New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

If Lance juiced... - Page 2

post #31 of 37

I don't get it either.  Why aren't all substances that aren't really proven more harmful than tobacco or alcohol legal?  If someone wants to shrivel up their balls and and turn their skeleton to chalk for a few trophies and extra money who are we to stop them?  Would you quit watching sports if people could juice all they want?

popcorn.gif

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Didn't think so..

post #32 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

Would you quit watching sports if people could juice all they want?

 



I watch football.

post #33 of 37
Primoz.

I don't believe any athlete or individual can exceed their physiology. The drugs take you to the limit, whatever that is. I will never be a championship tour cyclist no matter how much doping I was to engage in, my physiology will not allow for that. It only helps that last bit, which at an elite level is the difference.

my question about influence was a bit rhetorical. As a kid I remember sitting on a bus in Calgary as a couple of junior high students discussed openly taking steroids. It was unlikely they would benefit in any way, but the downsides were obvious to me even then. It was clear that there was an influence factor stemming from a number of sports even then.

After watching the 60 minutes expose tonight, all I have to say is if and when they take the blade to Lance, I think that will make fans of the sport more cynical. A cleaner race judged against the others will look boring and slow by comparison.

Mostly I find it incredibly ironic, after all that we have seen in the last 3-4 years, the level of indignance with regard to this issue. You can literally blow up the entire financial system, destroy pension funds, jobs and lives and receive no penalty. But if you bring joy, excitement and employ thousands as a result of your performance, that even if influenced by doping, you are pursued with vigor and contempt. Who was harmed by this outcome?....other than another guy who trained hard, doped and didn't win.

What a ridiculous world we live in.
post #34 of 37

Well said, Tristram.

post #35 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristram View Post
 A cleaner race judged against the others will look boring and slow by comparison.

I beg to differ.  I think a cleaner race is much more unpredictable and exciting, people actually can have a bad day (and that does not mean a botched blood transfusion).  It was soooo boring to watch an obviously juiced Basso destroy the other Giro contenders a couple of years ago, he made everyone look like fat middle aged guys on a club ride.  Some of Lance's last Tour wins were also exceedingly boring, everyone was fighting for a second place.   That's not sport.  

 

Also, if you allow unlimited doping, you will get something akin to a pro wrestling: a totally fake competition.  
 

 

post #36 of 37

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexzn View Post
Whatever people think about drug cheats, I sure know that they don't like liars.


That's one thing which I don't like with Lance, and especially with Millar, and Aldag. They are acting like they are some sort of gods blaming everyone else so damn easily. Millar is forgetting he was actually the one who got caught already, and Aldag was one of those crying babies who's conscious didn't let them sleep, and they had to come out 10 years later, while most of people they accuses were never caught. Armstrong on the other side was never (officially) caught, but there's more then enough accusations about his doping, that he's really not the right person to talk about "idiots destroying sport". I agree that he wasn't caught etc etc. but he should know whats all about, and he should know how to keep mouth shut when it comes to this. World is spinning one way or the other, and sooner or later you end up on wrong place. So at least till then, keep your mouth shut since it will look, at least for me, pretty pathetic when that happens, and someone will drag out your week/month/year old comment about "idiots destroying sport with doping".

As far as confessions go, I totally agree. There's no need to confess anything. Ullrich has same thing in Germany... he still didn't confess anything, and if he did, all his (ex)sponsors would jump at him and sue the hell out of him (most of them, including T-Mobile, already said publicly they would do that). So until someone really comes with credible results, not just accusations, he will never admit anything. And I believe Lance is in very similar situation. So I totally understand, he won't come out, make pathetic press conference and cry there that his conscious doesn't let him sleep anymore. Besides... what would it change anyway even if he would do it?

 

post #37 of 37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tristram View Post
I don't believe any athlete or individual can exceed their physiology. The drugs take you to the limit, whatever that is. I will never be a championship tour cyclist no matter how much doping I was to engage in, my physiology will not allow for that. It only helps that last bit, which at an elite level is the difference.


Yes and no. Doping still takes you over your physical limit. I'm sorry but my English is most likely not good enough to explain this, so try to bear with me and especially my English :) First of all doping helps with training. It enables faster recovery etc. so you are actually able to train more. Then on competitions it gives you some extra boost. All this mean, that on the end you are able to run 9.8sec on 100m, while without it you would run only 10.5sec for example, no matter how much you would train. I know back from my racing days (xc skiing) that there's limit how much and how hard you can train, and no matter how hard you want, you just can't get over it. With proper stuff you can do some more. And it's not necessarily to take doping... just proper food supplements help already (not as much as real stuff but still). So this I understand as "it takes you over your physiological limit".

But then to second part. No I still wouldn't win Olympics no matter what I would take, just like you said, you would never be Tour champion. This is something what most of people don't understand. Doping is no something what would make you win without training. And doping is not something what would automatically make you World champion. Even if everyone else would be clean, there's really huge chance you wouldn't do anything. Doping gives another few percentage to your "limit", but if you are 20 or 30% under top guys, you will still end up way behind. And considering most of top guys are still using almost same things, we can conclude this what I wrote before already... Lance still won all 7 Tours fair and square. He was as doped as everyone else, so best men on bike still won. There's no discussion about this.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling