Triathletes should be PISSED at Armstrong
Read the Reasoned Decision (or any one of a million synopses of it online), and then read this article
And tell me how you cannot be pissed off to learn that Armstrong has been 'working' with Ferrari on his triathlon comeback? As if he's been doing that clean?!? Please, this is a joke, and I totally congratulate WTC for doing the right thing here.
0
Comments
I'm not pissed at LA at all. I'm still pissed about the witch hunt aspect of this whole thing. For the record, I AM a Lance fan. Do I think everyone in that cycling era blood doped, probably. But LA was still a 7x TDF champ on what one could consider a reasonably level playing field since just about everyone of relevance was doing the same exact things in those times but he was the only one winning at the big dance.
I also don't believe what someone may or may not have done 15 yrs ago should have any relevance on what they do now. Especially since he never actually tested positive for any drug. So if he was adding a few extra platelets into his system or blood doping or EPO or whatever it might have been, those benefits would have been totally out of his system within days or weeks after the race and certainly not still benefiting him 15 yrs post-facto. And to top it all off, it's freakin' Paulo Sousa who's calling him out. One more reason for me not to like Paulo, what a crybaby. And the dude who lost to him in Panama 70.3 is also a sore loser and a crybaby.
I really think they're all just scared to face the competition.
And finally, I have never touched drugs ever in my entire life (unless you count alcohol). But if some dude in my AG smoked weed when he was in college 15yrs ago, I don't really give a rats behind, and if he beats me to my KQ slot by one place someday I'll know it's because I need to work harder and get faster and not because of illegal something he did 10 or 15 yrs ago.
There you go. My rant is over. ...for now.
The items I accept as fact, relevant to my assertion above:
1) working with Dr. Michele Ferrari's program means, by definition, cheating by chemical means (EPO/Cera, transfusions, testosterone, cortisone, etc)
2) Lance was 100% linked to working with Ferrari in the 2009 and 2010 TdF
3) from the USADA document: "an expert examination of Armstrong’s blood parameters establish that the likelihood of Armstrong’s blood values form the2009 and 2010 Tours de France occurring naturally is less than one in a million". Based on the evidence, there is almost zero percent chance he was clean in those tours.
4) the article above states that he and Ferrari were scheming to figure out how to win the Hawaii Ironman.
Based on those 4 points, I cannot see any reasonable alternative conclusion than that they were looking to figure out how to use every possible advantage, legal and otherwise.
It is my opinion that Lance had every intention of cheating to try to win the Ironman.
It is a matter of fact that we're not talking about smoking weed 15 years ago.
To John - yes, he probably won the TDF on a level playing field, but that's moral relativism at its worst. And the evidence is overwhelming that he is a lying, cheating, vindictive, drug pusher. His support of cancer is admirable, but does not excuse his significant character flaws. We'll have to wait 20-30 years to see how history judges him.
All in all, I'm more disappointed than angry. But I'm with Mike -- WTC made the right call. My only wish is that USAT/WTC would test all age group winners at Kona and 25% of the 1st place winners at each Ironman. Yes, there is a cost, but only testing a fraction of the 1st place winners would keep it in check and serve as a significant deterrent to the age groupers who are doing the same thing on a lesser scale.
I still don't know how I feel about the 'level playing field' argument. It's pretty clear that you were either working with Ferrari or you were working with somebody who was not Ferrari. The USADA report and Hamilton's book make it pretty clear that he was way ahead of everybody else.
George Hincapie, Tom Danielson, Levi Leipheimer, Christian Vande Velde and Zabriskie all would have received at least two-year sanctions had they not helped USADA with its case. Instead, they got six months and were told to withdraw themselves from consideration for the 2012 Olympic team.
USA Cycling announced Thursday the cyclists had accepted their punishments. CEO Steve Johnson said he wanted to "acknowledge the extraordinary courage of these riders who placed their careers on the line in order to come forward with their experiences of past doping practices."
It seemed more of a CYA situation with little courage involved.
I'd be willing to pay $50 more per IM race to have this happen. But now that everyoe, thanks to Lance, USADA, and the NY Times, knows how to evade testing, what good would it do?
oops, originally posted without logging Jess out.
Full Disclosure: Jess is sitting here on the couch with me telling me how much of an idiot I am and wondering why I even care to debate things like this, but I believe there are 2 camps on the opposite side of the spectrum regarding LA, and I am clearly in one camp, but there are many, many people in the other camp. So I am in no way trying to offend anybody, but I do like to give my opinion whether people agree with it or not. So here goes...
@Mike, you make a lot of really good points, and I never said that LA didn't dope. Probably did, but I'm not ready to say that I'm 100% positive he did.
BUT... Al Olsen just said more of the direction I was heading in. IF, and I mean IF the USADA'a main objective was to really clean up the sport, then they would have come down hard on all 17 of the cheaters. The 6 active guys that got a lame 6 month ban that would start AFTER the TDF this yr (basically during their offseason) turned this whole process into a farce. So honestly, sworn affidavids from a bunch of lying cheats that got nothing more than a slap on the wrist for their testimony turns the whole process into a sham. If they are serious, ban EVERYONE who ever doped for life. Otherwise this was simply a witch hunt against LA.
On the Ferrari argument being the better doctor, that's kind of like saying well they all tried to cheat and LA picked the better doctor so he had an advantage because he was a better (or worse) cheater. Um, okay. Either they're all cheating scumbags or that was just the era they were in. Kind of like the baseball steroid era. Was Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa the worse cheater? Do you really care which one had the better supplier of roids?
I read that article with a different lens than you. Kind of like asking a Liberal or a Conservative who "won" a political debate. I read that and saw this quote:
As early as 2008, Armstrong was asking Ferrari’s son, Stefano, about competing in triathlon events. On Feb. 23 of that year, Armstrong e-mailed Stefano Ferarri, asking, “How hard would it be to win the ironman?” Two years later, the two exchanged notes about how to train, according to the agency’s evidence. “The first you’ll have to do once the Tour is over is recover a bit,” Ferrari wrote on July 25, 2010. “Then start working on refining your swimming technique.” Later Ferrari wrote that his father said they would have “to discuss and plan for the Ironman events, as it’s no easy joke, of course. The main issue could be the running, we’ll have to restart carefully and purposefully.”
Now, what if Lance asked RnP instead and the article simply cut "Stefano" and pasted in "Coach RnP from EN" it would read like this:
As early as 2008, Armstrong was asking Coach RnP from EN about competing in triathlon events. On Feb. 23 of that year, Armstrong e-mailed Coach RnP from EN, asking, “How hard would it be to win the ironman?” Two years later, the two exchanged notes about how to train, according to the agency’s evidence. “The first you’ll have to do once the Tour is over is recover a bit,” Coach RnP from EN wrote on July 25, 2010. “Then start working on refining your swimming technique.” Later Coach RnP from EN wrote that his father said they would have “to discuss and plan for the Ironman events, as it’s no easy joke, of course. The main issue could be the running, we’ll have to restart carefully and purposefully.”
Actually, if LA asked me about winning the Ironman, I probably would have given him pretty much exactly the same advice. Not really all that controversial or insightful of advice. And reading that through my biased lens, it is really a pretty big stretch to think that it meant "hey Lance, the IM is hard, we'll really need to dial in your doping for you to have a chance to win it."
I totally agree Al. Add $50 to everyone's fee. And you could simply randomly test anyone in a "testing pool", but every KQ will be in the random testing pool as well as 10% of every finisher in the top 15% of their AG. The NCAA does stuff like this for every championship tournament or event.
Then, put it in large BOLD print at the top of the disclosure statement when you sign up for the race that anyone who tests positive for any banned substance during an USAT event is contractually obligated to pay $5,000 into a Drug Testing fund and is banned from all USAT events for life!
As far as the level playing field goes, I was struck by point 3 in this discussion by some pretty smart guys
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2012/08/the-armstrong-fallout-thoughts-and.html
I am not well-informed enough to know how level the playing field was or was not. But I trust those guys, and the USADA opinion, when it comes to how much better these guys were than everybody else. Hamilton also discusses that in his book, and I'm inclined to think that Hamilton figured out first hand how not level the playing field was.
That said, I still think that Armstrong was better than everybody else at the time. That's why I got into the sport in the first place, and it's heartbreaking to think of it all as somehow tainted. Very challenging. But I can't stand the thought process implied by working with Ferrari on figuring out what the 'program' is to win the Hawaii ironman.
Ferrari is well known for doping.
So substituting one for the other isn't quite so simple an analysis.
Thanks for making this debate respectable and open; it's one of the things that makes EN so awesome. I fluctuate how I feel b/c this case is both emotional and mentally challenging to me, as a person and a professional in this space. I don't have much to add at 4am outside my hotel room here in HI, but I do think we as triathletes have to find a way to move forward with our sport as cleanly as possible. There is doping in the AG ranks, from the real stuff you read about to abusing testosterone prescriptions, it's all there. I don't know what that path is, but we need it...
The whole doping thing may be "moral relativism", but I think they all did it at one point. Just like baseball had it's past. It doesn't make it right, just what it is. I will still cheer for Lance because he got me into cycling. Without him I would argue that American cycling would look completely different. Whatever you viw point it seems hard to argue that point. Sure Greg Lemond was a big winner, but Lance penetrated the national consciousness and got people on bikes. There are probably very few young people racing as pros that didn't have his poster on the wall of their bedrooms.
It is sad to see a hero torn down in what seems like ridiculous over persecution. I don't choose to be angry. I choose to be sad, but I also choose to believe that Hulk Hogan DID body slam Andre the Giant to become the WWF world champion. Lance did win 7 tours and is the BEST pro that ever lived. Call me a 10 year old, but I choose to believe because it make me happy....
I have been very interested in this since it first came to light earlier this year and have wanted to chime in but never did. Mostly because I dont really know the difference between true facts and spun or embellished facts. The other thing preventing me from participating is I didn't really understand WHY I felt the way I do - Dino, you hit it square on the head.
I choose to percieve things in a way that makes me happy. Thanks Dino for helping me understand....
Yes a bummer on George H. news.
I think that Lance has been unfairly singled out.
usada is wasting a lot of time and money on things of the past. We should be pissed at them. Very unfair the attention to Lance and the lack of attention or passes given to the hundreds of others.
The doping question is moot at this point.
Was looking forward to the possibility of racing with Lance.
Right now, I'm most of all disappointed about this whole thing going public. It takes away from the hard training, commitment, work attitude he was famous for. I think I will always have my respect for Armstrong regardless of how this continues to develop.
I have less respect for guys such as Hincapie. Admitting doping just when you retired is pretty lame. There was at least one of the american riders who was honest and said he took the deal to cover his ass... can't remember which one it was. I respect that.
Moving forward - I don't see what good is gonna come out of this. Basically the whole world now knows doping tests mean nothing at all... if you get caught you were just unlucky. It also tells me all those teams that want to be leaders in anti-doping policies are hypocritical. Look at slipstream / Garmin.. Vaughters, Danielson, Vande Velde, Zabriskie, Dekker, Weltz, former team director White, etc etc. Is that how you run a team that is supposed to lead by example? How can we take them and other teams seriously when it comes to preventing doping? I am convinced there are young riders starting their careers with promising results without doing any doping, though I wonder how long one can go one without getting tempted to try something here and there with so much expertise around.
My view - live and let live. Race hard, do want you choose to do. I don't ask, you don't tell. Race, fight, win and lose.
We can agree to disagree about the USADA investigation being a waste of time. Lots of consequences to this, it's only just started.
I have a hard time believing any of these guys saying that they just doped for a little while and quit. It is part of the training "plan" and as long as the incentives are there and the probability of getting caught is low, it will continue. LA clearly had the financial resources, power, and influence to assemble the best team of coaches, doctors, and drug smugglers, thus giving him an advantage over other athletes (who assumably were all doping but not as effectively).
...Sigh
Thanks everyone for this discussion! For me, even if I did partake of doping activities, I might at best find myself in the middle of a pack. Does it impact me? Not so much! However, this does get down to core values! Race clean or race using artificial enhanced treatments. Coach P mentioned that we need to find a way to move forward without, but unclear with what path will be taken (paraphrased).
For sake of discussion, let me place on the table that we as members of Endurance Nation pledge to participate in this sport as "clean" athletes without blood doping or drug enhanced blood. Let Endurance Nation be known for "clean racers". Let us not get lost in all of the arguments, but take a collective stand. We are 400 plus strong now. Let our performance through training, strategy and execution be our hallmark. Let our performance improvement speak for itself! Let that be our message as a team! Let that be our stance!
Thanks for listening!
as my rare post on slowtwitch said (copied below)
I think this is the question to ask: was lance the first guy to dope?
to get to the top of the podium, did he have to dope to compete with others who were already doping?
Did he have to have his teammates dope in order to compete with the teams of the other dopers?
I think Hincapie's press release clearly points to a lot of this. Lance played a game, he played it better than anyone else and he got people to supporting him to play the game at the highest level. He could have said "no, I am not going to dope." If he did, would you know his name? Would someone else have won the TDF who WASN'T doping? Would he have successfully blown the whistle on the guys who were doping? would he have taken his fame (and fortune) and created livestrong? would he have raised the $ he has that have gone to cancer research and patient support? would anyone passionately raise $ for Livestrong as they have because of what he accomplished (tainted or not)? I don't want to agree with the doping, but if he never won a TDF, chances are I never would have heard of him and and a friend of mine[graffeo] who got into cycling and then tri, never would have, and I never would have met this friend, and my life would be emptier...
so, while I don't agree that any of this justifies anything, Lance impacted many of us in ways that we can only begin to think about now, how different would our lives be if a brash American kid from Texas never won 7 TDFs?
now subsequent to this, Mike Graffeo and I had a phone chat on Friday evening on this topic. Mike was upset that lance further upset the level playing field by having ferrari locked up for him and his team the best doctor... I countered with: this is the way the game was played. whether it was legal or not, the competitors by all doping (I think we all universally agree that doping was universal) said that this is part of the game. As we all in EN know, execution, training, planning are all part of the game. So, by seeking out the best doc, developing the best doping program, did LA do anything more than execute better than everyone else?
additionally, we queried the question of pain, work, mental effort. while he was doped, he still had to suffer, albeit on a higher level. I used to race sailboats. You could cheat in having unreported modifications to a boat that would effect it's rating and do many other things to game your game, but you still had to go out and race right, race smart, you could take a fast machine and not win. so, i still think there is something there.
all of this said, I agree with JW, this was 15 years ago. BUT, and i question this today, how do you know he wasn't doing it again now? i believe there was a feeling that lance could have won yesterday. how would you feel if that win was doped? then again, how would we feel if macca, crowie, chrissie, jacobs or any of these heroes of ours were really dopers (and they may be). No, JW, i am not going to feel bad about being beaten by a guy that did more bong hits than me in college. But i am going to feel badly about being beaten by a guy who used performance enhancing drugs.
THAT is a THE issue. Now let me say this, i am a Lance fan. I do have a mancrush on him. He is the American dream. He came from a broken home, from disadvantaged circumstances, he found his place in the pool (it was biking 10 miles to the pool every day that supposedly got him started in biking) and he became an icon and grabbed all the financial rewards that come along with that. Along the way he was stricken with Cancer, received a death sentence and beat it. In doing so, he found religion and has inspired thousands of people to raise money and inspired many stricken with cancer and other diseases to challenge themselves to overcome.
He didn't create the cheating and to try and stop it, he would have been trounced and pushed aside as a "nobody." He played the game that was being played and he played it better than anyone else and that is why so many hate him. If it wasn't him, it would have been a different cheater at the top and they would be the center of discussion today. Let's not forget, many cheaters also won TDFs, none of them won 7, does that say anything????