe to Tour organizers and other cycling bodies, showing which riders were implicated in the investigation. It was on the basis of that official information that Tour teams decided to act.

The UCI noted that while the probe implicated the riders, it had not yet established that they had cheated. Nevertheless, Tour organizers pushed for their exclusion and teams agreed, in keeping with their ethical charter that allows riders to be barred from racing while they are under investigation for doping.

T-Mobile received information implicating Ullrich, Sevilla and Pevenage from Tour organizers, including documents from the Spanish government, team spokesman Luuc Eisenga said.

"The only thing I can tell you is that the information is clear enough and didn't leave any doubt," he said.

Another T-Mobile spokesman, Stefan Wagner, told Germany's n-tv television that the team was acting on information indicating "that there was contact between the two riders and Rudi Pevenage and the Spanish doctor ... who is at the center of this doping story."

Asked whether T-Mobile would consider cutting ties with Ullrich completely, he replied "certainly ... we are now demanding evidence of his innocence."

"If this evidence can be provided, then we have a completely new situation," he said. "If it cannot be provided, nothing will change about this situation."

German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble, who is responsible for sports, said: "This is a sad day. It can only strengthen us in pursuing the fight against doping with determination."

The extent of Basso's implication was not immediately clear. His team said that Basso insisted he was innocent. But it also said that the suspicion hanging over the Italian would have made his participation in the Tour difficult.

"It would be big chaos if those riders remain in the race," said the manager of Basso's team, Bjarne Riis. "We have to protect cycling."

Riis noted that Basso's contract forbids him from working with doctors from outside their CSC team.

"Ivan must prove with his lawyer that he is innocent," Riis said. "I believe in Ivan but I have been forced to take the necessary steps."

justClaudia
06-30-2006, 05:47 PM
I never thought Ivan was also involved in this doping case. It's a shame, really.

star
06-30-2006, 05:55 PM
:sad: :sad:

The pressure to dope is so great. I think almost anyone could be doping.

almouchie
06-30-2006, 06:23 PM
yeah the cylcists have such a bad rep
L'Equipe are usually right about their allegations
I wouldnt be surprised, actually i expect it
that Armstrong has been on some kind of drug
having cancer & then treatment &
then come back to win so many times
u would have to be almost superman to achieve that
thou in cycling it is such a team game, that all the riders in a group race for thier to billing
it kind of seems Lance is trying hard to deny the allegations
after he is retired
there were rumours that once the story of his use will be out he decided to call it quits

vincayou
06-30-2006, 07:02 PM
I never thought Ivan was also involved in this doping case. It's a shame, really.

you are very naive, all of the top 50 of the last 10 years (Indurain included) were on EPO at least. This sport is a total fraud, I used to like it.