Didn't the "great" Marco use PEDs, like Pharmstrong? Just sayingBasically my point is what TdF champion in recent years has not done drugs. One's use doesn't excuse somebody else's use - instead it is very frustrating as a fan of pro cycling to think they all do it.-the Professor
Yep, he was actually disqualified the day after I saw him for having too high a hematocrit level. But like so many others he never actually tested positive for anything eitherHe paid the ultimate price though when like a few others his depression led to a cocaine overdose. I hate to say this but all that made him more human.Pharmstrong needs to man up and take responsibility for what he's done and stop hiding behind his crown.Amphetamine use starting after WWII and many top riders got caught or were surrounded by some controversy.Pharmstrong brought big money corruption to the sport and big money lies. 196 days of racing the Tour and not one "bad" day? No sickness? No nothing. And to preach that you're the only clean one. I don't think so.I'm proud to say that when the Indurain years began I stopped following pro road cycling and didn't really start watching again until the final year of the Armstrong era. Not bummed at all that I "missed" the big doping years. He was an arrogant SOB when he was 17 and he still is today. Nothing to admire about him really.
Mark, here is the only thing I don't get about your comments. "Pharmstrong brought big money corruption to the sport and big money lies." You seem to be saying Armstrong made the doping worse. When it has gone on (in bunches) before him. The Festina affair happeneded before his victories. Pantani happened before his victories. Delgado in '88. The rapid rise of Chiapucci in '90. Rii's confession about his '96 title.Again, sadly I do believe Armstrong's titles need to be stripped and I am not defending him. And I very much agree with this statement, "to preach that you're the only clean one. I don't think so.".I just don't understand how you started watching after his last year, when there are still multiple dopers present.
You're right, my statements are probably driven more by emotion than by fact.US doping started back in the 1984 Olympics by then national team coach Eddie Borysewicz. It was his training regiment that I used as a junior racer. At that point in international racing the drug use I remember hearing about was amphetamine use. Eddy B though, employed what is now known as blood doping. The US won quite a few medals with riders that were blood doped.Fast forward to the late '80's. Lance Pharmstrongs first professional team was the Montgomery Securities team run by Eddy B and Tom Weisel. Montgomery Securities later became US Postal and then Discovery.I've read recently that Tom Weisel may be the guy the Feds are pointing fingers at on the investigation, not the riders.Now when I say "Lance brought big money corruption and big money lies" maybe I should say "The team ". But the international popularity that was the Lance/Livestrong brand allowed him access to finances to do things in professional cycling that no other athlete before his time could. It blew up from there.Is he any more guilty or innocent than any other athlete of the era? No. But I believe he had more resources available to him to launch much more extensive cover up operations.Emotionally charged? Yes.
Very true."But I believe he had more resources available to him to launch much more extensive cover up operations."How else does somebody explain that almost everybody who has finished on the podium with him (the years he won) was caught or forced to admit infractions.I do wonder what will happen with the Livestrong brand. I hope his cheating isn't explained away with "he did so much for cancer". Ends don't justify the means.
Good find Vaughn, speaks volumes of what USA Cycling has become
Post a Comment