Who is to say that there wouldn't have been a genuine drug-free cyclist who did work for charity in that time? Armstrong lied and manipulated throughout his career, destroying people along the way. I don't think you can let him off that just because he did work for charity.
I totally agree with comments that the BBC4 Storyville: Stop at Nothing was a better documentary than the rambling channel 4 one. Especially if, like me, you don't follow Cycling and the Tour de France closely, it gave a chronological account of the events and contained that telling footage from his first Tour victory, after climbing the mountains, he wasn't even breathing heavily or sweating with the exertion, and all those in the sport knew he must've been "on the juice". I'm incredulous that he got away with it for so many years, and only his vanity and arrogance brought him down in the end. Frankly, the World Cycling Authority, the ICU, must've been totally ineffective, or in the know themselves. And why hasn't that so called dirty Italian 'Doctor' been prosecuted yet?
I found the channel 4 docu too much of a fanboy film, and that's exactly what it would have been had Armstrong not been exposed during the making of it. Though the interview with him was sickening in that he wasn't in the least sorry that he ever took the drugs, just that he eventually got caught. I think America just ran out of people who believed in him. In Europe they knew what he was up to, as almost every rider was doing it aswell!! I've always thought the Tour de France is an impossible event to complete and stay alive unless you're taking drugs. That's why I've never got into it, although I've always enjoyed the Track Cycling.
I assume the hospital doctors when he had cancer wouldn't reveal the truth of what he told them because of the Hypocratic Oath? Armstrong himself wouldn't talk about it as he would implicate too many people who are still unprosecuted.
Looking back I wonder if he and Sheryl Crowe split up because she knew what was going on and wanted to distance herself from him?
I wondered the same, and it was a failing of the channel 4 docu, that they didn't ask about her and the reason for the break up? Instead we just got more angst from the film maker.
Haven't yet watched either documentary although they are recorded. We live in France and are very keen cycling followers. We are also still fans of Armstrong. Yes he was into doping but then so were most of the teams at the time. Festina - who are the official timekeepers for the TdF - had all their team thrown out for doping. Richard Virenque was beloved of the French public and denied doping but even when caught out was still beloved of the French.
One thing to remember - Armstrong never failed a drug test. No matter the reason why he just didn't. It was people who had, for one reason or another, crossed him who were determined to bring him down and who niggled and niggled until it happened. Please do not compare him to Savile who may have made millions for charity but ruined the lives of many. Armstrong may have upset a few but has done a lot more good via his Livestrong foundation.
People who are not followers of road racing - particularly the grand tours - seem not to understand that doping does not make you a great cyclist. It helps to prolong training times and also to prolong racing times. The affair with Landis was different in that what he was given did actually help his performance the following day. Most of the doping just allows cyclists to keep going longer and recover more quickly.
Until this year we have always watched the TdF TV coverage on Eurosport. This year we are watching on ITV4 as I cannot bear to see Greg Lemond on the TV. His rival Fignon said he doped and I don't doubt that Lemond did too but he will never admit it.
I saw the Storyville one and Armstrong seemed to take just about everything at one time or another, I don't know how that couldn't have helped his performance considerably.
Haven't yet watched either documentary although they are recorded. We live in France and are very keen cycling followers. We are also still fans of Armstrong. Yes he was into doping but then so were most of the teams at the time. Festina - who are the official timekeepers for the TdF - had all their team thrown out for doping. Richard Virenque was beloved of the French public and denied doping but even when caught out was still beloved of the French.
One thing to remember - Armstrong never failed a drug test. No matter the reason why he just didn't. It was people who had, for one reason or another, crossed him who were determined to bring him down and who niggled and niggled until it happened. Please do not compare him to Savile who may have made millions for charity but ruined the lives of many. Armstrong may have upset a few but has done a lot more good via his Livestrong foundation.
People who are not followers of road racing - particularly the grand tours - seem not to understand that doping does not make you a great cyclist. It helps to prolong training times and also to prolong racing times. The affair with Landis was different in that what he was given did actually help his performance the following day. Most of the doping just allows cyclists to keep going longer and recover more quickly.
Until this year we have always watched the TdF TV coverage on Eurosport. This year wer are watching on ITV4 as I cannot bear to see Greg Lemond on the TV. His rival Fignon said he doped and I don't doubt that Lemond did too but he will never admit it.
He did fail a drug test, though and the UCI were complicit in allowing him to fix it after the event.
I dont believe lemond doped. I think he beat fignon because of the bike technology. I hope he didnt dope.
The trouble is though, you start asking questions about all the winners, and all the nearly men of the same era, in the knowledge that some winners were acknowldged dopers.
Haven't yet watched either documentary although they are recorded. We live in France and are very keen cycling followers. We are also still fans of Armstrong. Yes he was into doping but then so were most of the teams at the time. Festina - who are the official timekeepers for the TdF - had all their team thrown out for doping. Richard Virenque was beloved of the French public and denied doping but even when caught out was still beloved of the French.
One thing to remember - Armstrong never failed a drug test. No matter the reason why he just didn't. It was people who had, for one reason or another, crossed him who were determined to bring him down and who niggled and niggled until it happened. Please do not compare him to Savile who may have made millions for charity but ruined the lives of many. Armstrong may have upset a few but has done a lot more good via his Livestrong foundation.
People who are not followers of road racing - particularly the grand tours - seem not to understand that doping does not make you a great cyclist. It helps to prolong training times and also to prolong racing times. The affair with Landis was different in that what he was given did actually help his performance the following day. Most of the doping just allows cyclists to keep going longer and recover more quickly.
Until this year we have always watched the TdF TV coverage on Eurosport. This year we are watching on ITV4 as I cannot bear to see Greg Lemond on the TV. His rival Fignon said he doped and I don't doubt that Lemond did too but he will never admit it.
I think you should watch both ( or if only one then the BBC one) then come back and tell us if you feel the same.
One thing to remember - Armstrong never failed a drug test. No matter the reason why he just didn't.
As gemma-the-husky says, yes Armstrong DID fail a drugs test for cortisone at the TdF. He was retrospectively allowed to submit a prescription by his team doctor to say he'd been taking a steroid cream for saddle sore, after they'd searched the internet for something other than steroids which contained cortisone and was available on prescription. Just one example of how Armstrong's main line of defence "I've NEVER failed a drug test", repeated by StrictlySC4, and upheld by the corrupt and pathetic ICU, was a load of blatant lies.
It was people who had, for one reason or another, crossed him who were determined to bring him down and who niggled and niggled until it happened.
I really think you'll be embarrassed to have written that when you've seen the documentaries, especially BBC4's Stop At Nothing (made for ABC in Australia, by a British Producer Alex Holmes, and aired on the same evening in both countries).
Here's a great radio interview with him. https://twitter.com/abcsouthqld/status/485943824511148032
On the contrary, it was Armstrong who pursued people in the courts, like David Walsh of the Sunday Times, for daring to publish that he'd taken drugs. He attacked anyone who dared criticize him - like Betsy Andrieu, wife of rider Frankie, and former Armstrong teammate, and Emma O'Reilly, the masseuse, by calling her a ****. He also said that Greg Lemond was a drunk and drug user after he suggested that Armstrong may've doped. Armstrong had friends in very high places after he set up the LiveStrong Foundation, and even got a government enquiry called off. It was only when he'd completely run out of friends that the truth caught up with him.
People who are not followers of road racing - particularly the grand tours - seem not to understand that doping does not make you a great cyclist. It helps to prolong training times and also to prolong racing times. The affair with Landis was different in that what he was given did actually help his performance the following day. Most of the doping just allows cyclists to keep going longer and recover more quickly.
That includes me, who doesn't follow the sport closely, but what I do understand is that the Italian doctor who supplied Armstrong - at one point giving all the team riders blood transfusions on the team bus - was an expert in how to utilise EPO and every substance known to man to increase their performance on the bike. He made a scientific study of it. Basically Lance had the best crooked doctor.
As someone who does follow the sport, can you tell me how it's possible to complete a race like the TdF in one piece and at a competitive time without taking drugs? It seems a physical impossibility. The whole race and sport is flawed IMO unless times come down considerably. And when Armstrong came back to win Bronze, he cheated even then. He overtook Wiggins, who presumably was clean?
Haven't yet watched either documentary although they are recorded. We live in France and are very keen cycling followers. We are also still fans of Armstrong. Yes he was into doping but then so were most of the teams at the time. Festina - who are the official timekeepers for the TdF - had all their team thrown out for doping. Richard Virenque was beloved of the French public and denied doping but even when caught out was still beloved of the French.
One thing to remember - Armstrong never failed a drug test. No matter the reason why he just didn't. It was people who had, for one reason or another, crossed him who were determined to bring him down and who niggled and niggled until it happened. Please do not compare him to Savile who may have made millions for charity but ruined the lives of many. Armstrong may have upset a few but has done a lot more good via his Livestrong foundation.
People who are not followers of road racing - particularly the grand tours - seem not to understand that doping does not make you a great cyclist. It helps to prolong training times and also to prolong racing times. The affair with Landis was different in that what he was given did actually help his performance the following day. Most of the doping just allows cyclists to keep going longer and recover more quickly.
Until this year we have always watched the TdF TV coverage on Eurosport. This year we are watching on ITV4 as I cannot bear to see Greg Lemond on the TV. His rival Fignon said he doped and I don't doubt that Lemond did too but he will never admit it.
This post fails in so many ways. So basically we should give the guy credit for being such a skilled cheat that he never failed a drug test (though he actually did)? Awesome.
People who are not followers of road racing - particularly the grand tours - seem not to understand that doping does not make you a great cyclist.
Yes it does. Winning a grand tour has virtually nothing to do with skill. Climbing mountains is the most important factor, and there is no skill to that. It's a purely physical thing - endurance, recovery and power. Everything that doping gives you. It's why cycling is littered with riders who had overnight transformations, riders who were unheard of as climbers suddenly becoming, mid-career, among the greatest climbers of all time. Armstrong is a prime example. Here's a guy who previously struggled to even finish the tour, and would finish in the top 50 at best, suddenly dropping Pantani and breaking climbing records. That was solely because he got put on the best doping program there was at the time, by the best doping doctor around.
The affair with Landis was different in that what he was given did actually help his performance the following day.
Landis tested positive for testosterone, which Lance admits he used throughout his seven wins (among plenty of other stuff most important being EPO).
Until this year we have always watched the TdF TV coverage on Eurosport. This year we are watching on ITV4 as I cannot bear to see Greg Lemond on the TV. His rival Fignon said he doped and I don't doubt that Lemond did too but he will never admit it
Greg Lemond's wins came before EPO transformed cycling in the early 1990s. Lemond went from being the best cyclist around, a 3-time tour winner, to someone who couldn't even hold on to the last rider on the road and was having to abandon grand tours. It's obvious now why, EPO had been introduced into the peloton and he wasn't on it.
Fignon said he used drugs recreationally at the time, and claims his career was ended by not taking EPO too.
Yes it does. Winning a grand tour has virtually nothing to do with skill. Climbing mountains is the most important factor, and there is no skill to that. It's a purely physical thing - endurance, recovery and power. Everything that doping gives you. It's why cycling is littered with riders who had overnight transformations, riders who were unheard of as climbers suddenly becoming, mid-career, among the greatest climbers of all time. Armstrong is a prime example. Here's a guy who previously struggled to even finish the tour, and would finish in the top 50 at best, suddenly dropping Pantani and breaking climbing records. That was solely because he got put on the best doping program there was at the time, by the best doping doctor around.
Landis tested positive for testosterone, which Lance admits he used throughout his seven wins (among plenty of other stuff most important being EPO).
Greg Lemond's wins came before EPO transformed cycling in the early 1990s. Lemond went from being the best cyclist around, a 3-time tour winner, to someone who couldn't even hold on to the last rider on the road and was having to abandon grand tours. It's obvious now why, EPO had been introduced into the peloton and he wasn't on it.
Fignon said he used drugs recreationally at the time, and claims his career was ended by not taking EPO too.
Thanks for your interesting and educative post.
Reminds me of when US Sprinter Calvin Smith, interviewed after the Seoul Olympic 100M Final, said he still considered himself the best runner, knowing full well those placed above him were on drugs.
what was interesting for me was that just because everybody was on EPO didnt make it a level playing field as not everybody reacts to EPO the same. i think what i found interesting was the 50% hematocrit limit. they all refereed to someone who had a natal hematocrit of 43 would see a massive performance increace by taking EPO so there limit increased to 49 where as someone whos natural hematocrit of 48 would only see a marginal increase by taking EPO.
Comments
I found the channel 4 docu too much of a fanboy film, and that's exactly what it would have been had Armstrong not been exposed during the making of it. Though the interview with him was sickening in that he wasn't in the least sorry that he ever took the drugs, just that he eventually got caught. I think America just ran out of people who believed in him. In Europe they knew what he was up to, as almost every rider was doing it aswell!! I've always thought the Tour de France is an impossible event to complete and stay alive unless you're taking drugs. That's why I've never got into it, although I've always enjoyed the Track Cycling.
I assume the hospital doctors when he had cancer wouldn't reveal the truth of what he told them because of the Hypocratic Oath? Armstrong himself wouldn't talk about it as he would implicate too many people who are still unprosecuted.
I wondered the same, and it was a failing of the channel 4 docu, that they didn't ask about her and the reason for the break up? Instead we just got more angst from the film maker.
One thing to remember - Armstrong never failed a drug test. No matter the reason why he just didn't. It was people who had, for one reason or another, crossed him who were determined to bring him down and who niggled and niggled until it happened. Please do not compare him to Savile who may have made millions for charity but ruined the lives of many. Armstrong may have upset a few but has done a lot more good via his Livestrong foundation.
People who are not followers of road racing - particularly the grand tours - seem not to understand that doping does not make you a great cyclist. It helps to prolong training times and also to prolong racing times. The affair with Landis was different in that what he was given did actually help his performance the following day. Most of the doping just allows cyclists to keep going longer and recover more quickly.
Until this year we have always watched the TdF TV coverage on Eurosport. This year we are watching on ITV4 as I cannot bear to see Greg Lemond on the TV. His rival Fignon said he doped and I don't doubt that Lemond did too but he will never admit it.
He did fail a drug test, though and the UCI were complicit in allowing him to fix it after the event.
I dont believe lemond doped. I think he beat fignon because of the bike technology. I hope he didnt dope.
The trouble is though, you start asking questions about all the winners, and all the nearly men of the same era, in the knowledge that some winners were acknowldged dopers.
I think you should watch both ( or if only one then the BBC one) then come back and tell us if you feel the same.
That's a very polite way of putting it!
As gemma-the-husky says, yes Armstrong DID fail a drugs test for cortisone at the TdF. He was retrospectively allowed to submit a prescription by his team doctor to say he'd been taking a steroid cream for saddle sore, after they'd searched the internet for something other than steroids which contained cortisone and was available on prescription. Just one example of how Armstrong's main line of defence "I've NEVER failed a drug test", repeated by StrictlySC4, and upheld by the corrupt and pathetic ICU, was a load of blatant lies.
I really think you'll be embarrassed to have written that when you've seen the documentaries, especially BBC4's Stop At Nothing (made for ABC in Australia, by a British Producer Alex Holmes, and aired on the same evening in both countries).
Here's a great radio interview with him.
https://twitter.com/abcsouthqld/status/485943824511148032
On the contrary, it was Armstrong who pursued people in the courts, like David Walsh of the Sunday Times, for daring to publish that he'd taken drugs. He attacked anyone who dared criticize him - like Betsy Andrieu, wife of rider Frankie, and former Armstrong teammate, and Emma O'Reilly, the masseuse, by calling her a ****. He also said that Greg Lemond was a drunk and drug user after he suggested that Armstrong may've doped. Armstrong had friends in very high places after he set up the LiveStrong Foundation, and even got a government enquiry called off. It was only when he'd completely run out of friends that the truth caught up with him.
That includes me, who doesn't follow the sport closely, but what I do understand is that the Italian doctor who supplied Armstrong - at one point giving all the team riders blood transfusions on the team bus - was an expert in how to utilise EPO and every substance known to man to increase their performance on the bike. He made a scientific study of it. Basically Lance had the best crooked doctor.
As someone who does follow the sport, can you tell me how it's possible to complete a race like the TdF in one piece and at a competitive time without taking drugs? It seems a physical impossibility. The whole race and sport is flawed IMO unless times come down considerably. And when Armstrong came back to win Bronze, he cheated even then. He overtook Wiggins, who presumably was clean?
I didn't realize Virenque hadn't been stripped of all those polka dot jerseys he won, that's blatant favouritism from the French.
This post fails in so many ways. So basically we should give the guy credit for being such a skilled cheat that he never failed a drug test (though he actually did)? Awesome.
Yes it does. Winning a grand tour has virtually nothing to do with skill. Climbing mountains is the most important factor, and there is no skill to that. It's a purely physical thing - endurance, recovery and power. Everything that doping gives you. It's why cycling is littered with riders who had overnight transformations, riders who were unheard of as climbers suddenly becoming, mid-career, among the greatest climbers of all time. Armstrong is a prime example. Here's a guy who previously struggled to even finish the tour, and would finish in the top 50 at best, suddenly dropping Pantani and breaking climbing records. That was solely because he got put on the best doping program there was at the time, by the best doping doctor around.
Landis tested positive for testosterone, which Lance admits he used throughout his seven wins (among plenty of other stuff most important being EPO).
Greg Lemond's wins came before EPO transformed cycling in the early 1990s. Lemond went from being the best cyclist around, a 3-time tour winner, to someone who couldn't even hold on to the last rider on the road and was having to abandon grand tours. It's obvious now why, EPO had been introduced into the peloton and he wasn't on it.
Fignon said he used drugs recreationally at the time, and claims his career was ended by not taking EPO too.
Thanks for your interesting and educative post.
Reminds me of when US Sprinter Calvin Smith, interviewed after the Seoul Olympic 100M Final, said he still considered himself the best runner, knowing full well those placed above him were on drugs.
http://www.scmp.com/sport/other-sport/article/1320069/calvin-smith-true-winner-1988-seoul-olympics-100-metres-final