UCI Announcement: ‘Win-at-all-costs’ Armstrong stripped and banned
Lance Armstrong has been stripped of his Tour De France titles (AAP)
Related coverage
Drug cheat Lance Armstrong’s doping program bore testimony to the disgraced cycling champion’s win-at-all-costs attitude, the head of the International Cycling Union (UCI), Pat McQuaid, said on Monday.
“We’re looking at an enormous, sophisticated doping program. It was win-at-all costs,” said the Irishman, who took over the UCI presidency shortly after the US rider’s seventh and final Tour de France win.
The UCI said it would not contest sanctions already handed down by the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA), stripping the cancer survivor of all of his results since August 1998 and earning him a ban for life.
Many of Armstrong’s former staff and team-mates testified against the Texan, and while McQuaid thanked them for speaking out, he said he was horrified to read the USADA report.
“I have to say and admit, as a (former) cyclist and coming from a cycling family, I was sickened by what I read in the USADA report,” he told a news conference in Geneva.
In particular, he said he was baffled that someone like Armstrong’s former team-mate David Zabriskie could be pressured into taking performance-enhancing drugs.
“The way he was coerced and forced into doping is just mind-boggling. I just found it hard to understand,” said McQuaid.
In an interview with AFP, McQuaid claimed the USADA dossier suggested that many of Armstrong’s former team-mates at US Postal had not set out to cheat.
“In fairness, when reading the affidavits you realise that most of the guys who were on that team, had no intention getting into doping,” said McQuaid.
“They were coerced into it and even one or two were forced into it.
But “they took that decision, and then they did it in a very covert way, trying to beat the system, at all times working to beat the system.
“I don’t think you can blame the authorities for what these guys were doing and I think it’s wrong for these guys to try and do that.
“The athletes of today don’t want to get into doping, and the structures that are being built around athletes by their professional teams now are much better than they were in those days.
“Structures of support, not structures of doping as they were in the USPS team.”
McQuaid said the UCI would now convene its management committee to discuss how to deal with issues, including the re-attribution of titles and prize money from races.
But he hit out at those who had benefited financially from cheating.
“A lot of them (cyclists and teams) made a lot of money out of their cheating at the time,” he added. “None of them has apologised to the UCI, to the sport, to the fans or to the stakeholders.
“None of them are offering that money back to the organisers. These guys have cheated and I feel sorry for the guys who raced clean. They must be sore now, and I empathise with these guys,” he added. “They have every right to be sore.”
Asked about the legacy of Armstrong, McQuaid said: “Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling. He deserves to be forgotten in cycling.”
© AFP 2013
Passionate about your cycling? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily cycling email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
The Crowd Says (52) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Cycling, Lance Armstrong
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:02am
Kasey said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:02am | Report comment
You may laugh at my naivety(hindsight is a wonderful thing), but this has all hit me like a tonne of bricks. As a cancer survivor myself and a cycling fan, I really wanted to believe in the sporting miracle that was Armstrong’s story. To have that rug pulled from underneath me is akin to finding out that Santa Claus isn’t real. LA has lied, cheated and spat on the very people he claimed to champion – cancer survivors.
IMO The very least he can do is to publically admit his sins and beg forgiveness. His public stance since these allegations surfaced indicate that I’ll be waiting a long time for that apology, best not to hold my breath.
One thing that cannot be taken away from him is that he did beat cancer. That alone would have made him a hero and still has currency for me. I will continue to live strong and continue to enjoy riding my bike.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:12am
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Kasey I’m a cynic. I’m not going to brag and say “I knew it all along”. But for me, when there’s smoke, there’s fire. And there was too much smoke.
However my biggest problem with Lance is how he let people like you down. He lied over and over – repeated the lies and set up systems to protect his lies. He’s the worst sort of liar – one who does it cold-heartedly and solely for his own benefit.
Don’t worry, there are other heroes to draw inspiration from.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:44am
Pot Stirrer said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:44am | Report comment
I could be wrong but i thought i read somewhere that he got his cancer from the drugs he was taking, which is prob why he was able to beat it.
October 25th 2012 @ 12:52am
joeb said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:52am | Report comment
PS, “We now know Armstrong’s seven victories weren’t genuine, but what’s more damning is that a man in remission for cancer would risk his health with dangerous drugs. Indeed, a Sports Illustrated article last year reported that Armstrong’s doping doctor, Michele Ferrari, was worried his cocktails of performance-enhancing drugs had helped cause the cancer.”
From The Age: “There can be no remorse when the cheat has no conscience,” October 24, 2012, By Mark Coultan
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/there-can-be-no-remorse-when-the-cheat-has-no-conscience-20121023-283cr.html
Armstrong facing big financial fall out
http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/40505/armstrong-facing-big-financial-fall-out
“Armstrong, who reportedly has an estimated net worth of $125 million, has already taken a financial hit, as high-profile sponsors including sportswear firm Nike have dropped him from marketing campaigns.”
‘The head of the World Anti-Doping Agency, John Fahey, said Tuesday that the sport’s administrators had to take responsibility for that time when “everybody doped”, despite UCI president Pat McQuaid’s insistence that only riders were to blame.
Fahey told Australia’s Fox Sports that cycling would only regain credibility when the senior officials on watch during the “debacle” were removed.’
October 25th 2012 @ 3:31am
dasilva said | October 25th 2012 @ 3:31am | Report comment
So far I don’t think there are any evidence that PED cause testicular cancer.
There are evidence leading steroids to prostate cancer kidney cancer and Liver cancer but not testicular cancer
the only real link I have found is that steroids used can cause testicular atrophy as a side effect and there are weak evidence (which is basically a shown association but not causation) that testicular atrophy is a risk factor of testicular cancer but that’s mostly theoretical and not based on clinical trial and strong evidence.
Still someone who recovered from cancer taking something that increased risk of other type of cancer even if not testicular cancer is pretty hypocritical thing to do when you are campaigning on general cancer awareness (i mean livestrong isn’t just advocating for testicular cancer sufferers but cancer sufferers in general)
then again, I’m quite sure there are cancer suffers out there who still smoke so I don’t think this is that big of an issue.
October 25th 2012 @ 3:47am
dasilva said | October 25th 2012 @ 3:47am | Report comment
By the way the idea that if something is carcinogenic for one type of cancer and therefore must be carcinogenic to other type of cancer is not true at all (I have heard people say that because steroids increase risk fo certain types of cancer such as prostate and therefore there should be still be suspicious for testicular cancer). That doesn’t work that way
It may surprise poeple to knwo that cigarrette smoking which increase the risk of lung cancer actually decrease the risk of developing breast cancer (of course the increase risk of lung cancer is much larger than the decrease risk of breast cancer and so smoking is still not recommended) but the point is different type of cancer don’t necessarily have shared risk factors.
Also steroids despite having increased risk of certain type of cancer are regularly used in cancer therapy in treating cancer pain especially in reducing pain in advance cancer. It’s quite possible that Armstrong probably took steroids during his treatment of cancer because he had cancer that was advance and metastasize to his brain. Steroids are used to reduce swelling in the brain caused by tumors to reduce pain.
So I don’t think that steroids are an issue at least in terms of testicular cancer
October 26th 2012 @ 8:26am
joeb said | October 26th 2012 @ 8:26am | Report comment
Thanks for that DaSilva, good stuff.
Read what Greg LeMond is saying? He’s demanding current UCI chief Pat McQuaid resign, quote: “LeMond, who won the Tour in 1986, 1989 and 1990, called McQuaid and his predecessor as UCI chief, Hein Verbruggen, “the corrupt part of the sport… you and your buddy Hein have destroyed the sport”.”
http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/40549/open-letter-lemond-to-mcquaid
He might have a point.
Try this one too:
David Millar to the fore as hypocrisy runs wild
by: MATTHEW SYED
From: The Australian
October 25, 2012 12:00AM
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2012/10/24/1226502/645929-121025-david-millar.jpg
Former doper David Miller has turned anti-drug campaigner. Source: AFP
DAVID Millar is an outspoken campaigner on drugs in sport. He has written newspaper articles, a book, and he tweets a lot, too.
Yesterday, his column was headlined “The Horrors of the Lance Armstrong Doping Era must never be Forgotten”.
The Lance Armstrong Doping Era. It has a nice ring, doesn’t it? And, in one respect, Millar is spot-on. The damage wreaked upon the sport by its most famous practitioner should be uppermost in the minds of the authorities as they try to get a grip on doping.
The way in which the US Postal team avoided positive tests, for example, provides a template on how to tighten protocols.
But what about the label itself? Is it fair for Millar to characterise the past decade and a half as “his doping era”, referring to the Texan? Or is it a little misleading, perhaps deliberately so?
It is worth remembering doping existed in cycling for decades before Armstrong first mounted a bike as a 12-year-old. It was widespread before he first won the Tour de France, too. Do names such as Tommy Simpson and Marco Pantani ring a bell?
Even in the “Armstrong era”, doping was rife in teams that had no association with the Texan. According to Tyler Hamilton, a former teammate, 85 to 90 per cent of the peloton were taking illegal substances. Most of these had not been pressured by Armstrong, leant on by Armstrong or cowed by Armstrong. Some of them had probably never even talked to him.
It is comforting, perhaps, to think that dozens of innocents were pressured into wrongdoing by a tyrant, but it is also simplistic. It doesn’t even make sense when applied to Armstrong’s comrades. Do you really think that those who have signed affidavits against Armstrong would have refused to dope had they ridden for other teams? Do you think that Hamilton, Floyd Landis and co were corrupted by Armstrong alone? Or do you suppose that the problem runs infinitely deeper than one man?
One of those who doped without any obvious encouragement from Armstrong was Millar.
French police found two empty vials of Eprex, a brand of the blood-boosting EPO, and two used syringes hidden on the bookshelves of his apartment in Biarritz in 2004. Armstrong was a thousand miles away when Millar first plunged the needle.
So are we not entitled to say that the doping era was yours, too, David?
When Millar was first accused, he protested his innocence with all the eloquence that he now brings to his anti-doping campaign. Confronted with the testimony of Philippe Gaumont, a teammate who said that Millar had taken drug trips by mixing Stilnox with ephedrine, he reacted with Armstrong-style fury, calling him a lunatic.
When Millar was suspended for two years, he fought his sentence all the way to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. He even managed to get his suspension backdated to when he fessed up. But the confession took place only after Millar had been caught red-handed and informed that his phone had been tapped for months by French police.
Armstrong, for his part, has yet to own up, but it is not difficult to see why. He is almost certainly worried that a confession would give carte blanche to former sponsors and the Tour to sue him for millions in ill-gotten earnings.
But where is the moral consistency? Millar wrote a bestselling book about his doping past, as did Hamilton and others. But where are the proceeds? Have they been ploughed back into the sport to fund the doping educational programs that they tell us are so important? Or are they sitting in their ever-expanding bank accounts? And where is the income that they pocketed while riding high on drugs?
When Millar started on EPO in 2003, he was earning €250,000 a year. After receiving advice on doping from Jesus Losa, the doctor of the Euskaltel Euskadi team, his annual earnings soared to €800,000. Millar won the time trial at the world championships in Canada (he estimated that drugs improved his time by 25sec) and celebrated his triumph at the Bellagio Casino in Las Vegas. If it is payback time for Armstrong, isn’t it payback time for Millar and the other dopers, too?
It is not so much the anger levelled at Armstrong that should worry us (the anger is justified); it is the hypocrisy. Doped riders who have testified against Armstrong are being held up as heroes. Support staff are characterised as having been held to ransom; and cheats who are making a big living from a sport that they almost destroyed are shamelessly parading their moral outrage.
This is something that Millar, in particular, is becoming rather good at. This week, he tweeted that Rabobank’s decision to curtail its sponsorship of cycling was “sickening”. Few even raised an eyebrow at Millar’s continuing attempt to position himself as the conscience of the sport that he betrayed.
Of course, Millar has seduced many observers by arguing that he was corrupted by the pernicious culture of cycling, and by the realisation that he could not win without taking drugs. His memoir was sufficiently eloquent to get shortlisted for a literary award. But isn’t this precisely what Armstrong will say, if and when he comes clean?
The book – hypothetically titled: “It’s not about the EPO” – almost writes itself. “I took drugs because everyone else was at it (Landis is on the record as saying that Armstrong took the plunge only after he realised that doping was pervasive). Once I started winning, I realised I had the power to do something really important via my foundation.
“I believed that winning was justified by the positives of raising awareness of cancer. And I tried to silence other people from telling the truth because I knew it would damage the things I believe in. If I acted as a bully, I’m sorry. I was only motivated by the overriding imperative of the Livestrong campaign.”
Quite simple, really. And perhaps Armstrong, if he writes such a book, will believe every word, as Millar and Hamilton seem to believe their self-serving confessionals. But we should be smarter than this. They cheated out of selfishness and because of a culture that had turned a terrible act into a condonable one.
That is the real lesson of the recent history of road cycling. Doping predated Armstrong and extended beyond Armstrong. He was not the orchestrator of more than one strand in a far wider web. The vast majority of those who took drugs were not victims, but authors of their own destiny. They betrayed their sport, just as Lance did. But few want to hear this. We have been mesmerised by the story of the Christ-like figure who morphed into the satanic parody of today. By personalising the moral breakdown of a sporting culture, we have been handed a convenient scapegoat, together with an exquisitely facile explanation. So, with sad predictability, the Texan has become the fall guy, while Millar and his ilk revel in their ever-growing kudos.
The Times
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/david-millar-to-the-fore-as-hypocrisy-runs-wild/story-fnb64oi6-1226502649345
October 26th 2012 @ 8:52am
aussie sports lover said | October 26th 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Dasilva, Just one point of contention, there has been some studies in the past that has linked reduced risk of breast cancer with smoking but there has also been studies that show no risk and more recent studies that show increased risk. it is incorrect to say that smoking reduces the risk of breast cancer. Probably the only thing you can say about smoking is that it is not a big risk factor for breast cancer either way. Sorry to be nitpicking, but i think it’s important to not give people the idea that smoking reduces the risk of breast cancer.
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:35pm
Steve said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:35pm | Report comment
Kasey, decent people usually look for the best in others, and it’s a rare man indeed who can lie and cheat with the utter shamelessness and arrogance Armstrong does, so I don’t think it’s naivety on your part.
There’s plenty of evidence to discredit Armstrong the man and Armstrong the athlete, but I haven’t seen anything to discredit the message of living strong. I’ve seen plenty to discredit the way cycling has been run, but I haven’t seen anything yet that tells me the actual sport of cycling itself isn’t worthwhile.
It will take a while to ‘clean house’, but hopefully some good will come out of this mess and we’ll end up with clean, competitive cycling.
In the meantime, continuing to ride your bike and living strong is about the best thing you can do!
October 23rd 2012 @ 5:21pm
Kasey said | October 23rd 2012 @ 5:21pm | Report comment
Thank you Steve one doesn’t expect kindness on t’interwebz;) I will learn from this and hopefully next time I place my faith in someone, I will have my eyes open before I make the leap.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:39am
sheek said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
There are many tragedies to this story, with one of them wonderfully articulated by Kasey above.
On another level, Armstrong denied a maximum of 7 legitimate riders the pleasure of standing on the podium, wearing the laurel wreath & receiving the crowd’s generous applause of being a genuine Tour de France winner.
It is here that drug cheats must be exposed BEFORE they win, not after.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:50am
aussie sports lover said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
The problem is finding another legitimate rider to stand on the podium. We all know how endemic it is now during LA’s era – how far back does it extend? The antidoping blood test administered by both USADA/UCI seem to be a farce. Yes I agree with Kasey beating cancer is definitely an inspiration but have to disagree on one point – LA did champion the cancer sufferer/survivor’s cause through his Foundation work,raising $600 million dollars, visiting cancer sufferers etc. IMO, ihe’s still a hero to cancer sufferers, and people should not underestimate his achievements when it comes to cancer advocacy and raising funds.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:01am
sheek said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:01am | Report comment
No, they won’t do that (anoint another winner) simply because it’s too difficult to know who was the first legitimate rider home in those years. Was it 4th, or 6th, or 7th, or 10th? Nobody can answer this.
This is why the years 1999-2005 will be left blank. It’s unsatisfactory, but it’s also the only practical course available.
1999-2005 Tour de France winners – ALL BLANK.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:19am
Kasey said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:19am | Report comment
I currently am using my experiences as a cancer survivor to be an ambassador for the Cancer Council of SA so I’d never sell short the charity work LA has done in his life, but one thing you and many others need to be aware of is LiveStrong is not dedicated to curing cancer.
It is an advocacy/awareness campaign and its funding is not directed towards finding a cure. Primarily it is about removing any stigma that existed about having cancer and supporting those that already have it by providing a measure of hope – largely successful IMO) and lobbying governments at various levels to put more of their money towards funding scientists in their quest to find a cure.
A charity like the various state Cancer Councilsunder the Cancer Council of Australia banner funds the Cancer helpline(staffed by oncology Nurses – thy arent cheap!) and over 80% of the fundraising by CCA goes direct to funding the search for a cure. If you are of a mind to donate, you could do a lot worse than supporting your state Cancer council.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:55am
sheek said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:55am | Report comment
Kasey,
LA used cancer as his crutch or justification to make millions. Okay, he did great stuff inspiring people like you to confront & deal with your cancer.
But he cynical manipulated the whole process all the same. In his mind dope cheating was okay because he was doing something good with his cancer awareness program. But make no mistake, he was filling his own pockets all the while. And hurting innocent people, like drug-clean riders, along the way.
The cancer side is entirely different. Let’s just concentrate on the drugs in sport issue.
There’s a lot of things wrong with the world, but two or more wrongs don’t make a right. The means does not justify the ends in most cases.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:11am
Kasey said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:11am | Report comment
I have to agree with you sheek; I started smelling a rat when Lance ceased his out right denials of PED use and started deflecting with (paraphrased)” stop chasing me – if you bring me down, think of all the cancer survivors who’ll lose their inspiration.” He used his charity as a shield, to beat people over he head if they asked too may pointed questions. That is why I said in my 1st post that he lied, cheated and spat on the very people he claimed to champion – cancer survivors. He used us and our sh*tty situation to cover his own Arse. Dog act.
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:27pm
Steve said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
I agree completely, Kasey. I’d much rather see money go to support cancer research and genuine support than “advocacy” and lobbying.
Particulary when some of that Livestrong lobbying clout was apparently used to lobby to remove funding to USADA (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303612804577531353567249064.html).
It will be interesting to see if any reporters are willing to have another good look at Livestrong and where there money goes.
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:22am
FrancisC said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:22am | Report comment
I know this is a low blow. I don’t wish cancer on anybody. But I will pose a question – did he really have cancer? was the cancer caused by the drugs or the doping program he undertook prior to doping even more to win 7 TDFs?
I can’t help being a skeptic. I am really sorry.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:00am
Dingo said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
I think it is a legitimate question. With the lies and cheating that has been and continues to be the L.A story, how do we know what is the truth?
It was incredibly inspirational that a cancer sufferer could overcome what he supposedly did to go on and win the 7 TDF’s, but now we are finding out what he was involved in and sadly, as more of the story comes out, this question is going to be asked more often.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:14am
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:14am | Report comment
You know I’ve been wondering the same thing. With all the other lies, who knows where it ends.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:19am
hawker said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:19am | Report comment
of course he had cancer, if he didn’t he probably would’ve ‘won’ another 4-5 TDFs in the late 90s…
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:40am
Kasey said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:40am | Report comment
You know I never thought to even ask that question. The horrible feeling that you get in your stomach when the doctor tells you that you have cancer is not something that I would wish upon my worst enemy.
It is unconscionable to me to even begin to think he lied about that too. Of course the question needs to be asked, but that should be much easier to answer…Doctors and Hospitals have records. They will be protected under doctor/patient privilege, but once somebody asks that question publically, if LA cares about his charity as much as he claims, surely he will go the extra yards to demonstrate that he was telling the truth about that at least.
October 24th 2012 @ 2:07am
AVictory said | October 24th 2012 @ 2:07am | Report comment
Take a look at 4 Corners website, it has a whole 45 minutes on demand video on this scandal, there are plenty of witnesses to his cancer suffering, one lady witnesses to him admitting to the doctor that he took a whole list of banned substances at the time that he was diagnosed, she hates lance and lances hates him, he would have never admitted to taking these substances had he been faking it…
When it comes to life and death, cheating in sport is insignificant. At the time, all Lance wanted to do was live.
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:42pm
Dingo said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
I can only imagine the horror when told of having cancer and surely to God no one would stoop so low as to fabricate an illness like that in order to use it to their advantage in business/sport/charity etc.
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:46pm
FrancisC said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
would there be a possibility (that everything was “well planned” to win everyone’s heart) now given that we know the character that he has now based on those reports? Again, just posing these questions.
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:54pm
Kasey said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:54pm | Report comment
Its not so much horror, just an overwhelming fear that grips you, the “sh*t I might die sooner than I had planned” thought runs through your head, then you think about all the things you never quite got around to doing or seeing. Will I ever get to see my beloved AUFC win a championship? Who knows? I’m not dead yet and there’s always hope.
In my case I had to snap back into reality pretty quickly, mum was in tears, gotta stay strong to help the olds keep an even keel.
October 23rd 2012 @ 7:56pm
Dingo said | October 23rd 2012 @ 7:56pm | Report comment
Kasey, all the best with your battle, I really hope you have a long and fulfilling life.
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:07pm
dasilva said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:07pm | Report comment
Although i will point out that men with testicular atrophy there are an association withf testicular cancer (although the studies say that this is considered a weak evidence. So there is a correlation but causation hasn’t been proven)
A side effect of anabolic steroid use is testicular atrophy.
Although saying that, there still no trials that link chronic steroid use with testicular cancer so this is mostly just theoretical links with cancer rather than back by statistical evidence
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:57pm
Kev said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
It’s a fair question. If you’re prepared to lie about doping for years what else are you prepared to lie about? I wouldn’t put anything past him considering when there are millions of dollars up for grabs.
October 23rd 2012 @ 2:55pm
dasilva said | October 23rd 2012 @ 2:55pm | Report comment
I know people are speculating the idea that the performance enhancing drugs caused the cancer that Armstrong has but I don’t think there is any evidence of that
Human Growth Hormones and Steroids are linked with increased risk of prostate cancer (especially the idea that if you have prostate cancer, taking steroids and HGH makes the prostate cancer grow faster) amongst others but there hasn’t been any links with testicular cancer.
Although the fact that he was knowingly taking substances that are link to certain types of cancer (even if it’s not testicular cancer) after surviving cancer is a bit dodgy
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:12pm
dasilva said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
I was looking up at the guidelines for doctors in dealing with PED abuse amongst sportsman
one of signs and symptoms that hints towards steroids abuse was this
“narcissistic personality (common)
Steroid use may uncover a narcissistic personality.”
I had a good laugh at that
October 23rd 2012 @ 10:33am
Bob Anderson said | October 23rd 2012 @ 10:33am | Report comment
When will we find out which of the big name pro swimmers are drug cheats? If you believe that Michael Phelps is clean, I’ve got some property I’d like to sell you. Don’t trust any of these “superman/woman” athletes who are so far ahead of the competition. Something isn’t right when anyone is overly dominant for a long period of time.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:16am
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
What about Thorpie then?
I think he was a freak largely because of his physique, plus his beautiful stroke. Hands and feet that big, he has an in-built advantage over the others.
And can I add – when Thorpie was at his peak, he told them to freeze his blood samples – so they could be re-tested later if necessary to prove he was clean.
Contrast this with Lance who refused to consent to his samples being re-tested a few years later when an EPO test had been created.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:22am
hawker said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:22am | Report comment
mate your kidding yourself if you think australians aren’t as using drugs as much as anyone else
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:32am
sheek said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:32am | Report comment
Hawker,
It pays to read what people are writing. Nowhere does James say Aussie athletes are ALL clean. He uses one Aussie athlete – Thorpe – as an example of an athlete with in-built physical advantages.
Nothing more, nothing less. But sure, Aussie athletes are potentially as culpable as anyone else.
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:37pm
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:37pm | Report comment
I’m saying one athlete’s dominance does not automatically mean they are doped. Thorpie was my example.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:20am
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
What about David Rusiha, who front-ran the Olympic 800 final and won in a world record time?
What about Usain Bolt?
What about Senegal-born immigrant British middle distance runner Mo Farah, who won the 5km and 10km for England?
They’re all dominant yet I, a cynic, think they’re all clean, with different justifications.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:29am
WoobliesFan said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
x2
8 gold Bejing….6 at Athens. Get the hell out of here!…..we was on it for sure……..100 percent.
…..add Bolt to that.
Pro sports = drugs……its systematic.
Sprinting, cycling, weighting, swimming and bodybuilding, who are the undisputed leaders in drug research and management. BALCO a perfect example….all Cali baby!……centre of the world, where all the best stuff comes from.
1988 Seoul 100m (watch the doco)……pre-1984 US athletics mass drug fails ……Le Tour…..Jones, Kersey, Montgomery, Lewis…..NHL / US college system…..East Germans….Chinese swimmers (15 yr old girl swims fastest 50m leg in all of history?)
HA!
I’m with you bobby – going into real estate to sell property…..I’m going to make a fortune give the naivety of so many in this world.
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:38pm
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
Bolt ran 19.80 for 200 as a skinny 17yo. Was he already on drugs? His time progressions are consistent with a clean athlete.
I’m not saying he’s clean, who knows that, but I’m saying it’s not a clear-cut example.
October 23rd 2012 @ 2:28pm
Brendon said | October 23rd 2012 @ 2:28pm | Report comment
Apparently kids from poor countries like Jamaica have been doping since they were young teenagers.
I love this argument. Lance Armstrong was a drug therefore ALL athletes are drug cheats.
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:56pm
hawker said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
Its a lot easier to buy gear in developing countries. In MLB Alex Rodriguez’s cousin bought steriods for him over the counter in puerto rico.
October 23rd 2012 @ 2:33pm
Brendon said | October 23rd 2012 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Phelps is clean. The improvements in suits helped him greatly in Beijing 2008. Notice how he lost his two longest events, the 200 fly and 400IM at London. 7 of Phelps’ gold have been relays.
Phelps came 5th in the 200 fly in Sydney 2000 as a 15year old. He had been considered a freak and potentially the greatest swimmer even before that.
Phelps and Bolt didnt just improve, they were great from their early days.
October 23rd 2012 @ 7:49pm
Dingo said | October 23rd 2012 @ 7:49pm | Report comment
The “greatest” legacy that Armstrong will leave is one of distrust towards exceptional athletes. Whenever there is a brilliant athlete that is in another class, people will always wonder if we are witnessing another drug cheat at work.
October 23rd 2012 @ 9:23pm
aussie sports lover said | October 23rd 2012 @ 9:23pm | Report comment
sure it’s probably not fair to genuine freak athletes. But it raises question about other sports, for example tennis with recent allegations of doping against Spanish players by Yannick Noah with Nadal coming out in strong defiance. There has been very little in the way of doping scandal from tennis but other players have stated it is there. I suspect doping is prevalent in elite sports, no where near as endemic as cycling, but more than what the public ever suspect.
October 23rd 2012 @ 11:26am
JJ said | October 23rd 2012 @ 11:26am | Report comment
look at this people … great display of how drug-induced the TDF really is … but does make you wonder if Cadel was clean (I mean, how is it possible to win the thing if not on something) …
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/lancearmstrong/9626520/Lance-Armstrong-How-Tour-de-Frances-recent-past-has-been-decimated-by-doping.html
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:21pm
garth said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
Maybe they should start declaring the person who came LAST the winner as they clearly are not cheating.
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:39pm
jameswm said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
or not cheating well enough
October 23rd 2012 @ 1:44pm
FrancisC said | October 23rd 2012 @ 1:44pm | Report comment
give them (the awards) to me… I will finish it (hopefully) in a year’s time. I am clean, the only drugs I will take would be paracetamol for pain.
but hold on, I got to reset time back first then I will ride my bike. I bet he wants to sing the song now – “if I could turn back time”.
October 23rd 2012 @ 2:54pm
aussie sports lover said | October 23rd 2012 @ 2:54pm | Report comment
Some people will still come last despite cheating. As Phil Liggett said, you can’t turn donkeys into race horses even with drugs.
From now on, all TFD winners should be assumed guilty until proven innocent. There will be a parallel drug testing process: UCI will now perform drug tests every hour on all Yellow Jerseys whilst USADA interviews team-mates (also called dob a mate). Where there are conflicting results, trust the dobbers.
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:12pm
Lats said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
Well I find it hard to believe any of them have ever been clean… so lets see how it pans out.
Can’t they retest Armstrongs old samples?? surely they must be able to detect something with all their new testing devices??
October 23rd 2012 @ 3:19pm
dasilva said | October 23rd 2012 @ 3:19pm | Report comment
The 1999 test sample has been retested and has shown evidence of EPO doping on it.The 1999 sample was tested as part of research in developing an EPO drug testing procedure.
It’s just that the official policy to store sample to be retested later when more advance drug testing procedures wasn’t enforced yet.
Lance “claimed” it was the sample being tampered with that resulted with the positive test
October 25th 2012 @ 9:01am
Big*Bear said | October 25th 2012 @ 9:01am | Report comment
Reading everyone’s comments just highlights how damaging drug abuse in sport really is.
We, the lovers of sport, and in my case, cycling, in particular, have been so badly let down I doubt anyone alive today will ever trust spectacular sporting results again. As a Brit, living in London, I now know just how special sport is to a community and a nation after the olympics this summer. To have my sense of well-being and utter joy sullied by people like Armstrong makes me so sad and downhearted it’s hard to put into words.
God only knows what sport will be like in the future but unless the sporting and civil authorities start to get their acts together and make sporting drug abuse a criminal offence (after all it is technically fraud) and start banging the perps up we, the punters, will always mistrust our sporting heroes.
Sadly, looking at the various stories around doping in cycling it appears that some countries (such as Spain) have been very lenient when it comes to laying down the law. I didn’t realise that Contador had been implicated in doping prior to his recent ban in Operación Puerto back in 2006 but was let off by the Spanish courts along with 2 other Spaniards a Portugeuse and an Aussie. One of the acquitted Spaniards, Beloki, is a possible recipient of 3 of the vacant TdF titles (2000, ’01, & ’02) as the only rider in the top three of those years not to have a doping case proven against them. At the time the UCI was very disappointed in the Spanish courts decision so it is unlikely Beloki will receive any of the titles, unless the UCI wants to have even more egg on its face.
What an awful way to round off what, for me, has been the most enjoyable sporting year of my 50 years.