Home Chat General Chat

Armstrong to miss Tour and do Giro?

From the news it looks like Lance may now skip the Tour and do the Giro?



Could this be to leave Contador alone for the tour?



Astana would surley not want to pee off their best asset (Contador) for one year of Lance? Contador has already hinted he would leave if asked to support Lance.



Also this would leave Lance an opportunity to complete the triple crown on his palmares and go for the Vuelta too later in the year.



Pink livestrong bands?

Comments

  • very interesting indeed. Seems strange as on the surface it appears that lance has admitted he is not good enough to be team leader for the tour....yet a few weeks ago he seemed adamant that he was going to ride the tour. You would think he would have thought the contador issue through before announcing his comeback.



    Anway to be honest i cant see lance being anywhere near as good as contador. Contadors times on the 2007 tour (e.g. up Plat d'Adet) i'm sure from memory were very similar (if not better?) to lance at his peak. Plus contador did it without nearly such a strong back-up team as lance (no heras, rubiera to pull him up the hills etc etc). Cant see lance winning the Giro either....but you never know what sort of "artificial help" he's lined up this time!!!
  • sfullersfuller Posts: 628
    why the dis-respect for him?
  • purely because i dont think he was clean.



    "he never failed a test" but neither did many other guys who have admitted to doping during his time (e.g. Zabel...multiple green jersey winner, Byrne Riis....former tour winner). Also he never says much about others guys doping... e.g ullrich and pantani. And why did he speak out against those who criticised doping like simeoni and bassons!?



    loads of his former teamates have been caught: e.g. beltran, llandis, heras, hamilton to name a few. i cant believe he was the only one in discovery/postal who wasnt taking something! Although he wont directly admit it jonathan vaughters often hints that the whole reason he set up slipstream was because he was fed up with the drug culture especially while he was riding for postal...likewise vande velde.



    a few interesting articles-

    http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jul/09/sports/sp-armstrong9

    http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-08/24/content_471898.htm

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/7648910.stm

    http://cyclinginfo.co.uk/cyclists/us/did-lance-armstrong-take-drugs/





    David Walsh of the sunday times (one of the worlds most respected sports writers and clearly a big cycling fan) write a whole book on the subject of lance and doping.



    if you try putting into google:

    Stephanie, Oakley, Hospital Room...

    IM Conversation, Frankie Andreu...

    Lemond, threat, telephone, Lance



    i think the evidence against him maybe not sufficient to legally "prove" he doped but there is no doubt in my mind.



    sorry for the rant but i just think the tour is better off without a cheat like him.
  • sfullersfuller Posts: 628
    innocent until proven guilty. Just because everyone else around was does NOT mean he was. Envy is a sin.



  • i think the evidence against him maybe not sufficient to legally "prove" he doped but there is no doubt in my mind.


    Well then it must be true if you think he did.... you obviously have a system to determin this?? Or can you not just get your head around the fact that he is good!



    I just think he is one of those people that is above average.
  • TommiTriTommiTri Posts: 879
    It would be so upsetting if it turned out he wasn't clean, I like to think of Lance as an inspiration for not only overcoming cancer but becoming such an incredible athlete. I am going to stick with the version of Lance that I have which is clean, until someone proves to me that he is guilty!
  • [color=#0066ff]"Or can you not just get your head around the fact that he is good!"

    [/color]

    ...well i can get my head around the fact that he was good. Lance's VO2 max was around/just above 80...clearly that of an elite athlete. however Greg le monds was above 90 (one of the highest ever recorded) yet Mr Armstrong blew apart Le Monds wattage outputs in testing. So if you assume both were clean then this doesn't really reconcile!



    [color=#3366ff]"innocent until proven guilty. Just because everyone else around was does NOT mean he was. Envy is a sin."[/color]



    ...so Riis and Zabel are innocent? lol.



    anway everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the subject of lance/doping, and the only facts are that he has never "legally" failed a test (the 1999 B samples tested in 2005 showing the presence of EPO in lance's blood are not admissable as the A samples were distroyed shortly after the tour) . Just expressing my personal opinion (which i admit would not stand up even for a minute in a court of law!)



    moving back more to the original topic...looks from todays news (contador comments) as though its still unclear if armstrong will ride in the tour....

    contador seems to be staying at Astana which i think is good news and makes for an interesting 2009.
  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    There is another post on here debating VO2 max & it relevance..or not, so that measurement is not much use.

    I have to agree with everyone on here, I would like to imagine Lance was simply a superior athlete who overcame the odds, but those odds also point to something else, the evidence circumstantial as it is, leans toward doping. The books by Walsh are excellent & very persuasive, as one might expect from a journalist of course. Feet of clay, shame but there you go.

    I can only rationalise it by assuming that it bought him even to the rest of the peloton & his superior ability gave him the rest, after all you still have to suffer up those mountains, dope or not. Any amount of chemicals will not turn a donkey into a thoroughbred.
  • bennybenny Posts: 1,314
    I think Lance was doped. Was he the only one? Who wasn't??(I think less people were not).

    I think you have to be mental to do the Tour completely, at the same speed and circumstances as the top ten finishers. Doing it without illegeal substances is unearthly if you ask me.

    I refuse to believe that these guys don't use, they really have to! How else can you do such a thing???(no,I'm not jealous, just in awe).



    How about Chrissie Wellington? She leaves the rest of the field litterally miles behind. Does it automatically mean that she's not clean? No,it means she's a great champion!
  • sfullersfuller Posts: 628
    benny wrote:
    How about Chrissie Wellington? She leaves the rest of the field litterally miles behind. Does it automatically mean that she's not clean? No,it means she's a great champion!





    So Lance is doped but Chrissie Wellington isn't? but they are both champions at what they do and blow others out of the water? ...... hmmm.... and CW has come out of nowhere almost? .... hmmm...



    personally i believe Lance and CW are both clean but Benny your argument is flawed.
  • bennybenny Posts: 1,314
    sfuller wrote:
    ORIGINAL: benny

    How about Chrissie Wellington? She leaves the rest of the field litterally miles behind. Does it automatically mean that she's not clean? No,it means she's a great champion!





    So Lance is doped but Chrissie Wellington isn't? but they are both champions at what they do and blow others out of the water? ...... hmmm.... and CW has come out of nowhere almost? .... hmmm...



    personally i believe Lance and CW are both clean but Benny your argument is flawed.



    Can't see where I said CW is clean or not!? I questioned it , but I didn't say that she is or is not.

    Frankly, I don't care. Dope or not, they're both champions.

Sign In or Register to comment.