KayZeroX wrote:
Somebody allready destroyed my opinion on Armstrongs 3rd place in the TDF 09. (the guy said something about Armstrong also being tested positive in that edition). I have no knowledge of that. So my opinion is based on a clean Armstrong in the TDF 09.
Sorry for the long quote, but wanted to provide context. I'll try to highlight the important parts.
ReasonedDecision wrote: Armstrong’s Blood Test Results During the 2009 and 2010 Tours de France are Consistent with His Continued Use of Blood Doping
USADA collected nine blood samples from Armstrong between February 13, 2009, and April 30, 2012. The WADA database, ADAMS, contains results from another 29 Armstrong blood samples collected by UCI between October 16, 2008 and January 18, 2011.
At USADA’s request, these blood test results were examined by Professor Christopher J. Gore, Head of Physiology at the Australian Institute of Sport. Prof. Gore observed that a cluster of five Armstrong samples during the 2009 Tour de France and his two samples during the 2010 Tour de France contained an unusually low percentage of reticulocytes.
Reticulocytes are immature red blood cells created naturally by the body. When an athlete adds additional red blood cells to his circulation by transfusing his own stored blood, the body’s production of reticulocytes is suppressed. This is reflected by a decrease in the athlete’s reticulocyte percentage. When Prof. Gore compared the suppressed reticulocyte percentage in Armstrong’s 2009 and 2010 Tour de France samples to the reticulocyte percentage in his other samples, Prof. Gore concluded that the approximate likelihood of Armstrong’s seven suppressed reticulocyte values during the 2009 and 2010 Tours de France occurring naturally was less than one in a million.
Prof. Gore also compared Armstrong’s blood plasma volumes measured during the 2009 Tour de France with his plasma volumes during the 2009 Giro d’Italia (the “Giro”). (Blood’s major components include red blood cells, white blood cells, and a yellowish liquid called plasma.) During prolonged periods of strenuous exercise, such as the Giro or Tour de France, it is well-documented that the percentage of plasma (plasma volume) in an athlete’s blood increases and consequently the concentration of red blood cells decreases. During the 2009 Giro, that is precisely what happened to the plasma volume in Armstrong’s blood—it continued to rise throughout the race. During the 2009 Tour de France, Armstrong’s plasma volume also increased over the first seven days of the race. However, over the next three days of the race, his plasma volume decreased back to pre-race levels. This would not happen naturally, but would happen if Armstrong engaged in blood transfusion during this period.
Collectively, the grouping of low reticulocyte percentage during the 2009 and 2010 Tours de France, coupled with his unusual decrease in calculated plasma volume during the middle of the 2009 Tour de France, build a compelling argument consistent with blood doping.
USADA has requested laboratory and collection information from UCI appropriate to validate the accuracy of the UCI blood test results given to Prof. Gore. UCI has refused to provide USADA laboratory data without Mr. Armstrong’s consent, which he has refused to give. Had Mr. Armstrong elected to go forward with the American Arbitration Association hearing, then either the laboratory and collection data required to verify the accuracy of his blood test results would have been provided upon his consent, or if he refused consent, then he would have been precluded from arguing that the laboratory results were not reliable.
You can now judge for yourselves whether you believe he was doping in 2009 (and 2010) or not.
Something tells me Elliott Smith would not have been a Lance fan. I still think the deadline is today for his camp to come out strongly the way they usually do. If they don't, I think he'll do a tell all in the next two weeks or so...
It's like when David Cameron says he likes The Smiths...makes you feel all wrong.
There are rumors he's starting a new TV show here in the US in December. It's called The Season with Lance and he'll be conducting animal experiments live on prime-time TV. Each show will climax with the summary execution of 4 week old kittens by the Livestrong Guillotine or the Livestrong Cannon. High ratings are expected due to his continued enormous popularity as
A Hero.
It was eleven more than necessary. Jacques Anquetil
Lance Armstrong still has some support among riders in elite cycling despite a damning report by the US Anti-Doping Agency that detailed testimony from 26 witnesses, including 11 former teammates.
Samuel Sanchez, the 2008 Olympic road race champion, is among those supporting the American rider.
In a Spanish language television interview with The Associated Press before today's third stage of the Tour of Beijing, the Euskaltel-Euskadi rider says, "Until the contrary is proved, he remains innocent. Lance has overcome many controls and even until today he has never been found positive in any of them."
I forgot to translate some interesting parts on AICAR: "it's a powder", "it's only for experimentational purposes, experiments on humans, that is" and "it's extremely expensive".
Hm, innovating new methods, spending a lot of money, losing lots of weigh, riding as a skeleton + skin.... why do I seem to think I've seen this somewhere
So many of his old teammates used it. It can't be true that he didn't use it... He won the tour 7 times! That's basically impossible without some help in this year and age.
I think the fact that most of his old helpers did it makes it 90% sure that he used it aswell.
So many of his old teammates used it. It can't be true that he didn't use it... He won the tour 7 times! That's basically impossible without some help in this year and age.
I think the fact that most of his old helpers did it makes it 90% sure that he used it aswell.
yes this could be true, but it could also be that in trainingcamps they noticed how much better Armstrong (Armstrong was allready the best American rider at the time) was then the rest of his team. Wich could lead to him being isolated as soon as the moutains arrived. His teamm8's wanted to help him in any way they could, and so therefor they used doping.
All kinds of posibilities. But wich one is true ? I can't wait to see what will happen next...
I don't mean to be rude, but I think you're a little naïve in this case. It can't be that almost the whole US Postal used dope and he didn't. He won the Tour 7 times! I'm sorry but I just can't believe he didn't use anything.
So when Armstrongs team mates were doping to 2005 to keep up with Armstrong, so does that mean Armstrong had to dope as a helper for Contador to help him winning the Tour????
Team Bianchi - 2012 Man-Game ProContinental Tour Champions
Rin wrote:
So when Armstrongs team mates were doping to 2005 to keep up with Armstrong, so does that mean Armstrong had to dope as a helper for Contador to help him winning the Tour????
To be fair, Armstrong wasn't really a domestique for Contador in 2009. Sure, he marked Frank Schleck pretty well, but other than that he more or less rode against Contador.
Rin wrote:
So when Armstrongs team mates were doping to 2005 to keep up with Armstrong, so does that mean Armstrong had to dope as a helper for Contador to help him winning the Tour????
To be fair, Armstrong wasn't really a domestique for Contador in 2009. Sure, he marked Frank Schleck pretty well, but other than that he more or less rode against Contador.
This discussion is not really relevant. What's relevant is whether he's guilty or not. Seeing that the evidence is more than substantial, with a lot of confessions of old teammates this is just true. Still Bruyneel has been in that kind of stuff for about 20 years now, I think?
Rin wrote:
So when Armstrongs team mates were doping to 2005 to keep up with Armstrong, so does that mean Armstrong had to dope as a helper for Contador to help him winning the Tour????
To be fair, Armstrong wasn't really a domestique for Contador in 2009. Sure, he marked Frank Schleck pretty well, but other than that he more or less rode against Contador.
Rin wrote:
So when Armstrongs team mates were doping to 2005 to keep up with Armstrong, so does that mean Armstrong had to dope as a helper for Contador to help him winning the Tour????
To be fair, Armstrong wasn't really a domestique for Contador in 2009. Sure, he marked Frank Schleck pretty well, but other than that he more or less rode against Contador.
KayZeroX wrote:
The accusations look to be right...but the truth is nobody (on this forum) knows for sure. You're all just quoting what other people are saying. And most of that information is known for a long time. But how do you know it is the truth? Only the people that are involved know with absolute certainty.
In your post Alesle you got a bunch of people doing a bunch of tests. (i can not judge if they are telling the truth because i've never heard of any of these people, mostly because i have no knowledge about these people)
We just have to trust them, and that's what you did.
I now feel compelled do provide some background info on Professor Gore.
The Sydney Morning Herald wrote:
Professor Gore was unavailable for comment yesterday, but AIS director Matt Favier had nothing but praise for his work.
"Professor Gore has worked at the Australian Institute of Sport for more than 20 years and is the head of the department of physiology. Professor Gore earned his PhD in 1989 and has published over 130 papers,'' Favier said. ''He has two professorships and is well positioned as an internationally recognised expert.
"Given his expertise and impeccable credentials, Professor Gore has provided an evidence-based opinion on perturbation in various factors found in the blood of athletes in several anti-doping cases.
"Professor Gore was also a key researcher in work prior to the Sydney Olympic Games that provided the basis for the current process that identifies abnormal levels of markers in an athlete's bloodstream. Moreover, the basic model of the so called 'athlete blood passport' now used by WADA and USADA is built on the foundation of that 1999-2000 research project, which was funded by the IOC.''
Combine that with him being one of the participants on a WADA blood doping symposium in 2009* and I have no reason to doubt his credentials, though you of course are entitled to your own opinion .
Dowsett sets the record straight after the comment he made :
Hi Guys,
I just wanted to set the record straight as some things have not been clear in my comments reported in the press today. When I was quoted saying Lance Armstrong is a legend, this was in regard to the charity work he has done, also when I said it doesn't matter, what I mean is that we are racing clean now and it is a different sport to what it was back then.
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, I was just about to start Stage 3 of the Tour of Beijing and I wasn't clear in my thoughts.
I do think what Lance has done is completely unacceptable.
But i'm sticking to my (Armstrongs and as we can see now also riders like S.Sanchez) point of view.
The accusations look to be right...but the truth is nobody (on this forum) knows for sure. You're all just quoting what other people are saying. And most of that information is known for a long time. But how do you know it is the truth? Only the people that are involved know with absolute certainty.
In your post Alesle you got a bunch of people doing a bunch of tests. (i can not judge if they are telling the truth because i've never heard of any of these people, mostly because i have no knowledge about these people)
We just have to trust them, and that's what you did.
My mind isn't easily manipulated, so untill this question is answered >> How do you know they are fair tests ? You can't know for sure if what is being said is the truth. (*EDIT + the testemonies of his ex-teamm8's and colleagues)
It's turning into a matter of who do YOU believe.
You guys believe the USADA, i believe Lance Armstrong.
I was on USADA's side till a year ago, my opinion didn't just change because of Armstrongs book. I like logics and i like to give people the benifit of the doubt till they are proven guilty.
How do you think people are proven guilty in, you know, the real world - not that weird parallel world Armstrong fans seem to reside in? By proof and testimonies. You think a thief would not be convicted by a judge if 12 people who have nothing to gain from their testimony (to the contrary) point to him + they find his fingerprints all over the place?
Get real man. This is beyond silly.
Edited by Bookie on 11-10-2012 17:17
Meanwhile on the CN forum, people are arguing about whether Ferrari said Pozzovivo was doping or not. More correctly, one person is arguing with the rest of the forum. This place doesn't seem so bad compared to that.
Reading the docs now.
A guy who did the Tour de Suisse in 2005 after a serious injury and rode at Astana in 2008?
That's very obviously Chris "I could've been a star but I chose not to dope" Horner
EDIT: Yet he keeps telling the media that he "believes Lance is innocent"
People don't come much faker than Horner
EDIT2: And a massive LOL @ Leipheimer's claim he's been clean for five years. Sure Levi....sure....you finished a few seconds behind Contador at his peak in the Vuelta clean. Suuuuure Edited by issoisso on 11-10-2012 17:43
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
.
