Lance Armstrong and Performance Enhancing Drugs

noel · Post by **noel** » July 9, 2004, 1:44 pm

For the record, this is mostly a reply to Pherr's comment about the asterisk next to Bonds' name versus the one next to Lance's...

For those that think Lance is on Drugs, read the following article that is a response to a reporter who attempted to associate Lance with doping... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 5ONH21.DTL

Lance Armstrong is most likely the most drug-tested athlete on the planet. The USADA (United States Anti-Doping Association), WADA (World Anti-Doping Association), and the UCI (Cyling's governing body) can demand a random test from him AT ANY TIME. They show up at his front door, and will basically stay with him, and wait for him until he urinates in a cup... again at any time. You cannot compare this testing to ANY American sport where the athletes are given advanced notice of when drug testing will occur, and given a light slap on the wrist if they're found positive. If a cyclist is caught doping, it's virtually an automatic 1-2 year suspension from the sport. In a sport where you only have 10-15 years of good riding at the most, that can virtually end a cyclists career.

Finally, not only does Lance invest in better doping controls (as a clean athlete it's in his best interest to keep others from cheating), he also has stipulations in his various sponsorships that will require him to pay back sponsorship money should he be caught doping.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 9, 2004, 2:17 pm

Using USADA as an argument for somebody being clean will make most international athletes laugh. Their history for the last 20 or so years is pretty sad and pathetic.

What a lot of people react to his Lance's numbers which, although never breaking 50, ALWAYS lays between 49 and 50.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 12, 2004, 10:02 pm

Really, who gives a shit.
Lance did his thing and it's relevance is completely passed at this point. I mean, who the hell can get inspired by this guy any longer? Shit, When I was growing up and enjoying cycling (prior to the whole mandatory helmet and lycra thing seemed to occur), Lance was the Lemont lackey. Fucker never seemed to place any higher than the triple digits (and I guess this was the 7-11 team, who fucking remembers).

noel · Post by **noel** » July 12, 2004, 10:44 pm

Chidoro wrote:Really, who gives a shit.
Lance did his thing and it's relevance is completely passed at this point. I mean, who the hell can get inspired by this guy any longer? Shit, When I was growing up and enjoying cycling (prior to the whole mandatory helmet and lycra thing seemed to occur), Lance was the Lemont lackey. Fucker never seemed to place any higher than the triple digits (and I guess this was the 7-11 team, who fucking remembers).

I like you Chid, but your post shows that you don't remember at all. I'd correct you, but frankly your post is almost compeltely innacurate. None of the 'facts' you posted about Lance or his placing are even close to accurate. Lemond's career was winding down as Armstrongs was beginning so there wasn't a lot of competition between the two. At that time, Lemond was a winner of Grand Tours and Lance had only recently become a world champion. It's fair to say that the two of them participated in the same races, but they never competed against each other.

This post was a response to a comment by Pherr, and frankly this post is timely and relevant. Certainly it's unimportant for the average American that neither follows, understands, or cares about cycling, but to current cycling fans what Lance is continuing to do is extremely relevant. To cancer patients and survivors, what Lance has done is extremely relevant.

I'm frankly surprised to see such an obviously naive post coming from you.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » July 12, 2004, 11:34 pm

My impression is that Lance is to cycling as Tiger is to Golf.. except Lance is still winning, and about to do something nobody has done before (as Tiger has previously). I'd also call Lance (and any of the competitors in the Tour de France) much more of an athelete than any other sport.

As for who he still inspires, you may be surprised. His popularity is only growing (as is cycling in general), and if he wins, that's only going to increase. If it were some french person winning the tours for example, nobody in the US would really care. But it's one of our own, so we're interested. Even if Lance loses, he's charismatic and likable. He's got a lot of influential power at his fingertips when it comes to his sport and John Q Public. (This coming from someone who doesn't even own a bike w/o a motor on it.. yet.)

Saw the same thing here in FL when the Lightning were winning the Stanley Cup. Before this season, hardly anyone cared.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 13, 2004, 1:38 am

He does indeed inspire. He also is a perfect example of something I'll never understand: If an American isn't winning/competing at a high level most Americans wont care. Is it so hard to appreciate good performances from non-Americans?

noel · Post by **noel** » July 13, 2004, 3:06 am

Kelshara wrote:He does indeed inspire. He also is a perfect example of something I'll never understand: If an American isn't winning/competing at a high level most Americans wont care. Is it so hard to appreciate good performances from non-Americans?

You've got it slightly wrong. There are plenty of American cycling fans that are immense fans of Merckx, Cipollini, Pantani, Indurain, etc. However, since cycling is not a mainstream American sport, the mainstram Americans don't care. But mainstream Americans aren't normally cycling fans. Nor do those fans of Lance even realize there's cycling other than the Tour de France. Lance also has the Cancer lobby which is huge. Tyler Hamilton is an excellent cyclist, but gets nowhere near the press Lance does.

Think of sports like Baseball, Basketball and Hockey where Americans cheer for foreigners on their team.

Simple fact is sports like cycling, soccer, cricket, and volleyball just aren't popular in the US.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 13, 2004, 9:28 am

There are tons of sports, like tennis, which are very popular as long as an American is winning or at least competing for the win. It has been debated on PTI on ESPN a few times (heh a show I actually enjoy watching) and even they say straight out that they find it boring to watch unless an American is involved.

noel · Post by **noel** » July 13, 2004, 10:24 am

I contend that, just like in cycling, there is a large core of American tennis fans that know all of the top seeds, know all of the tournaments, and know a great deal of the sports history.

Then you have the casual fan which are mostly American bandwagoneers. This is probably the same crowd that's currently watching cycling, and will watch world cup soccer, etc.

Thess · Post by **Thess** » July 13, 2004, 11:11 am

How anyone can be a casual fan of cycling is beyond me - it's more boring to watch then baseball.

Vetiria · Post by **Vetiria** » July 13, 2004, 3:16 pm

noel wrote:There are plenty of American cycling fans

Really?

noel · Post by **noel** » July 13, 2004, 3:27 pm

Yes really. There are a lot of die-hard American cycling fans. Not enough to where you're (ever) going to see it on prime-time television, but they're out there.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 13, 2004, 3:32 pm

But how many of them would give a damn about cycling if it wasn't for a great champion like Lance?

noel · Post by **noel** » July 13, 2004, 3:47 pm

That's the point I'm trying to make. You have like this large group of people who have hopped on the bandwagon in the last 5 years or so either because of the cancer story or because he's an American or whatever, but there's also quite a large group of people who have been following cycling since the 60s (or earlier) who can name names, events etc. in the history of cycling. That's the group of core fans I'm talking about. Prior to Lemond I think the most Tour de France coverage that there was in the US was an hour or so on ABC's wide world of sports. Given that, unless you went out and looked for cycling information, or unless you were born in Europe, there wasn't a lot of familiarity. Most Americans don't care about the sport, don't understand the sport, and don't see what the big deal is. Bottom line is they weren't socialized with it, and it will always be foreign to them.

At least now with OLN and with the Internet, it's a bit easier to find information about the sport, and learn about it's history.

There is a group of cyclists and cycling fans that have followed the sport before Lance, and will continue to follow it when Lance hangs up his bike. A lot of them don't even necessarily like Lance. Hell, I was rooting for Virenque against Ullrich in '97, and crushed when Virenque was kicked out in '98, and that was before Lance had decided to go for the Tour.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » July 13, 2004, 6:53 pm

Kelshara wrote:He also is a perfect example of something I'll never understand: If an American isn't winning/competing at a high level most Americans wont care. Is it so hard to appreciate good performances from non-Americans?

Kelshara wrote:Bah Hushovd lost the yeollow jersey due to bike problems after the excellent stage yesterday (got taken out and still got back to the front). Sucks.

Kelshara wrote: I've read some of Hushovd's comments to Norwegian papers

Kelshara wrote:holy shit.. just read an interview with Hushovd and damn.. he goes after the people running the Tour with the strongest words I have ever heard from him.

Kelshara wrote:Woot finally! Hushovd said he was perfectly positioned when he went down in the McEwen crash the other day and now he proved he could have won that day as well!

Well, we Americans are clearly not the only people with favorites. I wonder why you like this Hushovd fellow so much?

Kelshara wrote:I back up the two Norwegians

Ohhhhhh, that's why!

Just a few questions for you: Who was the leading vote getter in major league baseball's all-star voting this year? What country is he from? Who was the leading vote getter in major league baseballs all-star voting last year? What country is he from? Who was the leading vote getter in major league baseball's all-star voting the year before that? What country is he from? Are Yao Ming, Peja Stojakovic, and Dirk Nowitzki big stars?

I'm also quite sure that, if any other countries actually played American football, their stars would be welcomed and embraced just like foreign athletes in EVERY SINGLE OTHER MAJOR AMERICAN SPORTS LEAGUE have been.

In discussing international sports like Tennis: I don't understand your point in the slightest. Of course, in an international competition, people are going to root for their countrymen. Americans would prefer to watch Andy Roddick than Tim Henman. That's just how it is. Are you surprised? Are you telling me that other nations are any different? Who do you think the British would rather see in the Wimbledon finals: Andy Roddick or Tim Henman?

Let's say this Hushovd fellow was wearing the yellow jersey when the final stage opened. Would Norway be more or less excited than they would be if he were out of the running and Lance or Ullrich or Hamilton or someone else was up there?

Kelshara wrote:Honestly.. I don't even have any interest in watching this year. It seems way less competitive than last year with all the riders that have been taken out. Might as well hand the win to Lance now.

Is it so hard to appreciate a good performance from an American?

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 13, 2004, 8:03 pm

Hum let's see:
- Hushovd rides for a French team.
- Arvesen rides for a Danish team.
- The main reason I cheer for Hushovd is so that McEwen wont win (hint: He is an asshole).
- I supported a French team last year (which anyone who read the arguments between me and noel then will remember). The team went poof since.
- 99% of the sports I watch have zero Norwegians in it.
- I don't like Lance because I don't like people who dominate sports (which I have made clear several times) and I cheer for the underdogs (also a point for Hushovd: He is a clear underdog and notice that I cheered for O'Grady who is definitely not Norwegian but who I really like).
- Another reason why I don't like Lance is that he has come across as quite arrogant in interviews made in Europe. That was also part of our argument last summer.
- Comparing the bandwagon sports with NBA or MBL is ridiculous. Even you will see that if you bother to.
- I don't cheer for Norwegians in tennis or golf nor most other sports. I cheer for people I like, who are good and who play well. Only exception is when I personally know people on the teams from back home which happens at times.
- As for if Hushovd wore the yellow jersey (which is ridiculous since he is a sprinter.. only thing he has a wild chance at is the green) would Norway be more excited? Hard to say, the Tour is big back home with live coverage of the ENTIRE stage every day, with recaps in the afternoon and s how again in the evening. No let me rephrase that: The Tour is HUGE there, and was long before we had cyclists competing.

Of course, the fact that well known sport journalists agree with me seems to back my view that a LOT of Americans are bandwagon fairweather fans.

noel · Post by **noel** » July 13, 2004, 8:14 pm

Kelshara wrote:Hum let's see:
- Hushovd rides for a French team.
- Arvesen rides for a Danish team.
- The main reason I cheer for Hushovd is so that McEwen wont win (hint: He is an asshole).
- I supported a French team last year (which anyone who read the arguments between me and noel then will remember). The team went poof since.
- 99% of the sports I watch have zero Norwegians in it.
- I don't like Lance because I don't like people who dominate sports (which I have made clear several times) and I cheer for the underdogs (also a point for Hushovd: He is a clear underdog and notice that I cheered for O'Grady who is definitely not Norwegian but who I really like).
- Another reason why I don't like Lance is that he has come across as quite arrogant in interviews made in Europe. That was also part of our argument last summer.
- Comparing the bandwagon sports with NBA or MBL is ridiculous. Even you will see that if you bother to.
- I don't cheer for Norwegians in tennis or golf nor most other sports. I cheer for people I like, who are good and who play well. Only exception is when I personally know people on the teams from back home which happens at times.
- As for if Hushovd wore the yellow jersey (which is ridiculous since he is a sprinter.. only thing he has a wild chance at is the green) would Norway be more excited? Hard to say, the Tour is big back home with live coverage of the ENTIRE stage every day, with recaps in the afternoon and s how again in the evening. No let me rephrase that: The Tour is HUGE there, and was long before we had cyclists competing.

Of course, the fact that well known sport journalists agree with me seems to back my view that a LOT of Americans are bandwagon fairweather fans.

Kelshara speaks the truth.

For the record, I think Lance definitely appears arrogant in cycling interviews and especially during competition. I see the same thing in interviews with Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Kobe Bryant, Karch Kiraly, and other dominant players in their sports... I personally think that you have to have a certain level of confidence going to be at the pinnacle of your sport for such a long time. Lance has said many times that when his time in the saddle is over, he's going to disappear to his ranch in Texas and lead a quiet life. Heh, we'll see.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » July 13, 2004, 8:41 pm

I don't disagree with most of what you said, however, I feel that it hardly affects my point.

The only things I take issue with:

I don't cheer for Norwegians in tennis or golf nor most other sports. I cheer for people I like, who are good and who play well. Only exception is when I personally know people on the teams from back home which happens at times.

Who is the best Norwegian tennis player in the world? Who is the best Norwegian golfer in the world? Might the answers to these two questions have some bearing on your rooting interests in these particular sports?

Comparing the bandwagon sports with NBA or MBL is ridiculous. Even you will see that if you bother to.

Why? The most popular players (the answers were Alfonso Soriano and Ichiro Suzuki by the way) are not American. Yet they are the most popular. This seems quite pertinent to me. If you would like to discount it, that's fine.

- As for if Hushovd wore the yellow jersey (which is ridiculous since he is a sprinter.. only thing he has a wild chance at is the green) would Norway be more excited? Hard to say, the Tour is big back home with live coverage of the ENTIRE stage every day, with recaps in the afternoon and s how again in the evening. No let me rephrase that: The Tour is HUGE there, and was long before we had cyclists competing.

My question had absolutely nothing to do with logical possibilities. Nevertheless, I totally disagree with your assertion that it is "hard to say" if the country would be more excited. However, I think that this is kind of impossible to prove on both of our parts.

When dealing with "bandwagon sports" specifically: Before a sport can become a trendy bandwagon sport, it has to be unpopular. Something must occur to change public perception of that sport in order to make it popular. Oftentimes, this watershed event involves an individual (ie, Lance Armstrong). A sport is not going to simply become popular for no reason, regardless of how wonderful a sport may be. It stands to reason that an American performing well in a heretofore unknown sport would be a sensible way for that sport to be introduced to the masses.

Sports (in America at least) tend to be most popular when they are being dominated. It is a simple fact that, during the time that I have been old enough to follow sports, the most dominant performers in both Tennis and Golf have been Americans (Sampras, Agassi, and Woods). If Uzbekistan suddenly produces a tennis player who can win 2 or 3 majors a year, I'm betting that Americans would sit up and take note. Tennis and Golf aren't in down stages now because they lack Americans, they're in down stages because they lack the personalities and performers to captivate the section of the viewing public who are not die hard fans.

Coincident with the decline in interest in mens golf has been an increase in interest in women's golf. What nation is Annika Sorenstam from?

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » July 13, 2004, 9:10 pm

Sports (in America at least) tend to be most popular when they are being dominated.

Interesting you said that. In Europe it seems to be the opposite way, and Formula 1 is a perfect example. It is being completely dominated by Schumacher and it is loosing spectators like crazy.

Coincident with the decline in interest in mens golf has been an increase in interest in women's golf. What nation is Annika Sorenstam from?

Sweden, however Michelle Wie gets more attention heh.

Tenuvil · Post by **Tenuvil** » July 14, 2004, 2:23 am

noel wrote:Yes really. There are a lot of die-hard American cycling fans. Not enough to where you're (ever) going to see it on prime-time television, but they're out there.

Most cycling fans in the US are themselves racers or enthusiasts.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » July 18, 2004, 1:37 pm

Thess wrote:How anyone can be a casual fan of cycling is beyond me - it's more boring to watch then baseball.

But it's still more interesting than golf, which people will watch for hours on end..