I think it's time Lance Armstrong made France his bitch again

[JBauerisGod]

In today's team trial, Lance's team (Astana) had to make up 40 seconds in order for Lance to take the yellow jersey away from Saxo Bank's Fabian Cancellara. Essentially, Astana had to finish under 46:29.43 for Lance to go into the lead. Originally when Astana passed the line, the clock read 46:29.29 or something to that sort, but then the French officials said they had to go into review basically so they could fuck him over.

What do you know, after the commercial break, it turns out that they took a couple tenths off the time so that Lance wouldn't get the yellow. WTF. You would think electronic timing would be more accurate than a couple tenths...

Okay, I'm probably exaggerating, but it's still fun to hate France. Since Lance dominates "their" sport, France thinks it's alright to accuse him of cheating yet there has never been any hardcore substantial evidence that he has taken steroids. Fuck that.

I hope Lance wins the Tour just so he can stick it to that lame ass country again.

 

[Blade]

Well the frogs can't fight a war so I guess this is the only battle they can fight. I can't stand the french.

 

[Tailback U]

Lance Armstrong is the fucking man.

 

[Yawkey Way]

i'd watch Lance Armstrongs 1 minute commercial 60 times before i ever watched a television production in france.

 

[IamMedellin]

roids...

 

[JBauerisGod]

roids...

I refuse to believe it. Even if Lance came out and personally stated that he took steroids, I wouldn't believe it. His life story is too fucking amazing to be tarnished by that.

 

[Blade]

If I was to torture a Frog I would forego waterboarding and show them those commercials. Would'nt be long before they start divulging state secrets LOL

 

[Senser81]

In today's team trial, Lance's team (Astana) had to make up 40 seconds in order for Lance to take the yellow jersey away from Saxo Bank's Fabian Cancellara. Essentially, Astana had to finish under 46:29.43 for Lance to go into the lead. Originally when Astana passed the line, the clock read 46:29.29 or something to that sort, but then the French officials said they had to go into review basically so they could fuck him over.

What do you know, after the commercial break, it turns out that they took a couple tenths off the time so that Lance wouldn't get the yellow. WTF. You would think electronic timing would be more accurate than a couple tenths...

Okay, I'm probably exaggerating, but it's still fun to hate France. Since Lance dominates "their" sport, France thinks it's alright to accuse him of cheating yet there has never been any hardcore substantial evidence that he has taken steroids. Fuck that.

I hope Lance wins the Tour just so he can stick it to that lame ass country again.

I don't think it really matters if Lance has the Yellow jersey at this point. The breakaway he did on Day 2 was genius, because it separated him from Contador. I think that was more important than making up time in the Team Trial.

The doping accusations haven't really been brought up this year, probably because every rider but Lance has actually tested positive in the past couple years. It would still be interesting to find out what the deal was with Floyd Landis. I can't say if he was doping or not, since basically everyone was, but I find it hard to believe that there wasn't more outrage/discussion at the possibility of race officials tainting his sample.

 

[killgod]

I refuse to believe it. Even if Lance came out and personally stated that he took steroids, I wouldn't believe it. His life story is too fucking amazing to be tarnished by that.

the power of celebrity status :tocktock:

 

[JBauerisGod]

I don't think it really matters if Lance has the Yellow jersey at this point. The breakaway he did on Day 2 was genius, because it separated him from Contador. I think that was more important than making up time in the Team Trial.

The doping accusations haven't really been brought up this year, probably because every rider but Lance has actually tested positive in the past couple years. It would still be interesting to find out what the deal was with Floyd Landis. I can't say if he was doping or not, since basically everyone was, but I find it hard to believe that there wasn't more outrage/discussion at the possibility of race officials tainting his sample.

Very true. I'm just uncertain of how well Lance will perform in the mountains. I just want him to wear the jersey once in this Tour. If he gets to the mountains without the jersey, I'm worried that he may not wear it at all.

 

[IamMedellin]

the power of celebrity status :tocktock:

so true...

 

[FirstTimer]

He has openly admitted that he took steroids post-cancer to recover from surgery and get back into cycling shape. Of course that opens up the can of worms concerning where to draw the line between recovery and performance-enhancement, but he still did take steroids.

I would say the line is drawn when he tests at events and is clean and the only time it's known he took steroids was under the permission of doctors to help him recover........

I'd say the line is pretty clear.

 

[FirstTimer]

I'm not talking about the moral issue of taking steroids, I'm talking about the line between taking steroids to recover from an illness and taking steroids to enhance your performance in a sport.

That to me is a moral/ethical issue. Using steroids for legit reasons vs usuing steroids for selfish reasons of personnel gain.

So yes, Armstrong has never tested positive, but that doesn't mean that he did NOT use steroids to increase his abilities as a cyclist

There's no proof of that so I would say it does mean he did not use them to increase his abilities. So far I know of him using them to recover from cancer....


I don't see any red flags seeing as it's never been proven Lance used steroids for anything more than what his doctors prescribed them for. It's tough to argue Lance was "lucky" enough to get cancer to be able to do steroids to help him become a better cyclist.

 

[JBauerisGod]

Would taking steroids for six months or a year give him lifelong benefits? This is an honest question. If so, why would athletes continually use them in their professional careers when they could easily use them in their teens where they are not under the constant media attention?

Although Lance's success in the Tour was no where near as prominent before his cancer, he did pick up the World Cycling Championship and US National Championship in 1993. It's not as if he was some amateur who came from no where to win the Tour.

Regardless, Lance shouldn't be criticized for using steroids during his recovery even if it did lead to better performance. I'm sure the other riders would never want to be in Lance's situation in 1996 when he underwent treatment for cancer.

 

[Anthony]

 

[Senser81]

The line is blurred because it would be nearly impossible to separate his steroid use to recover from his illness and his steroid use making him a better cyclist.

Except that he used prescribed steroids to recover from cancer. You might have had a point if after Lance's recovery a number of other riders faked having life-threatening cancer in order to get this alleged "steroid performance boost" of yours...but since this didn't happen, you have no point.

You also have no specific evidence of anything. How long was Armstrong on steroids? How aggressive was his usage?

You make it seem as if Armstrong needed training wheels prior to recovering from cancer. He was actually the #1 ranked cyclist in the world, which was extremely impressive considering how young he was.

He was diagnosed with cancer in 1996, returned to cycling in 1997, but didn't win his first Tour de France until 1999. One would think that if Lance was aggressively using steroids during his cancer treatment, he would have won the Tour de France in 1997 and 1998 in record time. He struggled after he came back to cycling, and considered retiring.

 

[IamMedellin]

HA!

cant prove hes on steroids...

" the abscence of evidence is not the evidence of abscence"

JUICER!!!! LOL

 

[FirstTimer]

So you're saying that you don't see anything fishy with the disparity in his performance on the biggest cycling stage in the world before his illness and after his recovery, during which he admits to using steroids?

No. He took steroids prescribed by a doctor to recover from cancer treatment. I don't see anything fishy seeing as he's been tested and tested clean ever since his recovery and outside of baseless allegations from the French there is no proof he ever took them to aid athletic performance.

The line is blurred because it would be nearly impossible to separate his steroid use to recover from his illness and his steroid use making him a better cyclist.

No it's not blurred and it's easy to see the drawn line because once he returend to competition he was again under testing and always tested clean. This isn't that hard to grasp.

LOL at your argument hinging on Armstrong was lucky enough to nearly die and go through agressive chemo that broke his body down just so he coudl take prescribed steroids from a doctor to help recover.....then two years later win the Tour.

. I don't think that he was taking steroids to better himself at his sport, but rather that his taking steroids to recover from his illness helped make him the elite bike rider he became in his comeback.

He was an elite rider before he ever became ill. Ever think that perhaps the cancer in his body prevented him from training as well as he could have and held him back before his diagnosis?

Would taking steroids for six months or a year give him lifelong benefits? This is an honest question. If so, why would athletes continually use them in their professional careers when they could easily use them in their teens where they are not under the constant media attention?

Although Lance's success in the Tour was no where near as prominent before his cancer, he did pick up the World Cycling Championship and US National Championship in 1993. It's not as if he was some amateur who came from no where to win the Tour.

This

Except that he used prescribed steroids to recover from cancer. You might have had a point if after Lance's recovery a number of other riders faked having life-threatening cancer in order to get this alleged "steroid performance boost" of yours...but since this didn't happen, you have no point.

You also have no specific evidence of anything. How long was Armstrong on steroids? How aggressive was his usage?

You make it seem as if Armstrong needed training wheels prior to recovering from cancer. He was actually the #1 ranked cyclist in the world, which was extremely impressive considering how young he was.

He was diagnosed with cancer in 1996, returned to cycling in 1997, but didn't win his first Tour de France until 1999. One would think that if Lance was aggressively using steroids during his cancer treatment, he would have won the Tour de France in 1997 and 1998 in record time. He struggled after he came back to cycling, and considered retiring.

Oh..

And this.

 

[FirstTimer]

HA!

cant prove hes on steroids...

" the abscence of evidence is not the evidence of abscence"

JUICER!!!! LOL

Umm the evidence of abscence is the clean tests................So you have no argument.

 

[IamMedellin]

Umm the evidence of abscence is the clean tests................So you have no argument.

lmao...And you Know he's juicing!!!