Lance Armstrong

[spike 236]

Spike: My 3 favorites...Jackie Robinson, Carl Lewis or Jim Thorpe.

 

I think Carl Lewis wins, though.

mook,

 

Those are three of the all time greatest American athletes. To your list I would like to add Mohammed Ali, Babe Ruth and Michael Jordan.

 

One of the worlds greatest athletes was a Brit, Sir Roger Bannister, the first man to break the four minute mile barrier.

[olyboy 0]

MJis the most overated athlete ever. He couldnt hit a AA curve ball. Go look at Danny Ainge , Bo Jackson , and Deion Sanders. All played big league baseball and football,or basketball , totally disimilar sports. MJ is the first manufactured superstar thanks to marketing in the over hyped NBA. Jordan never won a single title without Scottie Pippen.

[livermore 0]

I would disagree that he didn't just come from nowhere. Prior to winning the tour he had competed four times previously and managed to finish only once, when he came in somewhere around 20th/25th or thereabouts. I think you would agree that is not a particularly strong pedigree by any stretch of the imagination.    You are right to say that he has lifted the sport to new heights but there again so did the East German swimmers and Chinese runners in their particular events.

 

Tom, you don't know alot about bicycle racing. At the age of 22 LA won a little race called the world championships. Which made him the "World Champion" in 1993. I would think that would look good on your resume. By the way this was also his first year in the Tour de France and he won a stage there. The early years he was a worker or domestic not a team leader on the weak Motorola team. He has finished no lower than 25 in the world every year since turning pro expect the year he was out with cancer. And it was a steady progression into the top 10. Again, show me where Armstrong ever tested positive for anything. This year alone he was tested at every event he entered and had 6 random out of competition test. This is where they literally show up at your house and draw blood. He is probably the most tested athelete on the planet.

 

Of course we could compare him to the British guy who won the Tour de France. But I can't recall his name right now. Can anyone help. Of course there is a British cyclist, David Millar who won the world championship recently. Oh yeah, thats he had to give that back and take a two year vacation for doping. So know a little about what you write.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Tom, you don't know alot about bicycle racing. At the age of 22 LA won a little race called the world championships. Which made him the "World Champion" in 1993. I would think that would look good on your resume. By the way this was also his first year in the Tour de France and he won a stage there. The early years he was a worker or domestic not a team leader on the weak Motorola team. He has finished no lower than 25 in the world every year since turning pro expect the year he was out with cancer. And it was a steady progression into the top 10. Again, show me where Armstrong ever tested positive for anything. This year alone he was tested at every event he entered and had 6 random out of competition test. This is where they literally show up at your house and draw blood. He is probably the most tested athelete on the planet.

 

Of course we could compare him to the British guy who won the Tour de France. But I can't recall his name right now. Can anyone help. Of course there is a British cyclist, David Millar who won the world championship recently. Oh yeah, thats he had to give that back and take a two year vacation for doping. So know a little about what you write.

livermore,

 

Your second paragraph says everything about your mentality. No-one has got a downer on LA because he is American so your little jibe about British cyclists is irrelevant and really does show what you know about cycling or are you one of these armchair coaches that cheers everyone on ...... as long as they're waving the stars and stripes.

 

The "he has never tested positive" argument was, as I have already stated on this thread, identical to that used by Kostas Kenteris, Flo Jo and Marion Jones to name but a few.

 

It was good that you brought up the case of David Millar since he also claimed never to have failed a drugs test up until he actually did. One of his more memorable quotes was:

 

"It upsets me to think that people assume every pro is on drugs. Just because people can't comprehend the level of fitness and ability that some riders have, they now assume they all do it on drugs."

 

Never a truer word was spoken.

 

Tom

[Niall 0]

'Again, show me where Armstrong ever tested positive for anything'.

 

Happy to do so:

 

In 1999, he tested positive for the corticoid triamcinolone. He claimed this was an ingredient in a legal topical skin ointment he had taken to treat road rash and saddle sores. Armstrong had not declared his use of this skin cream as he was required to do under UCI rules. His explanation was accepted by the UCI and his failure to declare was overlooked.

[Matty 0]

Of course we could compare him to the British guy who won the Tour de France. But I can't recall his name right now. Can anyone help.

Livermore -you thinking about Tommy Simpson who died in the 1960 `s whilst racing in the tour .

 

Matty

 

I feel doping is widespread amongst all sports ,not just cycling lets also remember cycling is one of the most tested sports!!

 

Matty

[The Mook 105]

I did not stick up for Lance simply because he is an American. This is not a Brit vs. USA debate. If Cheshire has said the same thing about Bjorn Borg and his 5 Wimbledon titles I would have used the same argument.

 

Also, I think Ali was a great (maybe greatest) boxer, but we'll really never know about his all around athletic prowess. If you can site specific reasons, please let me know. I know very little about him outside the ring.

 

MJ: One if the best b-ball players ever, but not close to being the greatest athelete. My reason: he tried his hand at baseball and could not cut it. It seemed obvious he wasn't getting better, too. He's a very good amatuer golfer, but I don't think he'd qualify for the PGA tour. So, that rules him out for me.

 

Ruth: Possibly. He was a very good pitcher and fielder and actually could run well in his early years. His hand/eye and power stayed with him until retirement. He also had tremendous strength.

 

Other great USA atheletes: Babe Didrikson (sp?), Florence Griffith Joiner.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

themook,

 

I think we've all set out our stall re Lance and I think it would be accurate to say that he is a controversial champion.

 

Of the other US sportsmen in my lifetime that I would consider great (or at least who have given me the most enjoyment), not necessarily athletes, I would rate:

 

Tiger Woods (I am lucky enough to live about 40 minutes from Southport and Royal Birkdale so I may even take a trip up there this weekend to see Michelle Wie - frightening ability for her age!).

 

McEnroe and Connors - some great memories of two great competitors.

 

Ali and Leonard - made boxing an art form at times.

 

Marino and Montana - the top dogs during my TV induction to American Football

 

Mark Spitz - whatever became of him?

 

Greg Lemond

 

I know bugger all about baseball and basketball as neither have really taken off over here so my apologies for omitting any folks from those sports.

 

Tom

[olyboy 0]

Quality of american sports has really went down the shitters over the last 20 years. Expansion of major league baseball and basketball has really hurt those skill sports. American football doesnt suffer so bad because it is more of a raw athletic talent sport with less skill involved. Hockey, well lets see if they can pull their heads out of their asses. I do miss the great boxing we had here in the 70's.Very few young men here are even competing in it anymore. Damn rough to even find boxing on the amatuer level here in the states. USA suffers in that regard because most all sports are tied to the school system and not club sports like in europe. A topical steriod cream, please give me a friggin break ok ??????

 

Brad

[Niall 0]

You asked for an example and I gave you one. Suck it up.

 

Also if you know so much about cycling as you claim then you will know about 'masking'.

[spike 236]

A topical steriod cream, please give me a friggin break ok ??????

 

Brad

The "clear" and the "cream" are two steroid applications that got Balco Labs and the SF Giants Barry Bonds in hot water. Both are topical applications.

[livermore 0]

By Francois Thomazeau Reuters

 

PAU, France, July 21 - Tour de France leader Lance Armstrong, cleared of doping allegations by the International Cycling Union (UCI) on Wednesday, said he had been persecuted by "vulture journalists".

 

The American said he had used a cream containing a banned corticoid to cure a skin allergy and that he had a medical prescription to do so.

 

"I was using a cream which showed minute traces in my urine, so minute that they were not there on day one," said Armstrong, replying to a report by French daily Le Monde that corticoid traces were found in his urine.

 

Le Monde said the test took place after the first stage on July 4. The Texan was also tested after winning the prologue a day before.

 

"If Le Monde wants to call it a doping story they can but it is not a doping story," the 27-year-old said.

 

He added that there were more journalists than usual on the Tour this year because they were chasing doping stories after last year's scandal, which brought cycling's showcase event close to collapse.

 

"It's vulture journalism, it's desperate journalism. I've been persecuted," he said.

 

"The traces were so small that it has nothing to do with enhancing performances. It's bad for cycling, it's bad for the Tour de France," he added.

 

In its report, Le Monde accused Armstrong of lying because he repeatedly said he was not taking any products, banned or not.

 

"I was asked if I had been given an exception by the UCI to take anything and I said no.

 

"When I think of taking something, I think of pills, injections. Quite honestly, I did not consider a skin cream to be taking something," he said.

 

Armstrong, who is set to win the Tour only two years after cancer threatened not only his career but his life, said the controversy had given him extra motivation.

 

"What they (the press) wanted was for me to crack on the bike, I was not going to do that for them," he said.

 

The UCI earlier confirmed that corticoid traces were found in Armstrong's urine on July 4.

 

But the governing body added he had a medical prescription to use the cream for a skin allergy. The cream contains the banned corticoid triamcinolone.

 

"We can confirm that all dope tests made during the Tour de France until July 19 were negative," the UCI said in a statement.

 

Normally, when a test is negative or when an athlete produces a prescription for corticoid, the results of the test are not published.

 

"But at the request of Lance Armstrong and his team and because of the exceptional situation created by some media, the UCI wishes to make an exception and to confirm that the rider has used Cemalyt cream (which contains triamcinolone) to cure an allergic dermatitis," the UCI said.

 

The UCI added that the use of the cream was "authorized by the rules and can not be considered a doping practice".

 

This is an article taken from a story published in a report by Reuters at the time. This is the whole article and not an excerpt. Read what the UCI (professional cycling's governing body) says. And make your own judgements. Does Armstrong use some masking agent, I don't know. Hell maybe he is from the planet Krypton, again I don't know. What I do know is that the man, and he is not even my favortite cyclist, in fact I believe Eddie Merckx is the all time greatest cyclist, has won 7 Tours and other classic events and has never been found guilty of doping period. The UCI and the other agencies have no problem banning a person or a team. They have banned a recent world champion, they have banned an Olympic silver medalist and believe me they would also ban Lance Armstrong if he was proven guilty of a doping infraction. So they don't just "Overlook" doping.

 

 

 

The "he has never tested positive" argument was, as I have already stated on this thread, identical to that used by Kostas Kenteris, Flo Jo and Marion Jones to name but a few.

 

Maybe I am not understanding you analogy here. I think that you are saying that these athletes all claimed to not have used drugs but were in fact found guilty later of using them. Or are you saying that there abilities improved greatly because of drugs which they denied using but were found guilty of using at a later date. Anyway, I can't argue with you that they claimed to have never used drug or that they in fact were caught using them. This is true. But I have to go by the innocent until proven guilty maxim or at least charged.

 

As far and English vs. American issue. I have great respect for English sports and sportsmen. I believe the EPL is the greatest sports league bar non. I even play cricket in an organized tournament every year up in Chiang Mai. So I do apologize for my remarks about British cyclist or lack there of.

 

So, just keep making conjectures, this is what Cheshire and Niall are good at.

Edited July 29, 2005 by livermore

[CheshireTom 1,377]

livermore,

 

I think the rules say that you declare prescription drugs or banned substances before the event, not after it; even if it is only for a sore bum. I think LA employs folk so that these little nuances called rules are adhered to. The fact that triamcinolone can also be ingested orally to help improve lung function is purely coincidental, of course. I suppose since the UCI is an international organisation LA can claim that he didn't understand the rules since they were written in French.

 

It reminds me a bit about the difference between Linford Christie and Ben Johnson ............. Ben Johnson didn't think of a cup of ginseng tea!

 

Tom

[spike 236]

Thank God Tom was not a testing judge or Lance would not have won 7 Tours. He had enough of a hard time with his French adversaries who were looking for ANY excuse and would have disqualified him in a heartbeat if they could.

 

Tom, you must have had some money on one of Lance A's rivals and lost big time to be so biased against him and to try to diminish his accomplishments. Really sounding like very sour grapes.

 

Enough from me, have a good day.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

spike,

 

"Thank God Tom was not a testing judge or Lance would not have won 7 Tours."

 

And LA's lucky that the London High Court Judges aren't either.

 

From Reuters today .......

 

Armstrong loses London court joust

 

Seven-times Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong suffered defeat in London's Court of Appeal on Friday. Three judges ruled that a London newspaper was entitled to argue that it could print a story containing allegations that Armstrong had taken performance-enhancing drugs.

 

The cyclist has denied taking banned drugs.

 

The judges agreed with The Sunday Times newspaper that it was entitled to argue such a story was privileged on the basis it was in the public interest and the newspaper had a duty to publish it.

 

The Court also ruled that when the case comes to court the paper can argue a number of points which it says justified publication of the story.

 

The High Court had earlier struck these out, along with the public interest defence.

 

The Sunday Times had challenged a High Court ruling in December in which a judge rejected its claims that the allegations, which had originally been made in a book, were a matter of public interest and the paper was therefore protected from being sued for libel.

 

Tom

 

p.s. Why would I ever bet against LA? Biased, maybe. Stupid, no!

[BigDUSA 71]

spike,

 

"Thank God Tom was not a testing judge or Lance would not have won 7 Tours."

 

And LA's lucky that the London High Court Judges aren't either.

 

From Reuters today .......

 

Armstrong loses London court joust

 

Seven-times Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong suffered defeat in London's Court of Appeal on Friday. Three judges ruled that a London newspaper was entitled to argue that it could print a story containing allegations that Armstrong had taken performance-enhancing drugs.

 

The cyclist has denied taking banned drugs.

 

The judges agreed with The Sunday Times newspaper that it was entitled to argue such a story was privileged on the basis it was in the public interest and the newspaper had a duty to publish it.

 

The Court also ruled that when the case comes to court the paper can argue a number of points which it says justified publication of the story.

 

The High Court had earlier struck these out, along with the public interest defence.

 

The Sunday Times had challenged a High Court ruling in December in which a judge rejected its claims that the allegations, which had originally been made in a book, were a matter of public interest and the paper was therefore protected from being sued for libel.

 

Tom

 

p.s. Why would I ever bet against LA? Biased, maybe. Stupid, no!

I take it, your point is they can print "allegations" and at the end of the day all they are is "allegations" with no proof that he took these drugs. So what?

[CheshireTom 1,377]

I take it, your point is they can print "allegations" and at the end of the day all they are is "allegations" with no proof that he took these drugs. So what?

BigD,

 

Sometimes I wonder if you are really that thick or whether you have to work at it.

 

The allegations were made in a book, LA Confidential, excerpts of which were reprinted in The Sunday Times. LA is currently sueing Times Newspapers and the case will be heard in London sometime at the beginning of Nov.

 

LA will have his day in court to establish whether or not he did, or did not do, what has been alleged in the book. If he thought that The Times would back off under the threat of legal action he has made a serious miscalculation. The contents of the book and the newspaper excerpts, which you obviously have never read, will make for a very interesting court case ........... if LA now continues with the action.

 

Tom

 

p.s. I ain't seen you around for a few days. I heard that McGuiness was in Philly and assumed you had gone to pay homage.

[BigDUSA 71]

BigD,

 

Sometimes I wonder if you are really that thick or whether you have to work at it.

 

The allegations were made in a book, LA Confidential, excerpts of which were reprinted in The Sunday Times. LA is currently sueing Times Newspapers and the case will be heard in London sometime at the beginning of Nov.

Gee, it was printed in a book, so it's gotta be true. No I haven't read the book but one wonders if these "allegations" had merit the cyclist judging authority would have been all over Mr Armstrong like shit on a stick. He did win the last race didn't he? I guess there may be nothing to this book full of "allegations" and no proof or he wouldn't have been allowed to race.

 

That won't stop you from trying to tear him down a peg or two. Will it?

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Gee, it was printed in a book, so it's gotta be true. No I haven't read the book but one wonders if these "allegations" had merit the cyclist judging authority would have been all over Mr Armstrong like shit on a stick. He did win the last race didn't he? I guess there may be nothing to this book full of "allegations" and no proof or he wouldn't have been allowed to race.

 

That won't stop you from trying to tear him down a peg or two. Will it?

BigD,

 

Are you the full shilling, or what?

 

All I said is that I can't get my head around how he has continually beaten all those cycling guys that are on drugs and have admitted that fact ............. somebody mentioned David Millar as a prime example.

 

Another poster said that Florence Griffith Joyner was one of his favourite athletes. Her legacy is a couple of ridiculous world records and an untimely death. But, just for the record, she never once tested positive.

 

As I have already said, LA will now have his day in court to put over his side of the story.

 

As for trying to tear him down a peg or two, I'll remind you that it was Greg Lemond who labelled him "a fraud".

 

Tom

[btm1735 232]

I did not stick up for Lance simply because he is an American. This is not a Brit vs. USA debate. If Cheshire has said the same thing about Bjorn Borg and his 5 Wimbledon titles I would have used the same argument.

 

Also, I think Ali was a great (maybe greatest) boxer, but we'll really never know about his all around athletic prowess. If you can site specific reasons, please let me know. I know very little about him outside the ring.

 

MJ: One if the best b-ball players ever, but not close to being the greatest athelete. My reason: he tried his hand at baseball and could not cut it. It seemed obvious he wasn't getting better, too. He's a very good amatuer golfer, but I don't think he'd qualify for the PGA tour. So, that rules him out for me.

 

Ruth: Possibly. He was a very good pitcher and fielder and actually could run well in his early years. His hand/eye and power stayed with him until retirement. He also had tremendous strength.

 

Other great USA atheletes: Babe Didrikson (sp?), Florence Griffith Joiner.

just goes to show you that people can look at the same thing differently. I think MJ is certianly a great as basketball is one of the most taxing sports there is, certianly if you look the Pro schedule. Babe was talented but I don't see most people calling him an athelete by todays standards. MJ just had no talent for baseball but IMO he is certianly a greater athelete than the Babe.

[Hub 203]

just goes to show you that people can look at the same thing differently. I think MJ is certianly a great as basketball is one of the most taxing sports there is, certianly if you look the Pro schedule. Babe was talented but I don't see most people calling him an athelete by todays standards. MJ just had no talent for baseball but IMO he is certianly a greater athelete than the Babe.

Before the Babe was the Babe and was just hitting HRs, he reportedly was an awsome athlete when he was also a great pitcher.

[Hub 203]

Khun Tom:

 

As much as it pains me to say so, our friend BigD seems to have the upper hand over you on this one. He is giving you some "rough trade"

 

Niall gives an example that seems to defeat his arguments and you seem to be hanging on mainly presumptions and allegations by potentially interested parties.

 

I don't claim to have ANY expertise in the accuracy or lack thereof of drug testing samples. However, as you know, I review and use analytical results from environmental and toxicological sampling as part of my work.

 

These results are accurate to the low part per billion (ppb) levels. The detection limits continually get lower and if LA was tested as frequently as rumored, I have trouble believing even the cleverest "nutritionist" could erase ppb signs between tests. However, I defer to those doping experts or those more familiar with medical sampling.

 

I have no real interest in cycling, as it seems you do, but as a casual fan I think LA will go down as the top cyclist regardless of the overtures he makes towards Merkx (sp?). I have to admit the beating of cancer pulls at my heartstrings, for personal reasons as I am sure it does for many others.

 

Regards,

 

Hub

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Hub,

 

Without referring specifically to LA, I agree with you entirely re the testing procedures, however, a test for chemical 'A' will not necessarily detect chemical 'B'. I think that's what folk refer to as keeping one step ahead of the testers as the Balco cases highlighted.

 

I don't think Marion Jones has ever tested positive for anything but you've got to wonder about the coincidence of her slump in form coming around at exactly the same time as the testers found out what exactly it was that other athletes alleged she was on.

 

At the end of the day, it is not sports fans who are naturally cynics. It is those athletes on drugs who have not only cheated the other competitors but also Joe Bloggs who has paid good money to see them who generate the cynicism. As a case in point, I don't think we ever seriously questioned the ridiculous times being run by sprinters in the late 80s until Ben Johnson came along.

 

Any bets that the Chinese team will win a whole host of medals in Beijing in 2008?

 

Tom

[olyboy 0]

Sure. I dont agree with most of the International regulations on anti -doping. Some countries delight in catching their own ,like the USA and Germany. Others dont . You have to admit there is a big difference between conventional anabolic steriods primarily used to build skeltal muscle bulk and other more subtle substance such a CSF's, and the milder doses used for anti inflammatory properties. I am well aware of Balco I have used some of their products. I also used to take Ma-hung - ephedra; till the dumb ass feds got rid of it. Face it, Lance was an american winning at a sport that was held near and dear to the hearts of those who want in the worst way to see an american fail at it. Sour grapes Had a frenchman won the tour 7 times how many drug tests would he have had to take ????? More salt in the wounds in that most americans couldnt give a rat ass about a very long bicycle race.

[Tahoe_Bill 0]

Damn good to see that two of the most entertaining / respected posters are going head to head again.

I tend to agree with Big D, but C .Tom has very well stated his opinion. I remember the first victory like it was yesterday, and 7 wins is amazing (with a little help “unproven†or not). Regardless Lance kicked ass on the bicycling opponents.

IMHO.