-
Very interesting the comments about Coppi & Anquetil may I just add that the Americans love a good witch hunt, they just can't help it, it is their evangelical protestant gene pool, Americans BURN witches.
-
That reminds me. I haven't been to a good old fashioned book burning in a while.
-
Come to my launch. Bring matches.
-
In the early days is was sweet strong coffee laced with cocaine
-
Gino Bartali took to raiding Coppi's room before races :
"The first thing was to make sure I always stayed at the same hotel for a race, and to have the room next to his so I could mount a surveillance. I would watch him leave with his mates, then I would tiptoe into the room which ten seconds earlier had been his headquarters. I would rush to the waste bin and the bedside table, go through the bottles, flasks, phials, tubes, cartons, boxes, suppositories – I swept up everything.
I became so expert in interpreting all these pharmaceuticals that I could predict how Fausto would behave during the course of the stage. I would work out, according to the traces of the product I found, how and when he would attack me."Gino Bartali, Miroir des Sports, 1946,
-
^^^^^^^wow
-
My favourite quote is from Coppi, when he was asked by a journalist if he took 'La Bomba'. Only when I need to, came his reply. And when is that? the journalist asks. All the time he replies....
I also read Anquetil complaining about drug testing, saying that if you want the peloton moving along at 15kmh then yes, test for drugs and everyone gets bored and stops watching, but if you want the peloton to go along at 25kmh then don't test. He considered drug tests an invasion of his civil liberties and I'm pretty sure he was stripped of a race or two by refusing to give samples. A 5-times TdF winner...
In the early days is was sweet strong coffee laced with cocaine, then amphetamine was widely used. HGH, steroids, testosterone all have been used but EPO was the game-changer. La Bomba might give you energy and make you ride a little faster and go a little longer, but I'm sure as hell it doesn't aid recovery. Weren't people amphetamines to ride and then morphine to sleep? EPO is the real turbo charger.
Lance is the sacrificial lamb, and I've heard people (mostly Americans) admit his doping but mitigate that by saying the entire peloton was juiced. I think he can feel aggrieved at the fact he is being singled out and that other riders aren't getting the same treatment, but he was the most systematic and sophisticated doper there was, and backed it up with mafia-style intimidation. He painted a target on his back in the long run.
EPO was indeed the game changer, never better illustrated than at La Fleche Wallone in 94 when Argentin & a couple of Gewiss teammates simply rode away taking all the podium placings. Who was team Doctor?, oh suprise suprise Ferrari. -
Robert Millar's tuppence -
http://www.cyclingnews.com/blogs/robert-millar/the-bare-minimumreasonable and articulate in my view.
*This Monday it was the UCI's turn to be stood in between the rock and the hard place. Ironically, in a dilemma not that different to the one faced by Tyler Hamilton and Co years ago, the UCI faced a decision which was going to be criticised whatever they did. So they did what they have been doing for too long now: they produced the bare minimum, they gave the political answers, dodged the hard questions and hid behind USADA's reasoning. Realistically, they had no choice but to accept the evidence put before them because any other challenge or inspection opened them up to even more criticism. And yet by doing the minimum those questions will still come. We still want the answers to the questions they don't want to hear.
The UCI can deny there was any link between the Armstrong donations and the suspicious test results and Pat McQuaid can try to place all the blame onto the riders for the blood doping and EPO abuse but everyone is beginning to see beyond that defence. The "It wasn't me it was them that did it" excuse has already been made famous by Virenque during the Festina affair and we all know how that one turned out .
1998 was the warning that the 50% limit chosen by the UCI two years earlier was an open invitation to dope to that level. The teams of the period, as teams had always done, expected the rules to be pushed and organised themselves as they thought fit. The UCI said it was 50% to protect riders’ health and just ignored the sudden emergence of the 75kg climbers. Festina were the unlucky ones as it could have been any of the teams – any one of them – and the bizarre strike of that year’s Tour just confirmed it. They weren't protesting that they were being cheated by Festina, they were protesting that their world had been found out.
At the last Tour de France I rode, a quick poll of my friends and colleagues in the peloton revealed that EPO was available to everyone regardless of the team budget or ambition. They weren't happy about it as the difference was no longer a question of how good an athlete you were, it was that plus how good your doctor was with the new drugs. The arrival of EPO and HGH meant the competition was as much about chemical warfare as it was about how fast you could race a bike. Of course those teams in at the very start of the substance abuse held a head start for the first few years, but eventually the lesser teams caught up and everyone could ride up a mountain at 30kmh with their mouths closed
Want to know who was juiced? That's easy – just ask to see their blood levels . Before EPO, the haematocrit norm would have been around 40-42%, gradually reducing as a grand tour went on. Then suddenly everyone's jumped to 50% or more and stayed there for weeks at a time. There hadn't been a step forward in human evolution, the only thing that had changed was the arrival of what Laurent Fignon called the new Super (French for high octane fuel) and those willing to supply and administer it.
So the riders found themselves in the situation of go to 50% and be a good professional or get blasted every day and at the end of the year it'll be bye-bye. When it's your dream job, you aren't yet mature enough to have a strong moral compass and are surrounded by an unhealthy environment there aren't many people who are going to stand up and shout that this is wrong. Add to that the ridicule that would be unleashed upon anyone who told the real truth and you have the perfect ingredients for the omertà. These are as much excuses as they are reasons. I doubt any of the riders placed in the 50% dilemma liked the idea of risking dying in their sleep, obliged to have one set of medication to see them through the racing day and then another set to get them through the night in case their blood got too thick or they were dehydrated. They didn't become bike riders for that reason.
After Festina, it was the supposedly the new era but the UCI limits were still the same and the problem moved even more into the shadows. The risk of longer bans or prison for the guilty didn't deter the preparers, it just made them smarter. Now we know what that meant: micro-dosing, blood transfusions and serious planning to avoid the testers.
Ask yourself would you have a blood transfusion outside of a hospital environment? No neither would I. I'd be scared even in a hospital given the stories of contamination but it seems some people thought this was acceptable to be competitive, to prove their point, to dominate. You have to have serious issues if you think blood doping is OK.
Cycling was bad enough when it was amphetamines and cortisones as the weapons to be deployed in times of desperation, and you were lucky to get out of that period with your self-respect and health intact, but organised preparation of whole teams with the collusion of doctors, coaches and management is criminal. It isn't cheating, it's playing with people’s lives.
What the UCI have done during the EPO era has been far from enough, they have let down a generation of fans, riders, sponsors and supporters. They and the people behind the 50% farce have been lucky that there weren't deaths. The UCI have been dragged forward by one scandal after another and now the social media generation has cried enough. It's no longer a carefully selected group of people asking if they think it was alright for Armstrong to be invited to respond to a dubious test result. It's all of us shouting: What ? And you took donations from him afterwards? And you thought that was OK? And maybe he asked how you reached those results and you thought he was being helpful? And it's still a 50% limit today despite the evidence that it isn't normal?
This mess is as much down to what the UCI hasn't done as much as it is the fault of all those who supplied, advised, facilitated and expected the use of EPO and blood doping.
Thankfully, the young riders of today have seen it's wrong and they dare talk about because they can they are allowed to talk about it and the old omertà can't stop it .
Now there's the opportunity to sort out the problems, to have the victims and the perpetrators come forward and give evidence. Punishments might be needed but they have to be appropriate. I thought six months was reasonable for those involved in the Armstrong/US Postal affair but the reaction from Lefevere to fire Leipheimer and the Sky threat of sacking everyone is only going to discourage what needs to heard.
There has been progress these last few years but much like the historic revolutions they have been led by those not willing to put up with the unacceptable and not by the institutions.
If the UCI wants to stay (in charge) then things are going to have to change and they could do well to start with the difficult questions.*
-
Great article from Legend Robert Millar, always loved his climbing, always loved his straight forward take no shit interviews! He is a great writer cuts through to the truth. ITV4 can we please have Rob on the Tour next yr. Please
-
My favourite quote is from Coppi, when he was asked by a journalist if he took 'La Bomba'. Only when I need to, came his reply. And when is that? the journalist asks. All the time he replies....
I also read Anquetil complaining about drug testing, saying that if you want the peloton moving along at 15kmh then yes, test for drugs and everyone gets bored and stops watching, but if you want the peloton to go along at 25kmh then don't test. He considered drug tests an invasion of his civil liberties and I'm pretty sure he was stripped of a race or two by refusing to give samples. A 5-times TdF winner...
In the early days is was sweet strong coffee laced with cocaine, then amphetamine was widely used. HGH, steroids, testosterone all have been used but EPO was the game-changer. La Bomba might give you energy and make you ride a little faster and go a little longer, but I'm sure as hell it doesn't aid recovery. Weren't people amphetamines to ride and then morphine to sleep? EPO is the real turbo charger.
Lance is the sacrificial lamb, and I've heard people (mostly Americans) admit his doping but mitigate that by saying the entire peloton was juiced. I think he can feel aggrieved at the fact he is being singled out and that other riders aren't getting the same treatment, but he was the most systematic and sophisticated doper there was, and backed it up with mafia-style intimidation. He painted a target on his back in the long run.
Good post, I agree.
-
I heard somewhere that US compensation rules means they can claim three times the fraudulant amount,
RICO permits triple penalties, not sure about other laws.
Given he made a non-disclosure clause part of his ex-wife's divorce settlement, I expect he's been planning for this possibility for some time.
Non-disclosure is normal business for divorces of the famous, that need not be an indication of anything other than that LA was famous.
I think he can feel aggrieved at the fact he is being singled out and that other riders aren't getting the same treatment,
He'd have got the same punishment as the others if he had behaved the same as the others. USADA asked everybody to come in for a chat, only LA refused. He's not the only one in the frame for perjury, nor is he the only one at risk from civil recovery, so it's not fair to say that he had more to lose by confessing than Levi, George, Floyd et. al.
He can probably still avoid actually serving any time in gaol (on the perjury charge, all bets are off if the Feds make the fraud charges stick) if he confesses now and throws himself on the mercy of the court.
Meanwhile, one has to ask; is Fat Pat the first McQuaid in 200 years who didn't get a shovel put into his hand as soon as he landed off the boat? He seems congenitally inclined to keep digging, no matter how deep the hole he's in gets.
-
Start the fire with Kindling
-
fnar
-
Cycling's status Stateside, succinctly summarised
http://www.theonion.com/articles/this-last-story-ever-written-about-cycling,30063/ -
"Where he has found the strength from I just do not know."
Seriously, nothing in this display to give you any hints then, Phil?
Otxoa looks how someone should after a 130m mountain stage, Armstrong looks like hes out for a ride in the park and has just warmed up. Lol
-
Another fabulous day.
Samuel Sanchez insisting Armstrong is innocent because he never failed a test (which is, anyway, untrue), a strict position that I am fairly certain he doesn't take with Contador.
The piece that adoubletap posted above along with this nugget:
One source suggested to Roberts that Clinton himself swayed US Attorney Andre Briotte into suddenly closing down the 18-month investigation without reason on Superbowl Sunday, although the office denied its decision was the result of political pressure. But the closure did coincide with a large donation from Armstrong - $100,000 - to Planned Parenthood, provider of breast cancer screening to underprivileged women, which was coming under fire from conservatives.
He does get value for money with his donations doesn't he?Pat McQuaid has had a real Frank Spencer. Suggesting that David Millar didn't promote his autobiography like Hamilton has and that makes all the difference.
Then he said this *“Bjarne Riis is a bit like Jonathan Vaughters, he’s working very hard to ensure that cycling today is doping free,” *
Later he had a dig at Paul Kimmage for using amphetamines when he was a pro. “I know Paul very well, I know him since he was in a pram,” McQuaid said. “I was a good amateur in my day but I took the decision not to go professional and I went to college instead. He went on to turn professional and then he took a decision during that career to dope. I’ve never done that. All I’ve done is ever work for the sport and for the benefit and the good of this sport all my life
Perhaps forgetting that, as a standard bearer of integrity in cycling, he was banned from the 76 Olympics for breaking the embargo on racing in Apartheid South Africa (along, sadly, with Sean Kelly). -
http://reader.roopstigo.com/view/roopster/story/595#/chapter/2/
Interesting read. All this lip-service paid to Armstrong over the years makes me sick. Take out the open secret of his drug use, tolerated by his commercial partners when it suited them, and you're left with the open truth of his disgusting personal behaviour, which has never made him any less attractive to the powerful and influential he so envies and emulates. Hey presto - they trip over themselves to welcome him into the arena of crooks.
If you want a friend get a dog. If you want a hero you should probably get another.
dubtap
deleted
Stonehedge
BringMeMyFix
prevailrob
lillywhite
miro_o
carson
StandardPractice
gbj_tester
cliveo
thiscocks
TheorySwine-
Post a reply
About
Lance Armstrong... greatest doper there was or ever will be
Posted by
@the-smiling-buddha
It won't be sitting in his current account.
However there has been a significant shift in offshore banking arrangements for wealthy Americans due to IRC 911 and various statues concerning the taxation of US citizens when working abroad. A combination of circumstances makes it very hard for US citizens to hide money. The list of countries with US tax treaties and social security totalization agreements is to all intents and purposes exhaustive and certainly covers the countries in which LA earned/won most of his money.
I am speculating wildy but it is possible that LA's financial advisers would be adivising best practice if the majority of his cash and capital is located in the US.
As Tester said upthread we are assuming that he hasn't blown a lot of money on expensive divorces and private jets too.
If Lance has been squirelling away my personal view is that it won't be a huge sum of money (the US government should have view of all of his transfers over a certain small sum).
Anyway, I'm only speculating. Time will tell.