fuckin' drug addict

i've worked in drug testing part time on and off for the past few years, and its common knowledge in the industry that cyclying is the filthiest sport there is... seemingly it's considered physically impossible to undertake an event like the Tour de France in the time they do, without supplementing

and for Lance Armstrong to have come back from cancer (which fucks you physically) to where he is now, it's inconceivable that he didn't take anything he shouldn't have to help him along the way

but at least in cycling it's a level playing field in that everyone knows everyone is doing it!

nicoasis:

not possible , cuz hinault and eddie were not americans

would you then have a doping theory on every dominating sports figure who requires physical endurance ?

i refer to my post above.....


.... when urine samples are tested, it's known whether the person is innocent or guilty if levels are above a certain point.

But to convict an athlete, the levels have to be so ridiculously high, so as the "accusers" are able to absolutely definitively stand over their results, with respect to the always likely possible legal challenges. The vast majority of times an athlete is known to be taking something, sadly due to the legal systems that exist, nothing further can be done to hold anything against them

There was a case i'll use to highlight.... the athlete is someone who i won't name 'cos i'm was only told this story in confidence (you might know him, you might not, he was successful international athlete in the 80's is all i'll say)

He was tested regularly. However he was a seasoned pro at the doping game and knew his stuff. There's a ratio of testosterone in urine samples, that for the average man should be approximately 1:1. Athletes obviously have higher levels, but it's unlikely to ever naturally move much above 2:1. The amount that must be found to declare somebody guilty is a whopping 6:1.

Whenever this man was tested, his levels were always in or around 4:1 or pushing on 5:1. It was known he was doping, but they couldn't convict.

He knew when he was more likely to be tested, and resultantly timed his doping to perfection... he was only caught out when well out of season he was tested, in his home, and his levels were over 7:1



If you believe Lance Armstrong has not taken illegal performance enhancing drugs, good for your sweet innocence.
But you obviously know nothing of the sport.


And as for athletes who come out and claim there was something in their head-ache pills, or whatever, that may have caused the test to come out dirty, when they are really a fully law abiding clean sports person, - not a fucking chance buddy.

Everyone is doped to a degree, like feckarse said, its rather unfortunate like that. But, that's human nature for you

Lance Armstrong is tested in and out of season, so he can't pick and choose when to take his drugs and has never been found to have taken any drugs.

Its not sweet innocence I know cycling is one of the dirtiest sports. But I choose to believe that someone who has been tested the most times to be clean.

The only possible drugs he could be taking are ones that there are no tests for, but i simply don't believe he is.

I watched the tour last year and he just happens to have the best team, some of the riders could be the leaders of smaller teams if they wanted but they would rather help lance win

that's what they've been saying for the past few years now. GO LANCE!