How/Why was Lance so good? (Page 3)

It just sucks to be him and have to prove everyday you did nothing and have everyone say you did and they have no proof.  Last time I checked there was an innocent until proven guilty thing in the country.

Remember, the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing is an American right and part of our justice system.  Doesn't mean that the court of public opinion has any bearing on that right.

Without a doubt, LA had the work ethic, the attitude, the sole focus of accomplishing the Tour wins and the desire.  He set all his sights on that one race each year and all his training was strictly for that.  This obviously shows that he wanted it and no one will ever question his talent and abilities in that respect.  And he re-invented himself after recovering from cancer.  Before that he really could only be thought of as more of a one day or classics rider (a stage winner, not a stage racer) other than small potato stuff like the Tour DuPont.  And that was how he rode, get in a solid break, make a move, claim the day.  Exactly how he got his WC victory in the rain.

One of my favorite riders of all time was Marco Pantani.  And again, he is an admitted doper and ended up taking his life with an overdose of cocaine.  But that does not mean he was not amazing to watch and I will always consider him to be one of the best all time climbers in cycling history.  The guy simply flew up mountains.  And there was no way it was just "the drugs."

Lets look at the Tour since Lemond's wins in '89 and '90 (who I also question as to whether he was on something during those two years).  Indurain won 5 straight, no one knows for sure if anything illegal was done.  But then in '96 Riis won ..... he unseated Indurain from his 5 straight wins with no positive tests ...... but later admitted to using EPO specifically during the Tour.  Ullrich didn't test positive ..... he won the next year.  And now he's out of the sport after blood transfusions from Puerto and Riis and Zabel both were on that team and later admitted EPO.  Pantani wins in '98 ...... doped but not caught, later "retired" from the sport.  Armstrong ...... 7 wins in a row. Landis follows after LA retires, busted for syntheitc testosterone.  And then last year we have Contador.  Also a product of Bruyneel, also originally indicted in the Puerto investigation just like Ullrich, but never prosecuted for it.

Obviously LA has never tested positive.  But I have said this before in other threads on doping, the teams each have their own doctors.  And the testing looks for "abnormal" levels of synthetics or counts in the system ABOVE A CERTAIN STANDARD.  This standard is published and let know to the teams, the doctors and the riders.  It is a very simple procedure for the doctors an DS's to know just how much to give each of their athletes so that they hit below those levels.  And when you used to see positive doping tests, it was because the doctors screwed up or the athlete went above and beyond and outside their normal doctor's supervision.

Along with the list of names I gave earlier you only have to look at each year's results for the years that LA won and see who of that group in the top 5 is still racing legal and "clean" without having already been busted.  You will see that list is really really small ........ Also look at what happened with Ricco in this year's Tour.  He was taking a 3rd generation "boutique" version of EPO that is not synthesized in other animals systems but in human systems and it had just came out in January and supposedly there was no way to detect its use.  Think of it as the police radar and the radar detector.  When a better system comes out that is not detectable, they make something that will beat it.  Ricco f'ed up because he was told that the new version couldn't be detected yet.  Well, the French lab had beat him to the punch and had contacted the manufacturer so that they could figure out a way to detect it, and they nailed him as a result.

And as I also mentioned before, Andreu and others that were on the various teams with him have said (under oath in some cases) that they have heard and seen things that directly implicate LA with doping.  Yes, even though that other nutbag wrote books about it and put them out conveniently right at the time of the Tour to sell them, but it is not all slander and lies.  Every lie and deception has particles of truth.

What does all this mean???  Absolutely nothing since LA has vehemently denied ever using drugs for performance enhancing and he has never had a positive test (during the race .... only supposedly years later on a previous B sample ..... but we all know the French labs are out to get him, right?).  Regardless of whether he doped or not, the fact is that almost EVERY SINGLE PERSON around him or in the same "league" as him did and he still beat them.  Even if the entire front end of the peleton was doping including him, the fact is that he still beat them which means it goes right back to the second paragraph of this novel of a post ........ he had the desire and the sole focus to make the Tour his own.  And it was a bunch of fun races to follow, that's for sure.

Everyone needs to believe what they feel is right, and others opinions and conjectures should only give a person something to reflect on and evaluate themselves.  But I would just caution that it is not really prudent to take an all or nothing approach to any topic, especially one like this where the sides are "He's a God and could never do any wrong" versus "He's a lying cheating baztard."  I prefer to fall in the middle with "He was one of the better Tour riders in history, was a blast to watch compete and took advantage of the system in all ways possible to do what he needed to do to win."

That's like saying someone who can swim a 2:05 in the 200 is elite ...... yeah it's fast, but most collegiate athletes in a good program could do that.

2:40 won't even get you into running in the US Olympic qualifier ..... which is where I'd say an elite was.  But that's just my opinion.

I think arguing/discussing whether or not LA used drugs it like talking politics.  Many people have already made their mind up one way or the other.  They post trying to vehemently defend their opinion.  Some people sit back and read to watch the battle.  However, there really is no right or wrong answer since there is no incontrovertable evidence, there has been no trial, etc.

Still fun to watch.

Do I admire Lance for his cycling achievements and charity work? YES, very much! (plus I like his "I am too cool for school" personailty )

Do I think he had the best team, a HUGE desire to win and be the very best, did some of the best training, has a fantastic physiology, etc and all his TdF wins were clean? yes and it might be possible

Do I also think there is a chance he did indeed took something to be able to compete in an era in which every single GC doped? it is a strong possibility

Whether he did or not will change my my admiration for him? most likley no.

Would I be willing to put my life on the line and state without a doubt that LA never doped? mmmm no...

Hence the reason I said it.

When he gets down below 2:10, then maybe. 

1) LA is genetically gifted. So are a lot of world class athletes

2) LA has an extremely high threshold for pain So do a lot of. . . 

 3) LA approached his training from a highly scientific point of view. So do many....

 4) LA is a very intelligent athlete. So are many. . . 

 5) LA had the best coaching. So do many  . . . 

 6) LA had substantial financial resources. So do many. . . . 

 7) LA had all 1 - 7. So have some . . . . 

 My question is this. Lance has countered drug accusations with saying: after what he went through with his cancer and survived, he'd be crazy to put any drugs into his body that could affect his health. But people often forget, or don't know, that during the course of his cancer treatment, his doctors LEGALLY gave him EPO to boost his red blood count to help his body fight his cancer. It seems he would have lost his fear of using that drug (if he ever had it). Avoiding testing positive for EPO? Please see 3, 4, 5 & 6 above. Just IMO.