Lance is back!

Status
Not open for further replies.

should be interesting, how long do you reckon he will need to become 'tour' fit?

Well, he's going to announce more details on September 24th so then we'll know what races he'll be competing in next season.

The man is a machine though, he's been doing marathons and is already training 5 hours a day. He'll be fit, don't worry about that (y)
 
The optimist in me is loving the news. Alongside Pantani he was someone that would light up the Tour and made the event an amazing spectacle. Add in the cancer and it's even more remarkable. He's the kind of guy you want to believe in because it's heroic stuff.

The flipside is of course doping. Pretty much all of the rider's that he routinely thrashed have been caught doping. Can he have overcome them all whilst riding clean?

Seeing special performances is what makes the Tour the greatest sporting event on earth so I sincerely hope it's all above board and we get another great spectacle in the summer.

To close I'll give you this video, which alongside some of Pantani is usually viewed as I get ready to go out to ride. As I've said, it's inspirational stuff and we all want to believe in heroes right?

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHJErrp4eOw[/media]
 

It's probably a matter of time before he's caught. What the fall out will be from that is anyones guess.

For a start there'd be four new TDF winners after LA's seven were wiped off: Kloden, Basso, Zulle, Beloki (Ullrich being RU x2, but he was caught out himself).
 
Lance Armstrong has been tested time and time again has he failed any drug test? No!
Having read his books the man is an inspiration!
GOOD LUCK LANCE!!
 

I hope he is clean, but the past would suggest that most champion cyclists were on something. I can't think of many that haven't fallen foul at some point in their careers. I sadly don't think Lance is any different. I don't have an issue with that, it's an incredibly tough sport and unless you've given it a go you can't really judge. The issue for me is all the stuff Lance has done on the back of his miraculous recovery from cancer. If he's found to have had help on the way all of that goes out the window.
 
Interesting that the 99 tour was chosen by Hamilton though. For me the field that year was very weak, with Ullrich out injured and Pantani suspended after being kicked out of the Giro earlier that year. With Riis not in either the field lacked any real grand tour pedigree. Zulle never really convinced that he could do it in a 3 week race.

Whilst neither Pantani or Ullrich were in good shape in 2000, the fact they were there made the race much tougher, so you'd think he would do it then if anytime.

Of course the saying that he passed lots of tests does ignore the fact that Ullrich never failed an in competition test either, yet was strongly linked with Operacion Puerto and retired when that blew up. Likewise Pantani passed tests during his back to back Giro/Tour win in 98. It seems probable that he was doing then what he failed a test for in 99. It also overlooks the failed test he had in the 99 tour for cortisoid, which was passed off as a treatment for saddle sores and allowed to pass.

Pantani that year was destroying everyone in the 99 Giro, much as Armstrong did in subsequent years, and much as Contador is now. Of course we'd love these things to be natural. We'd love Landis' attack to Morzine to have been pure adrenaline, or the frequent battling of Vino. I fell in love with cycling after seeing Pantani fly up les Deux Alpes in the rain. It was pure theatre. With hindsight it seems almost certainly assisted, but that doesn't take anything away from the spectacle of it for me.

Armstrong is different though because he's traded on the fact that he's recovered from cancer to win the Tour 7 times, and that he's done so naturally. He's used that as the fundamental force behind his cancer charity. If he's found to have lied it won't tarnish his cycling record, as for me most top riders were at the time (and quite possibly still are today) on something or other, but the rest of it will be incredibly tarnished.

It's also worth remembering how many US Postal riders have history with drugs. They include Frankie Andreu in 99, Mondini in 01, Hamilton in 05, Heras, Landis, Basso, Beltran, and so on. It doesn't seem likely that they doped when not at US Postal, and if they did that it wasn't a team wide thing.
 
You know, given that they all do it anyway, if they just allowed everyone to take drugs on the tour, this wouldn't be an issue. ;)

A "Lance Armstrong takes performance enhancing drugs" headline is about as shocking as seeing Phil Neville point whilst playing football.
 
Interesting that the 99 tour was chosen by Hamilton though. For me the field that year was very weak, with Ullrich out injured and Pantani suspended after being kicked out of the Giro earlier that year. With Riis not in either the field lacked any real grand tour pedigree. Zulle never really convinced that he could do it in a 3 week race.

Whilst neither Pantani or Ullrich were in good shape in 2000, the fact they were there made the race much tougher, so you'd think he would do it then if anytime.

Of course the saying that he passed lots of tests does ignore the fact that Ullrich never failed an in competition test either, yet was strongly linked with Operacion Puerto and retired when that blew up. Likewise Pantani passed tests during his back to back Giro/Tour win in 98. It seems probable that he was doing then what he failed a test for in 99. It also overlooks the failed test he had in the 99 tour for cortisoid, which was passed off as a treatment for saddle sores and allowed to pass.

Pantani that year was destroying everyone in the 99 Giro, much as Armstrong did in subsequent years, and much as Contador is now. Of course we'd love these things to be natural. We'd love Landis' attack to Morzine to have been pure adrenaline, or the frequent battling of Vino. I fell in love with cycling after seeing Pantani fly up les Deux Alpes in the rain. It was pure theatre. With hindsight it seems almost certainly assisted, but that doesn't take anything away from the spectacle of it for me.

Spot on. It doesn't bother me at all to hear of these drug test failures from a moral point of view (although I think they're mad health wise and cyclists pay for this in later life). The spectacle, as you say, is paramount. I just assume them all to be on some form of drug and it doesn't detract from the sport.

Armstrong is different though because he's traded on the fact that he's recovered from cancer to win the Tour 7 times, and that he's done so naturally. He's used that as the fundamental force behind his cancer charity. If he's found to have lied it won't tarnish his cycling record, as for me most top riders were at the time (and quite possibly still are today) on something or other, but the rest of it will be incredibly tarnished.

Also spot on and is probably the reason it will - and always must remain - shrouded in doubt. There's more to this than just bringing down Lance...other people to consider.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top