if a guy can put in the work to win one race and one race only, that's what Lance did. Yes, it is hard to believe that he didn't dope and still destroyed all competitors who did, BUT if on his own training schedule, i believe he did it without doping. Just because someone is that good doesn't mean he doped, like people saying The Sky Train doped. shutup.
I believe he put in the work and won those 7 tours CLEAN!
Its one of those things where an athlete can come along and dominate his sport during his era. It happens in every sport. Cycling surrounded by doping automatically leads to the suspicion that a great rider doped. Even without a failed drug test.
Hoping Andy gets back on form...
XxMillad24Xx wrote:
if a guy can put in the work to win one race and one race only, that's what Lance did. Yes, it is hard to believe that he didn't dope and still destroyed all competitors who did, BUT if on his own training schedule, i believe he did it without doping. Just because someone is that good doesn't mean he doped, like people saying The Sky Train doped. shutup.
I believe he put in the work and won those 7 tours CLEAN!
Its one of those things where an athlete can come along and dominate his sport during his era. It happens in every sport. Cycling surrounded by doping automatically leads to the suspicion that a great rider doped. Even without a failed drug test.
What about all the evidence of him doping? Doctors reports, receits, witnesses like friends and team mates. The list goes on.
No doubt he put a lot of work into it but that work clearly included doping.
Posts: 823 Joined: 06.11.10 Location: South Africa PCM$: 110.00
This is a long post, but to all those anti-Lance people, I encourage you read it for a bit of insight. I want to make 2 major point.
1.They were all dopers and Lance has talent!
Bearing in mind that Lance has one of the highest recorded VO2 max, he has abnormally large lungs and probably has a higher pain tolerance due to chemo, he obviously has massive natural talent. Here's a video to prove: YouTube Video
Even if he got caught for doping and the TdF victory is given to 2nd place, that would also be controversial, because many of those riders in 2nd, were dopers as well (Basso, Ullrich, Pantani, etc). Eventually were going to end up giving the victory to the guy in 6th place. I believe that is an old era of cycling and we need to put it behind us and focus more on something we can change: the present!
2.Community Service
Until you have a personal experience with cancer, I don't think you realise the severity of what Lance went through and what a miracle it is that he is alive. We also need to bare in mind that he didn't just survive and win 7 TdF's, he also started LIVESTRONG! So whether he gets convicted or not, he will always be a hero and I'll always have the deepest respect for him.
So to summarise, he has the talent to do it, you had to dope to be competitive in that era (I'm not justifying doping!) and he'll always be a hero.
A good friend of mine said, "I hate it when there are no drugs in cyclling. It makes it boring. Look at this year, it was so boring without drugs!
XxMillad24Xx wrote:
if a guy can put in the work to win one race and one race only, that's what Lance did. Yes, it is hard to believe that he didn't dope and still destroyed all competitors who did, BUT if on his own training schedule, i believe he did it without doping. Just because someone is that good doesn't mean he doped, like people saying The Sky Train doped. shutup.
The cyclists then doped. If you believe the Sky Train is like Armstrong then you are accusing all other riders of doping or you're saying that Basso, Ullrich and Pantani were clean
The Sky Train is clean, that is what I believe. They are training more professionally than the other teams. The other teams are clean. They are dominating a sport that is cleaner than the time of Armstrong. So if Armstrong trained harder and had a better schedule, like Sky have now, and he was clean, he'd still be behind the dopers of that time. Sky are winning in a clean(er) sport, Armstrong was winning in a sport of dopers. And don't say he is just immensely talented, all his closest rivals were talented too.
"We train harder" or "we train more professionally", do you have any fact to back it up, or are you just taking the words that the team (riders and staff) use to justify dominating performances as cold hard facts ?
"Racing is life. Everything before or after is just waiting."
Posts: 7074 Joined: 30.07.10 Location: Brazil PCM$: 431.00
francopell wrote:
The Sky Train is clean, that is what I believe. They are training more professionally than the other teams.
How can you affirm that? Have you been following the other team/rider's training programs?
Besides, it's not like cycling is a 100% clean sport nowadays, far far from that (F. Schleck as a recent example). And look at the watts they're putting, does the cleaned up competition help them get those numbers?
lluuiiggii wrote:
And look at the watts they're putting, does the cleaned up competition help them get those numbers?
They manage to produce those Watts because they're working on cadence. Nobody was professional enough to do that before them. "Racing is life. Everything before or after is just waiting."
aidanvn13 wrote:
This is a long post, but to all those anti-Lance people, I encourage you read it for a bit of insight. I want to make 2 major point.
1.They were all dopers and Lance has talent!
Bearing in mind that Lance has one of the highest recorded VO2 max, he has abnormally large lungs and probably has a higher pain tolerance due to chemo, he obviously has massive natural talent.
Ullrich is meant to have one of the best physiologies of a cyclist. Ever. To beat someone who has the talent of Ullrich who also doped would either take an alien, or someone slightly less talented but more 'mentally tough' who doped. And I don't think Lance is an alien
francopell wrote:
The Sky Train is clean, that is what I believe. They are training more professionally than the other teams.
How can you affirm that? Have you been following the other team/rider's training programs?
Besides, it's not like cycling is a 100% clean sport nowadays, far far from that (F. Schleck as a recent example). And look at the watts they're putting, does the cleaned up competition help them get those numbers?
I guess I can't prove that they're not dopers. Maybe they are doping. Maybe they're not. Right now there is no known proper evidence to prove that they doped.
Posts: 4346 Joined: 27.07.11 Location: Connecticut, USA PCM$: 224.55
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
It was boring with Armstrong. And if the problem is that everybody else was doped, just strip the titles. Don't give em to someone else.
Edit: And those case files are hilarious.
Then strip 2nd, 3rd, 4th and so on. And for 7 years we have no TDF top 10s.
Edited by baseballlover312 on 11-08-2012 15:28
Winner of American Championship races which I can't remember since my sig was deleted :L
Posts: 7074 Joined: 30.07.10 Location: Brazil PCM$: 431.00
francopell wrote:
I guess I can't prove that they're not dopers. Maybe they are doping. Maybe they're not. Right now there is no known proper evidence to prove that they doped.
What I meant is people trying to defend Sky (at least on this forum) keep saying that they are training harder than the other teams.. but how can one know that, unless he works on the team or something like that? Just because they say so?
Posts: 4499 Joined: 14.07.08 Location: Sydney, Australia PCM$: 0.00
lluuiiggii wrote:
francopell wrote:
I guess I can't prove that they're not dopers. Maybe they are doping. Maybe they're not. Right now there is no known proper evidence to prove that they doped.
What I meant is people trying to defend Sky (at least on this forum) keep saying that they are training harder than the other teams.. but how can one know that, unless he works on the team or something like that? Just because they say so?
"Hopefully in 2 years time I might win the Time Trial and be a credible Time Trial winner because I haven't beaten someone by 2 minutes."
- Bradley Wiggins a few years ago
"It's the Time Trial. The race against the truth!" - Phil Liggett, 2003 Vuelta
francopell wrote:
I guess I can't prove that they're not dopers. Maybe they are doping. Maybe they're not. Right now there is no known proper evidence to prove that they doped.
What I meant is people trying to defend Sky (at least on this forum) keep saying that they are training harder than the other teams.. but how can one know that, unless he works on the team or something like that? Just because they say so?
Even then, you could say they train hard, but you wouldn't know what the others do.
"Racing is life. Everything before or after is just waiting."
