Jump to content

How Lance Armstrong prepares for the Tour de France


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Try this: Farv sux, Armstrong can still compete. He recovered from a broken collarbone in less than 30 days. 40 y.o.? Shit, most 20-30 y.o. pros can't do that.

 

We shall see. Tour starts on Sat. The itt will be a decent barometer for the rest of the race, but a lot can happen once the mt. stages begin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, Armstrong's still 37, and Favre is still 39.

 

I originally associated Favre and Armstrong because they're two guys who really should have stayed retired, in my opinion. Both still have enough skills to compete, but both have managed to tarnish their own legacies in their respective sports, and haven't exactly been welcomed back with open arms (despite what the media want you to believe).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a zombie...ddduuuu.....mmmmmmm....Lance Armstrong is a good. he is good....ddduuuuu...mmmmmmm...so is Brett Favre....duhhh...mmmmm

 

ah, the media, blame it on the media. I cannot take ownership of my thought, the media did it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought he prepared by doing lots of HGH, steroids, and epogen

 

Yes! This was my first thought when I saw this thread, and I am happy someone else went the smartass route.

 

--Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely absurd. Your wild claims about the 2008 Tour riders are completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, except the desperate fingerpointing accusations of the utterly unreliable Bernard Kohl, trying to minimize his admitted drugging by claiming that "everybody does it." You're the delusional one, living in a fantasyland where by watching tv carefully you're able to successfully obtain positive drug tests for 200-some cyclists. Your opinions of Armstrong's success are more of the same -- speculation by the ignorant. The fact that you'd bring up his personal life as evidence that he cheated his way to 7 Tour de France victories just shows your claims are rooted in your vindictive dislike of the man rather than any science.

 

 

BTW, I've followed Armstrong's career before he was even a full time cyclist, and was just a tri geek. I don't watch much on TV, I'm to busy actually doing it.

Having participated in high end athletics for 30 years, and raced bicycles for more than 20, one doesn't need to be a genius to survey the landscape of sport

and see PED usage is the norm in upper level professional athletics. There's a reason recent most grand tour winners have been enshrouded in controversy. Not even

to forget that this usage is repeatedly proven to be systematic through scandals like Puerto, Kohl's revelations, the recent Quickstep shoe that fell, every

Armstrong domestique being disgraced by drug scandals (Heras, Landis, Hamilton, Andreau), sworn testimony as to things that were done or said, and didn't

Betsy Andreau just win some court settlement on the very topic..? Plus even in this country there has been systematic doping of national team riders.

 

It has nothing to do with vindictive dislike. Those are the silly words of someone with nothing to say. The debunking of mythologies does nothing to tarnish

athletic achievement. Sport is hard enough without needing it to be hyperbolic or rooted in some unobtainable genetic achievement, that simply sets

standards unobtainable without PED usage. It simply sets a standard that kids, and young adults to follow need to take health risks to even think about

chasing their dreams.

 

Now if you'll excuse me I'm off to win a national title but I need pancakes first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely absurd. Your wild claims about the 2008 Tour riders are completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, except the desperate fingerpointing accusations of the utterly unreliable Bernard Kohl, trying to minimize his admitted drugging by claiming that "everybody does it." You're the delusional one, living in a fantasyland where by watching tv carefully you're able to successfully obtain positive drug tests for 200-some cyclists. Your opinions of Armstrong's success are more of the same -- speculation by the ignorant. The fact that you'd bring up his personal life as evidence that he cheated his way to 7 Tour de France victories just shows your claims are rooted in your vindictive dislike of the man rather than any science.

What flavor is that Kool-Aid?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if you'll excuse me I'm off to win a national title but I need pancakes first.

 

I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely absurd. Your wild claims about the 2008 Tour riders are completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, except the desperate fingerpointing accusations of the utterly unreliable Bernard Kohl, trying to minimize his admitted drugging by claiming that "everybody does it." You're the delusional one, living in a fantasyland where by watching tv carefully you're able to successfully obtain positive drug tests for 200-some cyclists. Your opinions of Armstrong's success are more of the same -- speculation by the ignorant. The fact that you'd bring up his personal life as evidence that he cheated his way to 7 Tour de France victories just shows your claims are rooted in your vindictive dislike of the man rather than any science.

Good lord, dude.

 

I'm surprised you were able to step off of Lance's dick long enough to post these comments.

 

The guy is a success story when you consider the cancer and such. But I think it's pretty obvious that he used some steroids. Be realistic, man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's.

 

while it's true old guys do test positive each year, for the most part training time and intensity trump the need for drugs on thus level. There's simply not enough on the line to make it a worthwhile endeavor. It's not like some 45 year old is getting

signed to a uci team. A friend if mine did get bumped up at the worlds last year, fro

4th to 3rd, because one of the podium finishers tested positive.

 

I was the number one ranked rider I'm my category last year, and there are enough people here who know me (for real) that I don't really need to blow smoke up my own ass. Still being the fastest old guy on a given day is different than being a 20 year old cat 1 trying to make it to the next level.

 

I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's.

 

while it's true old guys do test positive each year, for the most part training time and intensity trump the need for drugs on thus level. There's simply not enough on the line to make it a worthwhile endeavor. It's not like some 45 year old is getting

signed to a uci team. A friend if mine did get bumped up at the worlds last year, fro

4th to 3rd, because one of the podium finishers tested positive.

 

I was the number one ranked rider I'm my category last year, and there are enough people here who know me (for real) that I don't really need to blow smoke up my own ass. Still being the fastest old guy on a given day is different than being a 20 year old cat 1 trying to make it to the next level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was the number one ranked rider I'm my category last year, and there are enough people here who know me (for real) that I don't really need to blow smoke up my own ass. Still being the fastest old guy on a given day is different than being a 20 year old cat 1 trying to make it to the next level.

 

 

So to paraphrase: everybody who's faster than you is doped up on EPO, and you're completely above suspicion. Got it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's.

 

 

what's your problem? maybe find some facts to back up why you don't think there's doping in the sport and post about that instead of being whatever you want to call this?

 

and ummmm, yeah spawn's dad is a cyclist and will be racing for a national title tomorrow. and i'm pretty sure what he said was that for a lot of athletes it isn't worth it, but one shouldn't be so naive about the fact that it happens.

 

calm down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...