Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lance Armstrong Comeback?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lance Armstrong Comeback?

    If true, will he sign up for the Project Believe program?

    http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2008/09/ ... trong.html
    There are no strings on me

  • #2
    Seeing some Michael Jordan similarities here. Definitely a risk guy.

    Comment


    • #3
      He is now saying yes, and most likely with Astana, which has a number of the elements of the Postal/Discovery team. It might be hard to attack a team with Armstrong/Contador/Kloden/Leipheimer/ and those are just the climbers/time-trial guys. The latter two would likely do the Giro/Vuelta as leaders.

      With a lot more drug scrutiny, and both time off and more advanced age, if he can still pull it off it will make more people believe that he did the Tours without major assistance.

      Comment


      • #4
        http://www.livestrong.com/lance2009/
        There are no strings on me

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by 26mi235
          With a lot more drug scrutiny, and both time off and more advanced age, if he can still pull it off it will make more people believe that he did the Tours without major assistance.
          The opposite would happen, at least in Europe.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by croflash
            Originally posted by 26mi235
            With a lot more drug scrutiny, and both time off and more advanced age, if he can still pull it off it will make more people believe that he did the Tours without major assistance.
            The opposite would happen, at least in Europe.
            Why do you say that? With a lot more scrutiny do you think that the likelihood of his use of PEDs has gone up? Is it he Europeans saying "we cannot sprint, we cannot run distances fast enough and how we cannot race bikes at the highest levels either [French, German, etc, not Spanish and Italians, and the track events are not the highest levels of cycling]

            If they cannot define what they think is an open procedure than they are just giving up and not willing to do anything but carp. It is a lot harder to hide when there is a continual, cross-section of blood/urine values and with them available to anyone on the net then some fancy cheats would be discernible to someone with some incentive to out a high-profile "cheater".

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 26mi235
              Originally posted by croflash
              Originally posted by 26mi235
              With a lot more drug scrutiny, and both time off and more advanced age, if he can still pull it off it will make more people believe that he did the Tours without major assistance.
              The opposite would happen, at least in Europe.
              Why do you say that? With a lot more scrutiny do you think that the likelihood of his use of PEDs has gone up? Is it he Europeans saying "we cannot sprint, we cannot run distances fast enough and how we cannot race bikes at the highest levels either [French, German, etc, not Spanish and Italians, and the track events are not the highest levels of cycling]

              If they cannot define what they think is an open procedure than they are just giving up and not willing to do anything but carp. It is a lot harder to hide when there is a continual, cross-section of blood/urine values and with them available to anyone on the net then some fancy cheats would be discernible to someone with some incentive to out a high-profile "cheater".
              I'm not going to get into this discussion about speculations on he is/was using PEDs, but I doubt that more sophisticated doping controls have that much of an impact in most sports when it comes to the decision whether you want to to use PEDs or not.

              As far as the nation comparisons, if you look at the amount of riders that tested positive in Spain and Italy, a lot of fans are always going to have doubts about those performances to say the least. Btw, Rasmus Damsgaard is the same guy (who is related to the CSC profiles you were referring to) who also said that if he were to look at the doping samples at the Olympics, he would probably find 500 positives whereas the WADA/IOC gets 2 or 3.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by croflash
                Btw, Rasmus Damsgaard is the same guy (who is related to the CSC profiles you were referring to) who also said that if he were to look at the doping samples at the Olympics, he would probably find 500 positives whereas the WADA/IOC gets 2 or 3.
                So if Damsgaard is the decider on PEDs use, it is a much tighter sieve, right?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm not positive about Armstrong coming back. I think the Packers have already made plans to use Aaron Rodgers this year.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by croflash
                    Originally posted by 26mi235
                    Originally posted by croflash
                    Originally posted by 26mi235
                    With a lot more drug scrutiny, and both time off and more advanced age, if he can still pull it off it will make more people believe that he did the Tours without major assistance.
                    The opposite would happen, at least in Europe.
                    Why do you say that? With a lot more scrutiny do you think that the likelihood of his use of PEDs has gone up? Is it he Europeans saying "we cannot sprint, we cannot run distances fast enough and how we cannot race bikes at the highest levels either [French, German, etc, not Spanish and Italians, and the track events are not the highest levels of cycling]

                    If they cannot define what they think is an open procedure than they are just giving up and not willing to do anything but carp. It is a lot harder to hide when there is a continual, cross-section of blood/urine values and with them available to anyone on the net then some fancy cheats would be discernible to someone with some incentive to out a high-profile "cheater".
                    I'm not going to get into this discussion about speculations on he is/was using PEDs, but I doubt that more sophisticated doping controls have that much of an impact in most sports when it comes to the decision whether you want to to use PEDs or not.

                    As far as the nation comparisons, if you look at the amount of riders that tested positive in Spain and Italy, a lot of fans are always going to have doubts about those performances to say the least. Btw, Rasmus Damsgaard is the same guy (who is related to the CSC profiles you were referring to) who also said that if he were to look at the doping samples at the Olympics, he would probably find 500 positives whereas the WADA/IOC gets 2 or 3.
                    What if Armstrong believes that cycling is now clean, but has concluded, like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens did, that with a level playing field, the cream always rises to the top? In other words, Bonds and Clemens believed that if everyone was dirty, they would be the best players in baseball. Maybe Armstrong has so much confidence in his talent that he believes that if the entire peleton is clean, he'll still be the best cyclist in the world.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Tough to foresee anything really positive coming from this decision. Are the internal mechanisms that make super-athletes successful the same ones that make them desparately try to regain the spotlight?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by jhc68
                        Tough to foresee anything really positive coming from this decision. Are the internal mechanisms that make super-athletes successful the same ones that make them desparately try to regain the spotlight?
                        Read the comments from the professional cyclists. Cycling has really been cleaning up its act and the biological passport and the testing like CSC is doing will cull out athletes like Vino and Rasmussan. They need to get through the next year or two without losing too many sponsors and too much money, which has been leaving the sport.

                        If Lance comes back it will bring a huge amount of interest and he tests clean with the intrusive testing then it will quite the critics that will sway the cycling public and make it feasible for the sponsorship to be maintained.

                        My guess is that he will get back into shape through the multiple stage races he has planned and will know before the Tour whether it is feasible or a pipedream. He may bow out of the Tour if it is the latter and stay active with the team in the Tour and still bring in a huge amount of non-drug publicity. Track and Field has no one that could bring in that level of interest in the sport.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by 26mi235
                          Originally posted by jhc68
                          Tough to foresee anything really positive coming from this decision. Are the internal mechanisms that make super-athletes successful the same ones that make them desparately try to regain the spotlight?
                          Read the comments from the professional cyclists. Cycling has really been cleaning up its act and the biological passport and the testing like CSC is doing will cull out athletes like Vino and Rasmussan. They need to get through the next year or two without losing too many sponsors and too much money, which has been leaving the sport.

                          If Lance comes back it will bring a huge amount of interest and he tests clean with the intrusive testing then it will quite the critics that will sway the cycling public and make it feasible for the sponsorship to be maintained.

                          My guess is that he will get back into shape through the multiple stage races he has planned and will know before the Tour whether it is feasible or a pipedream. He may bow out of the Tour if it is the latter and stay active with the team in the Tour and still bring in a huge amount of non-drug publicity. Track and Field has no one that could bring in that level of interest in the sport.
                          No, people here will only believe cycling is cleaning up its act if he tests positive, not if he does not. After Ricco and Sella tested positive, there was even more general suspicion than usual. That is not going to go away until ... well, I don't think the doubts will ever go. Very few believe that the top riders are clean or have been in recent decades, that's not limited to him btw.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by croflash
                            No, people here will only believe cycling is cleaning up its act if he tests positive, not if he does not. After Ricco and Sella tested positive, there was even more general suspicion than usual. That is not going to go away until ... well, I don't think the doubts will ever go. Very few believe that the top riders are clean or have been in recent decades, that's not limited to him btw.
                            It is not the 'testing positive', it is the whole blood profile open to scrutiny. All the comments about what Lance might have done/used, if true, would have showed up in that deep cross-section look, including might tighter limits on the parameters, a la Damsgaard. Most of all, most of the European cycling fans and potential sponsors would generally be satisfied and that is the crucial thing. Dara Torres damped doping suspicions with what would be a lesser version of what Armstrong is proposing.

                            Your position seems to be that there is absolutely no way of controlling doping at all, and so why do you follow track and field at all. However, they have been able to nab those that show clues (in both cycling and T&F [my candidates last year were Rasmussan, Vino, and Vino's country-mate/teammate; this year it was Ricco at the Tour, all caught], and the LA approach would provide many more clues if those clues are actually there.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by 26mi235
                              Originally posted by croflash
                              No, people here will only believe cycling is cleaning up its act if he tests positive, not if he does not. After Ricco and Sella tested positive, there was even more general suspicion than usual. That is not going to go away until ... well, I don't think the doubts will ever go. Very few believe that the top riders are clean or have been in recent decades, that's not limited to him btw.
                              It is not the 'testing positive', it is the whole blood profile open to scrutiny. All the comments about what Lance might have done/used, if true, would have showed up in that deep cross-section look, including might tighter limits on the parameters, a la Damsgaard. Most of all, most of the European cycling fans and potential sponsors would generally be satisfied and that is the crucial thing. Dara Torres damped doping suspicions with what would be a lesser version of what Armstrong is proposing.

                              Your position seems to be that there is absolutely no way of controlling doping at all, and so why do you follow track and field at all. However, they have been able to nab those that show clues (in both cycling and T&F [my candidates last year were Rasmussan, Vino, and Vino's country-mate/teammate; this year it was Ricco at the Tour, all caught], and the LA approach would provide many more clues if those clues are actually there.
                              It's not just the big names that were caught, there have already been another 11 or 12 doping cases in cycling this year. As long as that happens, the casual fan isn't going to believe that things are getting better. Those blood profiles are nice, but having Bjarne Riis as the manager isn't exactly a good basis for anti-doping campaigns.

                              I don't understand what cycling has to do with my interest in T&F.

                              And I'm also looking forward to his comeback because it will increase interest in the sport again, I just don't think it will have much of an impact on (anti-)doping in general.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X