# USPS's Exodus From the Vuelta



## _andrew_ (Jan 2, 2003)

I'm not sure if any of you have noticed this but since the incident with Hamilton, more and USPS riders have began pulling out of the Vuelta, It doesn't make sense for a team which is built arround the Grand Tours to be loosing riders at this rate. It just fuels my belief that Postal is runnign one of the smoothest and most secretaive doping programs in pro cycling. Armstrong is a once a year rider and in light of stricter doping controls has been racing less and less. Now that a HUGE name rider such as Hamilton has a Official doping charge on his record it would make sense for Postal to start pulling their riders out of major competitions, and then wait for the off season and go back to the lab to make sure their designer drugs are not going to be detected. I just want to know what others opinions are reggarding this and what you think of this 'coincidence'...


----------



## WalterJ (Sep 17, 2002)

Who has pulled out. I've noticed mostly T-Mobile riders exiting and most of them before the Hamilton results were announced. Though Vino pulled out today.


----------



## cannondale_boy (May 6, 2004)

_andrew_ said:


> I'm not sure if any of you have noticed this but since the incident with Hamilton, more and USPS riders have began pulling out of the Vuelta, It doesn't make sense for a team which is built arround the Grand Tours to be loosing riders at this rate. It just fuels my belief that Postal is runnign one of the smoothest and most secretaive doping programs in pro cycling. Armstrong is a once a year rider and in light of stricter doping controls has been racing less and less. Now that a HUGE name rider such as Hamilton has a Official doping charge on his record it would make sense for Postal to start pulling their riders out of major competitions, and then wait for the off season and go back to the lab to make sure their designer drugs are not going to be detected. I just want to know what others opinions are reggarding this and what you think of this 'coincidence'...


You say that this is your belief! Thats fine and your entitled. However, what facts do you have that they are doping? I hope there is a point here besides riders pulling out!


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

If it is your belief that "Postal is runnign one of the smoothest and most secretaive doping programs in pro cycling," what does it matter what anyone else thinks? It would be a waste of time for anyone to argue with you.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*golly you are right*



_andrew_ said:


> I'm not sure if any of you have noticed this but since the incident with Hamilton, more and USPS riders have began pulling out of the Vuelta, It doesn't make sense for a team which is built arround the Grand Tours to be loosing riders at this rate. It just fuels my belief that Postal is runnign one of the smoothest and most secretaive doping programs in pro cycling. Armstrong is a once a year rider and in light of stricter doping controls has been racing less and less. Now that a HUGE name rider such as Hamilton has a Official doping charge on his record it would make sense for Postal to start pulling their riders out of major competitions, and then wait for the off season and go back to the lab to make sure their designer drugs are not going to be detected. I just want to know what others opinions are reggarding this and what you think of this 'coincidence'...



Landis pulled out today after seeing that he was 23 minutes down and NOT A SOUL in postal has a GC chance. You might wantto also note, Landis lost SEVERAL minutes yesterday as well, might be that he was seeing the writing on the wall. Looks like it was time to go.

HOW this relates to aliens and doping, I have no idea. Doubtless, you will inform the unknowing masses......


----------



## serbski (Dec 2, 2002)

_andrew_ said:


> I'm not sure if any of you have noticed this but since the incident with Hamilton, more and USPS riders have began pulling out of the Vuelta, It doesn't make sense for a team which is built arround the Grand Tours to be loosing riders at this rate. It just fuels my belief that Postal is runnign one of the smoothest and most secretaive doping programs in pro cycling. Armstrong is a once a year rider and in light of stricter doping controls has been racing less and less. Now that a HUGE name rider such as Hamilton has a Official doping charge on his record it would make sense for Postal to start pulling their riders out of major competitions, and then wait for the off season and go back to the lab to make sure their designer drugs are not going to be detected. I just want to know what others opinions are reggarding this and what you think of this 'coincidence'...



You are aware aren't you that riders are subject to out-of-competition testing? LA, and doubtless others on USPS, are given surprise tests at various times throughout the year, not only at races. To say that your "theory" is based on grossly flawed logic would be an understatement. I hope that you are never allowed to perform jury duty!


----------



## Bozizle (Jan 2, 2003)

serbski said:


> You are aware aren't you that riders are subject to out-of-competition testing? LA, and doubtless others on USPS, are given surprise tests at various times throughout the year, not only at races. To say that your "theory" is based on grossly flawed logic would be an understatement. I hope that you are never allowed to perform jury duty!



Does anyone else read the news and that Floyd and a few others have been ill for the past few days...thus almost falling over 2 days ago and now gone...is this a gossip column or a message board


----------



## _andrew_ (Jan 2, 2003)

serbski said:


> You are aware aren't you that riders are subject to out-of-competition testing? LA, and doubtless others on USPS, are given surprise tests at various times throughout the year, not only at races. To say that your "theory" is based on grossly flawed logic would be an understatement. I hope that you are never allowed to perform jury duty!


I do know that athletes are tested out of competition, however, this is the responsibility of the nation which he is liscenced in... so Lance and the other American Posties are tested by the USCF and US Olympic Comittee not the UCI. Therefor the best way to evaide the UCI doping control is not to race at UCI sanctioned races, exactly what he's doing.. well not racing at all. One of you asked for my evidence, here is some of the proof that Armstrong, along with other top riders are doping. Firstly, all riders who make it to the professional ranks has natural talent, of those there will be a group with tramendous natural tallent. It is physically impossible for an athlete such as Lance no matter how naturally talented he is and how 'smart' he trains to compete with athletes taking performance enhancers. Last year he was able to beat David Millar in the time trials, Millar is a heavier rider more suited to the time trial than Lance, has tramendous natural tallent as proved when he won the white jersey. To further his abiltiy he has admitted to taking EPO throughout the 2003 season. How then is Lance able to beat David if he is clean and Millar is doped, a clean all rounder beating the worlds best doped up time trialist, in the time trial, it just doesn't make sense. Unless Lance is doped there is no way he should be beating Millar and still be clean. Also in 1999 Lance tested positive for steriods in the Tour, however after the positive test was announced a doctors note seemed to appear. Firstly that note should not have been valid as a athlete is required to apply for a Theriputic Exemption 21 days before the event, and documentation must be presented prior to the sample being handed over, finially a topical ointment should not have produced the concentrations needed for a positive result unless Lance was using the stuff by the tube. Finially my last point, Lance's comeback from cancer came a little bit too quickly, it is a well known fact in the cycling world that it takes 5 years to fully develop a cyclist to his/her physical potential, now before you jump on me saying that Lance was world class before his cancer consider that the cancer robbed him of all his fitness both arobic and muscular. It doesn't make sense that he made a natural comeback within 2.5years from when he started trainign to when he won the tour, also consider that the first year and a half he wasn't signed by a professional team and he could no longer be tested by US Olympic. There is no possible way a athlete could come from nothing to tour de france champ in 2.5 years, only now should he be reaching his full potential... Let me hear what you think i know its not what everyone likes in there heros but FACE THE FACTS THE PRO PELOTON IS DOPED, LANCE IS NO EXCEPTION


----------



## coreyb (Aug 4, 2003)

_andrew_ said:


> It is physically impossible for an athlete such as Lance no matter how naturally talented he is and how 'smart' he trains to compete with athletes taking performance enhancers... Let me hear what you think i know its not what everyone likes in there heros but FACE THE FACTS THE PRO PELOTON IS DOPED, LANCE IS NO EXCEPTION


see, 'evidence' is a collection of facts, not a bunch of unsupported opinion and cicurmstantial evidence.


----------



## _andrew_ (Jan 2, 2003)

coreyb said:


> see, 'evidence' is a collection of facts, not a bunch of unsupported opinion and cicurmstantial evidence.


Lance has only tested positive and that is the only hard fact that I have, I'll admit it. However the manner in which the doctors note was presented doesn't comply with article 15.49 in the UCI antidoping handbook. And that test should have been positive and Armstrong should have tested positive and been thrown out of the Tour, and he would have been yet another rider gone for doping. I'll admit that the facts I have given are circumstantial however a lot of his activities raise suspicion and makes you wonder, thats all I'm trying to say no more no less. By no means am i trying to say that these are grounds for a doping conviction just anomilies that may suggest that Lance isn't the man he has been made out to be


----------



## JPRider14 (Feb 9, 2004)

_andrew_ said:


> By no means am i trying to say that these are grounds for a doping conviction just anomilies that may suggest that Lance isn't the man he has been made out to be


Actually I think your original point was that Posties were pulling out of the Vuelta to avoid drug tests. You ever done a stage race? How many have you done? You finished all of em? I've finished a couple and dropped out of a couple. Am I a doper in your eyes? 

Your "reasons" for your arguments are plausible, but are pretty much all speculation and therefore, weak.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*Nice JP*

keep him on subject. Original accusation was based on Vuelta and USPS 'pullout'.
wow and Fassa pullout last years TdF must be doping related and....lemme see 9 guys in close quarters eating same food and sharing same air (bus), ever been on a plane? 1 gets sick, what's the odds the others do? and if it's food related those odds go way up. I'm sure we all have the BBQ gone bad story where half the party gets the green apple two step and we weren't even taxing our sytems to the limit. But since we are basing things on unsupported conjecture I'm gonna say based on your original post you have Ken Dolls that you have hand made T-Mobile kits and have Jan posters on your wall like a young girl has pix of (insert latest teen idol here) for your ononastic pleasure. Look it's okay to cry like a little girl when your hero loses, I feel your pain...not really. I'm sorry I'm not so ad hominum to trolls normally but since you (as a group) won't quit I'm going to now discourage the practice w/ verbal abuse.


----------



## ivanthetrble (Jul 7, 2004)

You know, this "Lance (or fill in the name of suspect rider) is doped and I can prove it" is so damn old! You don't know squat! You aren't there with the riders or teams. Your logic about a non-doped Lance not being able to beat a doped Millar is flawed at best. You have to assume that LA and Millar would be fairly equal without dope and that dope would put Millar just that much ahead of LA. Well, guess what? They might not be equal. One guy just might be better than the other. Things in sport don't always turn out the way they appear on paper. If it did the underdog team/preson would never win and there would be no need to play the games or hold the race. And your statement that "It is physically impossible for an athlete such as Lance no matter how naturally talented he is and how 'smart' he trains to compete with athletes taking performance enhancers." is so lacking in fact that it is just silly. You assume that, but you have no proof. Just because you believe it does not make it a fact. Give a rest will ya!


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*wow, really?*



_andrew_ said:


> I do know that athletes are tested out of competition, however, this is the responsibility of the nation which he is liscenced in... so Lance and the other American Posties are tested by the USCF and US Olympic Comittee not the UCI. Therefor the best way to evaide the UCI doping control is not to race at UCI sanctioned races, exactly what he's doing.. well not racing at all. One of you asked for my evidence, here is some of the proof that Armstrong, along with other top riders are doping. Firstly, all riders who make it to the professional ranks has natural talent, of those there will be a group with tramendous natural tallent. It is physically impossible for an athlete such as Lance no matter how naturally talented he is and how 'smart' he trains to compete with athletes taking performance enhancers. Last year he was able to beat David Millar in the time trials, Millar is a heavier rider more suited to the time trial than Lance, has tramendous natural tallent as proved when he won the white jersey. To further his abiltiy he has admitted to taking EPO throughout the 2003 season. How then is Lance able to beat David if he is clean and Millar is doped, a clean all rounder beating the worlds best doped up time trialist, in the time trial, it just doesn't make sense. Unless Lance is doped there is no way he should be beating Millar and still be clean. Also in 1999 Lance tested positive for steriods in the Tour, however after the positive test was announced a doctors note seemed to appear. Firstly that note should not have been valid as a athlete is required to apply for a Theriputic Exemption 21 days before the event, and documentation must be presented prior to the sample being handed over, finially a topical ointment should not have produced the concentrations needed for a positive result unless Lance was using the stuff by the tube. Finially my last point, Lance's comeback from cancer came a little bit too quickly, it is a well known fact in the cycling world that it takes 5 years to fully develop a cyclist to his/her physical potential, now before you jump on me saying that Lance was world class before his cancer consider that the cancer robbed him of all his fitness both arobic and muscular. It doesn't make sense that he made a natural comeback within 2.5years from when he started trainign to when he won the tour, also consider that the first year and a half he wasn't signed by a professional team and he could no longer be tested by US Olympic. There is no possible way a athlete could come from nothing to tour de france champ in 2.5 years, only now should he be reaching his full potential... Let me hear what you think i know its not what everyone likes in there heros but FACE THE FACTS THE PRO PELOTON IS DOPED, LANCE IS NO EXCEPTION


Lance was using a cream that shoped up on a test that proved to be a level in the area of 1/100th of the actual ammount that is said to be illegal.

The problem is that near science promotes the problems as well as the bozo witch hunters like yourself.

You are not medically trained. You are barely an athlete and yet you claim to know something about what you saw in a tabloid while in line at the supermarket. Doping is not and will not be a magic bullet, you actually have to have talent. Ironically, most of the folks who make the claims against these folks are folks who lack talent and still doped. Are YOU in that category?????


----------



## p lo (Sep 26, 2002)

*sad reality*

after all the positives in the last months i think they are all doped up. lance is the fastest and would be the fastest if they were all clean too. but there not........ 

they have gotten around the tests for a long time. the new epo/blood test does seem to have taken the riders by surprise. 6 more rider are being said to have tested positive in spain. hey, i love bike racing whether they are doped or not.


----------



## backon2wheels (Aug 9, 2004)

Andrew, fancy yourself an expert in Cancer care do you?
you say Lance can't come back in 2.5 years right after battling the disease?
perhaps you have had one form of cancer that gives you some specific knowledge, maybe you have been thru radiation treatments or Chemo? Cancer has struck my family not once but twice. I've seen it first hand, it nearly took my mother from me at the age of 50. Trust me man, once you survive that, you can do anything. I'm not trying to offend you, but please, unless you are a oncologist, please, shut up. 
I'm just a regular guy, I ride a bike. 
Kyle.


----------



## serbski (Dec 2, 2002)

_andrew_ said:


> I do know that athletes are tested out of competition, however, this is the responsibility of the nation which he is liscenced in... so Lance and the other American Posties are tested by the USCF and US Olympic Comittee not the UCI. Therefor the best way to evaide the UCI doping control is not to race at UCI sanctioned races, exactly what he's doing.. well not racing at all. One of you asked for my evidence, here is some of the proof that Armstrong, along with other top riders are doping. Firstly, all riders who make it to the professional ranks has natural talent, of those there will be a group with tramendous natural tallent. It is physically impossible for an athlete such as Lance no matter how naturally talented he is and how 'smart' he trains to compete with athletes taking performance enhancers. Last year he was able to beat David Millar in the time trials, Millar is a heavier rider more suited to the time trial than Lance, has tramendous natural tallent as proved when he won the white jersey. To further his abiltiy he has admitted to taking EPO throughout the 2003 season. How then is Lance able to beat David if he is clean and Millar is doped, a clean all rounder beating the worlds best doped up time trialist, in the time trial, it just doesn't make sense. Unless Lance is doped there is no way he should be beating Millar and still be clean. Also in 1999 Lance tested positive for steriods in the Tour, however after the positive test was announced a doctors note seemed to appear. Firstly that note should not have been valid as a athlete is required to apply for a Theriputic Exemption 21 days before the event, and documentation must be presented prior to the sample being handed over, finially a topical ointment should not have produced the concentrations needed for a positive result unless Lance was using the stuff by the tube. Finially my last point, Lance's comeback from cancer came a little bit too quickly, it is a well known fact in the cycling world that it takes 5 years to fully develop a cyclist to his/her physical potential, now before you jump on me saying that Lance was world class before his cancer consider that the cancer robbed him of all his fitness both arobic and muscular. It doesn't make sense that he made a natural comeback within 2.5years from when he started trainign to when he won the tour, also consider that the first year and a half he wasn't signed by a professional team and he could no longer be tested by US Olympic. There is no possible way a athlete could come from nothing to tour de france champ in 2.5 years, only now should he be reaching his full potential... Let me hear what you think i know its not what everyone likes in there heros but FACE THE FACTS THE PRO PELOTON IS DOPED, LANCE IS NO EXCEPTION


I must agree with some other posters here that you really do speak as if you have some type of medical background! Just to shoot an easy hole in your "no possible way a[sic] athlete could come from nothing to tour de france champ in 2.5 years", one of the USA's greatest milers, Steve Scott, overcame testicular cancer and still holds records as a Masters miler (post-cancer) as well as having run the most sub-four minute miles. You really are putting together a "case" against USPS/Armstrong out of bits and pieces of circumstantial evidence and "suspicious" behavior. I, for one, have seen first-hand someone ground down into nothing and killed by cancer and NO PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUG in the history of mankind could dope LA to TdF champ. General agreement on EPO states that it can give an athlete roughly a 4% boost in performance which I will agree could be very helpful when, as the Man says, "every second counts", but to credit his post-cancer comeback entirely to illegal drugs is just foolish. I am not a big LA fan and have my own questions about his (and others') involvement in doping but your uninformed prattling-on about USPS/LA is downright clueless gossip and armchair quarterbacking at its worst. Please, write your congressman or something or just ride your bike or visit conspiracy websites...


----------



## _andrew_ (Jan 2, 2003)

backon2wheels said:


> Andrew, fancy yourself an expert in Cancer care do you?
> you say Lance can't come back in 2.5 years right after battling the disease?
> perhaps you have had one form of cancer that gives you some specific knowledge, maybe you have been thru radiation treatments or Chemo? Cancer has struck my family not once but twice. I've seen it first hand, it nearly took my mother from me at the age of 50. Trust me man, once you survive that, you can do anything. I'm not trying to offend you, but please, unless you are a oncologist, please, shut up.
> I'm just a regular guy, I ride a bike.
> Kyle.


My point about Lance's comeback from cancer was not a statement saying that he did not have the willpower or the desire to comeback from cancer, his having cancer was just disease that happened to strip him of his cycling, I also do not dbout the fact that a athlete can be capable of coming back from cancer to become better than he ever was before, however those things take time. To build a professional cyclist takes time no matter how determined you are, its not a question of mental strength, its basically that the body can not be trained to a level needed to win in the pro peloton in under 5 years... It is a well accepted fact that a athlete requires a least 2 years of steady base inorder to build a program on let alone race the Grand Tours, I'm also not trying to offend people by stating that Lance is the only rider who is doped in the pro peloton, in reality the majority are on some sort of "juice".


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*Majority on juice*

using your quote and your 'evidence' then it must explain why 62 riders have dropped from the Vuelta. They are all on drugs. Vino, Floyd, etc.. all dopers though every winning rider is tested (which would qualify the whole USPS team since they won both TdF and Vuelta TTT) and somehow their superior masking technology is able to fool the UCI, TdF and Vuelta testers for 6 freaking years!!!!!! (Since Heras was top contender in last 3 VDE, as well as Levi 3 YA) It's amazing that they can beat the system while others get caught.....why, I know because they are an American Team and American Teams couldn't possibly better the European Teams. Look Andrew since you've spouted no 'evidence', no science and your arguement can be classified as having 'waste expulsive orfices at both ends' go back to your sewing machine. I'm sure your Ken Dolls will need new 05 T-Mob kits. I was reflecting on my ride home last night that maybe I was too harsh, but then I realized my conjecture carries as much merit as yours so I will continue. Do I think dope exists? yup. Do I think the entire peloton is juiced? highly unlikely. do I think certain teams have superior masking agents? No, they'd be on the black market easily.
Look at the Olympics, who got busted? In majority Atheletes from smaller East Bloc countries that had organized state run doping and now lack the national organization to test it's top athletes. Every Ol. athlete from major countries gets tested at qualification, do some sneak through, yes, some medaled, some got caught, some skated. That's the way it goes but we might as well condemn every athlete based on your logic.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*furthermore*

following your logic, fear of being caught is what made Virenque retire. after all, knowing his history.....


----------



## _andrew_ (Jan 2, 2003)

atpjunkie said:


> using your quote and your 'evidence' then it must explain why 62 riders have dropped from the Vuelta. They are all on drugs. Vino, Floyd, etc.. all dopers though every winning rider is tested (which would qualify the whole USPS team since they won both TdF and Vuelta TTT) and somehow their superior masking technology is able to fool the UCI, TdF and Vuelta testers for 6 freaking years!!!!!! (Since Heras was top contender in last 3 VDE, as well as Levi 3 YA) It's amazing that they can beat the system while others get caught.....why, I know because they are an American Team and American Teams couldn't possibly better the European Teams. Look Andrew since you've spouted no 'evidence', no science and your arguement can be classified as having 'waste expulsive orfices at both ends' go back to your sewing machine. I'm sure your Ken Dolls will need new 05 T-Mob kits. I was reflecting on my ride home last night that maybe I was too harsh, but then I realized my conjecture carries as much merit as yours so I will continue. Do I think dope exists? yup. Do I think the entire peloton is juiced? highly unlikely. do I think certain teams have superior masking agents? No, they'd be on the black market easily.
> Look at the Olympics, who got busted? In majority Atheletes from smaller East Bloc countries that had organized state run doping and now lack the national organization to test it's top athletes. Every Ol. athlete from major countries gets tested at qualification, do some sneak through, yes, some medaled, some got caught, some skated. That's the way it goes but we might as well condemn every athlete based on your logic.


I wasn't meaning to say that every rider who ever abandons a race is fearing being caught by doping control, I know racing and i know there are many reasons that a rider will drop out of a tour, however, the point that I wanted to raise is that at grand tours USPS has almost a perfect record of getting there riders to the finish line and I can't remember the last time they had a team leader drop out of the race because of fatigue or illness. also I am not meaning to jump all over lance, do I think Jan is doped... yes, Basso... forsure. I'm just saying that lance is no different. Are you also saying that at this day and age it is impossible to evade doping control? If that is your logic you have some serious research to do, look at Marion Jones, she was caught using steriods only by chance, had the sample steriod not been sent to USAF they wouldn't have been able to develo the THG(I think that was the drug's name) test and she would more than likley still be using the drug. Confidis, they used drugs all year and yet how many athletes were picked up by doping control... the only reason was through the team's investigation by french police were they able to find evidence... Just a question are you to proud to admit that your beloved home team could possibly be running a doping program, do you think lance is sponsored by a pharmaseutical just because they helped him 8years ago... i think they could be doing a lot more than just providing cancer treatment...


----------



## BBunny (Jun 16, 2004)

*Jury Duty!*

I hope that you are never allowed to perform jury duty! .....Now that is halarious. Of course I'm sure Scott Peterson would love to have an idiot like that on his jury. I can see him now, "Well I believe Lacy jumped off the Golden Gate bridge and Scott had nothing to do with her death."

Or maybe he was on the OJ jury......
.


----------



## _andrew_ (Jan 2, 2003)

BBunny said:


> I hope that you are never allowed to perform jury duty! .....Now that is halarious. Of course I'm sure Scott Peterson would love to have an idiot like that on his jury. I can see him now, "Well I believe Lacy jumped off the Golden Gate bridge and Scott had nothing to do with her death."
> 
> Or maybe he was on the OJ jury......
> .


Is it just me or are all of you a bunch of blind faithed red necks who can not even acknowledge the fact that your beloved hero may not be clean, and that people can seem good on the outside and still decieve you. Doping is a major problem in cycling today... in just this year alone 3 Juniors in Europe have died while racing from "unexplained causes." Are we to assume that they had some un-explained unknown condition; well becuase they're Juniors they could never dope they aren't even out of their teens... well fess up the sport is doped, the cheats are not who we'd like them to be its not pretty and its not beautiful, but its part of the sport we have to accept... I'm not here to call everybody cheats with no eveidence, every time a athlete tests positive it pains me to no end to see that the sport cant be clean and pure but we have to face the facts and realise that bike racing is no longer just riding a bike there is a lot more a stake and people who are willing to do anything for victory


----------



## coreyb (Aug 4, 2003)

_andrew_ said:


> Is it just me or are all of you a bunch of blind faithed red necks


ad hominem attacks do nothing to support your argument. some here are actually open minded individuals who seek to find out the truth, rather than piecing together a bunch of circumstantial facts to arbitrarily deduce that the only reason a pharmaceutical company is sponsoring lance is because they are providing the drugs.


----------



## al0 (Jan 24, 2003)

_andrew_ said:


> ... To build a professional cyclist takes time no matter how determined you are, its not a question of mental strength, its basically that the body can not be trained to a level needed to win in the pro peloton in under 5 years... It is a well accepted fact that a athlete requires a least 2 years of steady base inorder to build a program on let alone race the Grand Tours, ...


You just miss one point - you need much less time to rebuild level that you had once, doesn't matter how low ypour current level is. So 2.5 year seems very reasonable from this point of view.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*yes, check my posts*

I'm am neither a LA fan nor a 'normal ad hominum' attacker. I've only assailed you as a demonstration how one can conject alot from nothing, which is what Mr Drew is doing here. Lance is not my hero and I'm only defending him here as he's the guy and team you've picked on. Yes, USPS has a record of finishing tours, did you read my earlier post? If you are an expert on bike racing you should know how easily a bvirus or even more food poisoning can affect an entire team. The buses themselves are fine transferers of disease, as an ex-musician who spent more months on buses than I care to admit I understand how when '1 bean goes bad, you usually lose the whole burrito'. Once again, especially at the end of an long season w/ a hard TdF riders systems are taxed which would put them especially susceptible to illness. Did you read the Floyd interview? Funny the reporter talks about his voice showing the signs of a bad chest cold. But that would be research which would just get in the way of your conjecture. Oh, wait the writers of Velonews are 'in' on this as well right?
Speaking of conspiracy, Bristol Squibb is in on it as well? Please share your acid next time? see Bristol Myers sells drugs we can use that they can sell. What marketing advantage does an illegal program yield?
SO let's go to the risk management dept. of B.M. Squibb.
"let's give them secret drugs to make them win"
"do we then market them to the public, as the secret drugs that make them win?, no that won't work"
"well if he wins we'll sell more cancer medicine!"
"but if he gets caught using our drugs illegally it will be a huge negative hit on him and us, ruining his reputation and ours"
"probably not a sound marketing plan" 
If you look at it from a marketing standpoint it just doesn't make sense, especially w/ all the people that do call him "Hero"
IMHO if he was doped or doping, he'd retire now. he has the record and his place in history. He'd quit now to avoid marring his place and ensuring a long and lucrative life as an endorser of products. He'd have to be an idiot, which he's not to risk such downfall by continuing racing and therefore subjecting himself to further testing. That doesn't make sound finacial sense. So next time yer going to conject, what I'm asking is first look into the variety of reasons and then pick the more plausible ones before jumping to the least substantiated, or provide some better back up than, well ya can't disprove it.
RE: Marion Jones, it was her own Team that did the mystery submission (US Sprint Coach) which also caused the whole fiasco around the Greek Sprinters. Once again, you're whole theory is based upon the notion that USPS (not my fave team I'm a Domo Farm Frites kinda guy) has superior drug masking etc... which is either based in some form of Anti Lancism or Anti American-ism unless you are going to say, it's only the big $$ teams but let's see...most have had riders busted so that's out the window. 
Re: Basso what do you base that conjecture upon, his season? Let's see, was once the "Best Young Rider of the Tour" has finished top ten but was having his career squandered at Fassa. He signs with CSC where Bjarne Riis is the home for underacheiving pros and has his best TdF ever. Oh so did Tyler at CSC, and former podium placer Bobby Julich, so lemme guess Bjarne is doping master of Denmark.
So you also point to Jan, so what your whole argument is "he's having a good season / career...he's on drugs."
I'm sorry but you are just digging deeper and deeper into a hole. please back your points or cease.


----------



## serbski (Dec 2, 2002)

*Wrong Again, Andrew....*



_andrew_ said:


> I do know that athletes are tested out of competition, however, this is the responsibility of the nation which he is liscenced in... so Lance and the other American Posties are tested by the USCF and US Olympic Comittee not the UCI. Therefor the best way to evaide the UCI doping control is not to race at UCI sanctioned races, exactly what he's doing.. well not racing at all. One of you asked for my evidence, here is some of the proof that Armstrong, along with other top riders are doping. Firstly, all riders who make it to the professional ranks has natural talent, of those there will be a group with tramendous natural tallent. It is physically impossible for an athlete such as Lance no matter how naturally talented he is and how 'smart' he trains to compete with athletes taking performance enhancers. Last year he was able to beat David Millar in the time trials, Millar is a heavier rider more suited to the time trial than Lance, has tramendous natural tallent as proved when he won the white jersey. To further his abiltiy he has admitted to taking EPO throughout the 2003 season. How then is Lance able to beat David if he is clean and Millar is doped, a clean all rounder beating the worlds best doped up time trialist, in the time trial, it just doesn't make sense. Unless Lance is doped there is no way he should be beating Millar and still be clean. Also in 1999 Lance tested positive for steriods in the Tour, however after the positive test was announced a doctors note seemed to appear. Firstly that note should not have been valid as a athlete is required to apply for a Theriputic Exemption 21 days before the event, and documentation must be presented prior to the sample being handed over, finially a topical ointment should not have produced the concentrations needed for a positive result unless Lance was using the stuff by the tube. Finially my last point, Lance's comeback from cancer came a little bit too quickly, it is a well known fact in the cycling world that it takes 5 years to fully develop a cyclist to his/her physical potential, now before you jump on me saying that Lance was world class before his cancer consider that the cancer robbed him of all his fitness both arobic and muscular. It doesn't make sense that he made a natural comeback within 2.5years from when he started trainign to when he won the tour, also consider that the first year and a half he wasn't signed by a professional team and he could no longer be tested by US Olympic. There is no possible way a athlete could come from nothing to tour de france champ in 2.5 years, only now should he be reaching his full potential... Let me hear what you think i know its not what everyone likes in there heros but FACE THE FACTS THE PRO PELOTON IS DOPED, LANCE IS NO EXCEPTION


You've got about half a dozen different arguments going at once here (LA is doped, the peloton is doped, USPS has a secret doping program and avoids detection by staying away from UCI races...) but I'll tackle the most recent. LA/USPS certainly do NOT avoid races if you have a look at their calender: Classics, US races, grand tours. The list goes on. How do you convince yourself that one of the most dominant teams in the world is not tested constantly? You will only hear about it if someone turns up positive. Furthermore, LA/USPS and any other pro athlete is subject to testing by WADA/USAWADA, and if anyone of the aforementioned athletes tested positive in one of these random tests, they would be in SERIOUS trouble. So, please don't kid yourself that LA and USPS can avoid testing by "not racing" or travelling! Read up, these guys have to give WADA notice if they plan on not being home for more than a day! Now, LA and anyone else may be doping but they certainly are being tested as well. Please stop your know-it-all posting.


----------



## _andrew_ (Jan 2, 2003)

To adress some points raised by the 2 above posters. Read my post I never said that Brystol Myers Squibb is only supplying Lance with drugs, I'm positive they are also providing legal supplements and aiding him in other aspects of his life ie LAF, however i just think that its a little too easy access to new designer drugs, and can raise suspicion surrounding the athlete. Also, it was said that someone can make a comeback in less than normal time if they already have a tramendous base, and I don't dispute the fact, someone who was once trained can easly regain a portion of their fittness. However, one thing that needs to be considered is that Lance's cancer stripped him of all of his fittness, if you have read any of his books you will read that he was left with no strength, and even a one hour ride was difficult, and he was left with no muscle mass. This is much different than a well trained athlete whos fittness has merely gone dormant. He was left with the all arround fitness of someone who had never rode a bike in his life, so in all reality Lance was making a comeback from nothing... To avoid further conflict I will let others draw their own conclusions about that...


----------



## serbski (Dec 2, 2002)

_andrew_ said:


> Is it just me or are all of you a bunch of blind faithed red necks who can not even acknowledge the fact that your beloved hero may not be clean, and that people can seem good on the outside and still decieve you. Doping is a major problem in cycling today... in just this year alone 3 Juniors in Europe have died while racing from "unexplained causes." Are we to assume that they had some un-explained unknown condition; well becuase they're Juniors they could never dope they aren't even out of their teens... well fess up the sport is doped, the cheats are not who we'd like them to be its not pretty and its not beautiful, but its part of the sport we have to accept... I'm not here to call everybody cheats with no eveidence, every time a athlete tests positive it pains me to no end to see that the sport cant be clean and pure but we have to face the facts and realise that bike racing is no longer just riding a bike there is a lot more a stake and people who are willing to do anything for victory


If you even take a glance at most of the posts regarding LA you might notice that very few of them fall into the "Lance Fanatic" catagory. I simply object to your skewed logic regarding individuals' and teams' guilt in doping. I am also curious as to why only USPS is on your list of "suspects" when Euskaltel, for example, started the Tour with only eight riders as one failed a hematocrit test and have had a team doctor charged with administering EPO (David Millar got it from him). Come on, Iban Mayo (whom I like a lot) has had enough ups and downs in form to get his name on your sh*t list, no? Also, if USPS is running a high-tech doping program and is dominating the sport as a result, why would anyone ever leave the team knowing that USPS is truly unbeatable? Sure, guys like Tyler, Floyd and Levi (will) have gotten loads of money as team leaders but why on earth would they even bother doping (if Hamilton is indeed guilty) if their new teams would be unable to provide a comparable doping regimen to that of their former employer? Just some thoughts...


----------



## Mel Erickson (Feb 3, 2004)

Although I think Andrews assertions lack any shred of a logical argument I can think of one good reason why good riders would leave USPS. Money. They're like any other athlete, or any of us for that matter. Athletes are on a fairly short timetable. They've got a small window of time to make their cash. If they don't take advantage of significant offers while in their prime it's unlikely they'll make the big bucks. For most of us, and them, fame takes a second seat to fortune.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*agreed on Pretzel Logic*

So Jan has dropped from Worlds TT, since (according to andrew) there is only 1 reason to drop, it must be drugs. And once again, since USPS has some super, pharmaceutical company backed doping program it's just amazing how none of the ...what 20 plus riders has been caught. They've all evaded detection en masse, and since as noted (Millar, Jones, KelMe) usually don't get caught until a disgruntled rider/employee blows a whistle and searches are made, with all the 'legitimate' ex-posties it's a miracle nothing has been uncovered. Geez I'm sure if all the rumors are true and Mrs. Armstrong is peeved about the split, wow, what a bomb she could drop. Now I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but a theory needs at least a shred of evidence pointing that direction.


----------



## serbski (Dec 2, 2002)

Mel Erickson said:


> Although I think Andrews assertions lack any shred of a logical argument I can think of one good reason why good riders would leave USPS. Money. They're like any other athlete, or any of us for that matter. Athletes are on a fairly short timetable. They've got a small window of time to make their cash. If they don't take advantage of significant offers while in their prime it's unlikely they'll make the big bucks. For most of us, and them, fame takes a second seat to fortune.


I agree. Money is the prime motivation for most behavior in this world. Your point has now brought a new question to my mind: Isn't it fair to assume that most teams/sponsors must have at least a vague belief that their team leaders can be competitive seeing as they shell out massive amounts of cash to secure their services? Now, if a team/sponsor is as convinced as folks like Andrew seem to be about the doping going on in a team like USPS why do they persist in hiring expensive riders, ex-Posties no less? If USPS has a rap as being a massive, unbeatable doped onslaught why would anyone touch one of their riders unless *they too* had at least as high tech a doping plan which, if they did, would level the playing field and make the whole "doping advantage" a moot point. All of this is making my head swim but I just think that if USPS was seen by other teams as being so unbeatable that they would simply not bother spending so much money on guys who can't *ever* beat a doped team... Have I really confused the issue?


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*pay structure*

and USPS has a flat rate pay. part of the downfall of Mr Millar was his salary was directly tied to his results. He found by 'doping' his pay went up considerably. And as stated here, if USPS had a 'secret plan' all leaving riders would take it with them. So Levi should have continued up the rankings, and the podium should be he, Tyler, Heras and LAnce as they'd be the juiciest riders out there. Once again this whole theory laughs in the face of logic.


----------



## The Human G-Nome (Aug 26, 2002)

_andrew_ said:


> Is it just me or are all of you a bunch of blind faithed red necks who can not even acknowledge the fact that your beloved hero may not be clean, and that people can seem good on the outside and still decieve you. Doping is a major problem in cycling today... in just this year alone 3 Juniors in Europe have died while racing from "unexplained causes." Are we to assume that they had some un-explained unknown condition; well becuase they're Juniors they could never dope they aren't even out of their teens... well fess up the sport is doped, the cheats are not who we'd like them to be its not pretty and its not beautiful, but its part of the sport we have to accept... I'm not here to call everybody cheats with no eveidence, every time a athlete tests positive it pains me to no end to see that the sport cant be clean and pure but we have to face the facts and realise that bike racing is no longer just riding a bike there is a lot more a stake and people who are willing to do anything for victory


Face facts.... you don't like LA, you don't like Postal and you HOPE Lance is doped. Your original post contends that it's suspicious that most of USPS would drop out of the Vuelta right when Tyler got caught. You make ZERO mention of the T-Mobile squad, however, the same one that cried "food poisoning!" and yet the pudding came back from the lab negative. I didn't hear you mention the fact the Euskatel SEVERELY underperformed at the le Tour the same year that the TDF instituted new, much tighter drug controls. They dropped like flys and all of a sudden NONE of them could climb any better then Thor Hushovd. No, you mention none of this. Instead, Tyler Hamilton gets "caught", a Phonak rider, and somehow this means that Landis's early exit from the Vuelta is "suspicious". How do you expect not to get questioned when you post STUPID stuff like this? You act like a racer has never underperformed or dropped out early in a grand Tour. Do you even follow cycling? And then, when folks don't agree with you you go all ad hominem on them and start calling them "red necks". Gimme a break! 

Your assertions and accusations are groundless and factless. What was the point? Why not just say "I don't like Lance Armstrong and I hope he's doping and then get's what he deserves." That's the truth of the matter.


----------



## The Human G-Nome (Aug 26, 2002)

atpjunkie said:


> and USPS has a flat rate pay. part of the downfall of Mr Millar was his salary was directly tied to his results. He found by 'doping' his pay went up considerably. And as stated here, if USPS had a 'secret plan' all leaving riders would take it with them. So Levi should have continued up the rankings, and the podium should be he, Tyler, Heras and LAnce as they'd be the juiciest riders out there. Once again this whole theory laughs in the face of logic.


By the way, if "big guys" are suppose to TT better then "small guys", then someone, please explain Eric freakin Wohlberg to me. Thanks for playing.


----------



## The Human G-Nome (Aug 26, 2002)

serbski said:


> If you even take a glance at most of the posts regarding LA you might notice that very few of them fall into the "Lance Fanatic" catagory. I simply object to your skewed logic regarding individuals' and teams' guilt in doping. I am also curious as to why only USPS is on your list of "suspects" when Euskaltel, for example, started the Tour with only eight riders as one failed a hematocrit test and have had a team doctor charged with administering EPO (David Millar got it from him). Come on, Iban Mayo (whom I like a lot) has had enough ups and downs in form to get his name on your sh*t list, no? Also, if USPS is running a high-tech doping program and is dominating the sport as a result, why would anyone ever leave the team knowing that USPS is truly unbeatable? Sure, guys like Tyler, Floyd and Levi (will) have gotten loads of money as team leaders but why on earth would they even bother doping (if Hamilton is indeed guilty) if their new teams would be unable to provide a comparable doping regimen to that of their former employer? Just some thoughts...


The Euskatel team and Mayo has gotten almost ZERO press in relation to their team doctor's suspension and EPO. Why is this? It's because people could care less whether Mayo is doped. They only care that Lance and company goes down. If the USPS doctor had gotten suspended on the eve of Le Tour and then all of a sudden the entire USPS team severely underperformed, you'd better believe that there would be a big deal made about it. 

....and before someone accuses me of being a Lance worshipper, my favorite riders are Iban Mayo and Tom Danielson.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*inverse Yankee Homerism*



The Human G-Nome said:


> The Euskatel team and Mayo has gotten almost ZERO press in relation to their team doctor's suspension and EPO. Why is this? It's because people could care less whether Mayo is doped. They only care that Lance and company goes down. If the USPS doctor had gotten suspended on the eve of Le Tour and then all of a sudden the entire USPS team severely underperformed, you'd better believe that there would be a big deal made about it.
> 
> agreed. my guess is becuase it's another sport where 'those damn yanks are taking over' I can imagine the scandal outcry if our men ever get their futbol team together. If the US ever won the Copa Mundial it would be the end of the world. I really think many Euros don't like the fact that some of our athletes are dominating 'their' sport. Very true about E.E., doctor caught, rider not allowed to start a GT for illegal H-Crit level and it's page 6 news. Because you know we Americans could never do this without cheating, it's our nature


----------



## serbski (Dec 2, 2002)

The Human G-Nome said:


> The Euskatel team and Mayo has gotten almost ZERO press in relation to their team doctor's suspension and EPO. Why is this? It's because people could care less whether Mayo is doped. They only care that Lance and company goes down. If the USPS doctor had gotten suspended on the eve of Le Tour and then all of a sudden the entire USPS team severely underperformed, you'd better believe that there would be a big deal made about it.
> 
> ....and before someone accuses me of being a Lance worshipper, my favorite riders are Iban Mayo and Tom Danielson.


Thank You! I was beginning to think that I had imagined the entire Euskaltel doctor/rider suspension debacle! I was really hoping that Mayo was going to put LA "into a spot of bother" this year and really give us a show. To be honest, I still didn't care much about the doctor/rider suspensions but you hit the nail on the head about if this had happened to USPS. Christ, the world would have stopped spinning! Look how excited people are about a former USPS doctor's assertions about doping during the *pre-Armstrong* team! If equal time and effort was put towards investigating more of the peloton than USPS (I mean *real* effort) I can only cringe at the thought of what might be brought to light. If ASO was fair in their efforts to "clean up the Tour" they would have banned Cofidis and Euskaltal immediately but instead they decided to threaten USPS's Pavel Padrnos as well as un-invite Danilo Di Luca. I know it's a French race but their favoritism just reduces their "efforts" at running a clean race to mere farce. OK, I've hit enough topics here. Point is, so many teams really have some monkey business going on with them ,and USPS is not among them at this point, so why isn't there more focus on these "lesser" teams that have actually had multiple riders and staff turn up positive and/or implicated? Europeans enjoy Americans winning their top sports about as much as we would like seeing a Japanese team win the World (not) Series or seeing Croatia win the NBA World Championship. However, at least the Europeans *allow* other nations in their events which is more than we do!


----------

