Lance is back!

Status
Not open for further replies.

How can you explain him beating so many proven dopers though Welts? I mean in 97/98 both Ullrich and Pantani had thrashed all their rivals. Indeed in 96 Riis thrashed Indurain, and Ullrich then thrashed Riis. All three of those were convicted of doping, yet Armstrong manages to beat them all. He beats Ullrich on the flat and Pantani on the climbs.

It simply defies belief. I suppose a similar example is Wiggins. He clearly has a lot of power from his track days and is excellent at time trialling. He lost weight and got to 4th in the Tour, albeit a Tour with a relatively easy route. Armstrong is asking us to believe he did a similar thing and went from decent classics rider to all conquering stage racer. It just doesn't add up.

This.....

What happened to innocent till proven guilty?
No failed drug test from Lance Armstrong=Not guilty=innocent!

He hasn't failed a test, the only people who are saying he took drugs have all been caught and as such are hardly credible sources. If Lance was taking the same things as they claim he would have been caught too seeing as he's probably the most drugs tested athlete in history. I find it very hard to believe that all those hundreds and thousands of tests were all wrong. Lance has been adamant that he is clean for the whole of his career and has always been very outspoken about doping. Of course, the disbelievers will just say he's lying, but I don't know, maybe I just like to see the best in people. Miracles do happen in sport. As you rightly say, who could've predicted a 4th place TDF finish for Wiggins, yet rightly nobody suspects him of doping. Who'd have thought a lad from the Isle of Man could become the best sprinter in the world and practically unbeatable? Who'd have thought Gary Taylor-Fletcher, a former non-leaguer who not so long ago I watched playing for Lincoln City, could become a Premiership football player and bag a few goals? Sportsmen can achieve great things. You mention how Lance was always a classics rider before his illness. True, but physically he was completely different back then. In his first book he explains how cancer left him pretty much as a skeleton. His first ride after beating it was just a gentle one with his mates and he couldn't keep up. He had to completely start again physically and build himself up. He had a newfound desire and commitment which he didn't have before his illness. So I don't really see how saying he used to be a classics rider so it was impossible to win the tour is relevant really.
 
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