exactly!

True, the French would have figured this out long ago. I wonder if Landis has an ulterior motive, i.e., or taking the focus off of himself. Why now?

There probably isn't a person in the world who has had his garbage and sewage sifted through more than this individual. I think (I know) we (the media) would have found something.

dose it matter any more he was proven inosent guys get a life and deal with ur own problems

No they wouldn't as he was using "investigational" drugs that only had a number not a name yet, and therefore they were not and could not be on the banned substance list. He used and I do know this for sure by someone that was a teammate.

Garbage? dude get a clue.......you are probably a fat lazy baseball fan

There is the hateful response we want for fans of the most corrupt and cheating sport on earth! Not one cyclist is clean and they all try and hide. But yes I am a baseball fan. Does that make me a bad person? Probably not.

Maybe not a bad person Sid, but I would classify you as garbage, making ststements you obviously know zero about...why don't you get off the couch and get your lazy a** on a bike...who knows the excersise may even help to save your life. That would give you more time to make your crude remarks.

Yes, you are most likely a bad person. Anyone who would say "cycling is garbage" is someone who is an enemy of every cyclist. We are a strong army of people with healthy ideals who believe in the sport. Yes, there have been some drugs, but the sport is closely monitored today and cheats are not tolerated. But, drugs are probably prevalent in your sport too (poker?). Have a nice day.

You need to wash the sand out of your vagina.

Ha.. There you go. To not enjoy such a mundane sport doesn't make me lazy. Your opinions are exactly yours. You cannot deny the steady parade of cyclists who have thrown off the tour or suspended for Blood Doping of EPO or any of that. The sport has always been a mess and no matter who is testing there is an "army" of them still failing tests. I am just a realist. In this day and age all atheletes are cheating. My remarks aren't crude. They are honest. Stop lying to yourselves that your heros are clean. And relax on the hate. My opinion has become just as valid as the rest of you cycling apologists.

Most athletes are cheating, and nobody can Win the tour de France six or seven times in a row without drugs.

Atta boy Stephen, you couldn't be more right.

Stephen is correct since we now that others were dopping as well. Armstrong might have been good but there is no way he could have beaten an army of dopers without dopping hisself. Not 7 times.

I would say all of you need to wake up!! Sid is correct. All cyclist are using and I know this through my ex-boyfriend who was a teammate of Lance's. Cyclist of his caliber and financial means are using "investigational" drugs that only have a number, not a name. Therefore, they are not on any "banned" substance list yet. Do you honestly think after having had cancer he could come back on his own and win 7 Tours? Even Greg LeMond agreed and I know Greg. This was not sour grapes on his part. All athletes today have tried or are using. This is not the 50's or 60's where athletes play or compete simply for the LOVE of the sport. They want the fame and fortune. I know this as well as my Dad played Pro baseball and then became a Scout. When you have 18 years olds getting ready to graduate from HS with no experience and they already have agents or are demanding 6 figure signing bonuses. They want to play for the money not the love of a life long dream as my Dad did. Chewing tobacco, sunflower seeds and beer were their vices back then.

He has had postive tests, but got them suppressed by his big money legal team. Look it up.

He has had postive tests

False! Hasn't happened!

There were 3 test taken during his first tour victory. One of which came back inconclusive. The other 2 were clean. Ever since then, no doubt what so ever. All test came back clean. It has already been scientifically proven why Lance is so good.

1. Just like Micheal Phelps in swimming, Lance has a perfect body for his sport. The length ratio between his upper and lower leg is such that he actually produces greater leverage on the pedals than the average person. That is just genetics. You can't blame him for that.

2. If you remember, all of his tour victories came after his bout with testicular cancer. The cancer did two things for him. One it completely destroyed his physique. He basically had to start from scratch. This allowed him to build a perfect cycling body. Before he was carrying a lot of extra muscle up top from his days as a swimmer. Muscles which are nothing but extra weight to a cyclist. After his cancer treatments, all those muscles were gone.

3. Also related to his cancer treatments; he was bombarded with multiple rounds of chemo and radiation therapy. A part from nearly killing him, it is believed (this part is somewhat speculative) that his bodies ability to produce lactic acid was also damaged. As a result, his muscles don't get as tired and sore as a normal persons muscles would. Again, not lances fault. merely a side effect from his cancer treatments.

4. Good old fashioned hard work. Lance trains harder and longer than any other cyclist on the planet. In the off season when other cyclists are relaxing and having a beer, Lance is training in some of the highest mountains in the world.

Let it be known, that as a person, I think Lance is a bit of a pig. The way he discarded his first wife after she stuck by him through cancer and the way he broke up with Cheryl Crow the moment he found out she had cancer makes me sick. But as a cyclist. There is simply no one better. That is why he wins so much. Illegal doping has nothing to do with it.

Whaat??? Lordy when will you people stop saying that Lance dropped his wife after she stuck it out with him while he had cancer???? They were already divorced, it was his MOM who helped him through. And Lance did not drop Sheryl after she found out she had cancer they were already broken up!!!!!!

Not according to his book "It's not about the bike". It's pretty clear in there that she stuck by him through cancer and through his recovery and just when he started winning races again, he dumped her.

Actually I did have my facts wrong--Lance met Kristin after he was pretty much done with chemo and yes, she was probably instrumental in getting him back into shape. However she couldn't handle being a SAHM while he was off doing his thing and that is when she decided she wanted more. Nothing wrong with that, they both have gone on to good lives.

As for Sheryl I stick by what I said. I do wonder how she feels, however, when he probably said that he couldn't have kids with Sheryl and now here he is having child number 2 with girlfriend number who-knows-I've-lost-track.

But all that stuff is irrelevant when we are talking about Lance as an athlete, no?

Just an interesting point, the only way Lance is having kids is through artificial insemination. He had his sperm frozen the day before he started chemo as he knew that he would be unable to do it the old fashion way.

Armstrong was tested probably more times than anyone who ever rode in The Tour de France, and has never had any positive results. WTF? Give it a rest, Landis.

Hey George Wright, you don't know a thing about cycling do you? Admit it. You are a mere casual "Lance fan" and know virtually nothing else about the sport, am I right?

The claims Landis makes would be supported by the content. If Armstrong was doping and then transfusing his blood it would prevent him from being caught in the drug testing process. It's a little out there to think that someone would go to that extent to hide their drug use, but the money is certainly a high motivator. Testicular cancer has also been linked to doping drugs and may also provide some circumstantial evidence to the doping allegations

if that were true, then every baseball player and body building for the last 30 years would have testicular cancer. Sorry, I don't buy it.

It's linked to all types of cancer, but it certainly doesn't cause it in everyone. I don't follow baseball or bodybuilding, but you'd likely find links to problems in every sport. Because the problem isn't followed in the media for athletes who aren't at the same level as a Lance Armstrong it isn't as well documented or publicized.

exactly. There all kinds of things linked to all kinds of cancer. So your implied assertion that lance must have been using performance enhancing drugs because he had testicular cancer is absurd.

actually I said it was circumstantial evidence, not proof by any means, I actually agree that Lance is built for racing, but with all the competition doing it it may be that he felt he needed to. I don't know, but Landis' claim that they were transfusing blood would certainly hide any illegal drug use in the screening process. Don't you agree?

I honestly don't know. I'm not a Dr. I'm not sure if a blood transfusion would be able to eliminate all traces of a drug or not. That said, I still don't think he did it. There are too many legitimate things to explain his ability ( see my post 3.3 ). So why go chasing windmills. And why take the word of a man who is an obvious lier, remember he denied drug use for over 2 years, over someone who has proven time and time again that he is not a doper. Besides, those drug tests are random. you never know when they are going to ask you to submit to one. So either A. he was transfusing all the time, or B. He was not taking drugs. I'm going to go with B.

Your post 3.3 is ridiculus. Now that we know that many others were dopping, there is no way he could have beaten an army of doppers if he were not dopping himself. Not 7 times. Don't get me wrong. I don't blame him. In fact, given his situation I would have probably done the same thing. But don't fool yourself into thinking that all those physiological things that you listed above make any difference against a cyclist who is dopping.

allow me to respectfully disagree. Trust me, the way the French go after this kind of thing, especially against American cyclists, whom they absolute hate to see win their Tour, if Lance was doping they would have caught him.

My post that you referred to as ridiculous is nothing but absolute verifiable fact. Where as your post, which I can only assume you believe NOT to be ridiculous, is based on nothing but pure conjecture, wild assumptions, and your own opinion, and you have not one ounce of proof to back any of it up. None. Buddy, I'm beginning to question your sanity.

Come on man, I saw the special on TV where you are getting all your information. Don't be so easily drawn in to their hype. My ideas may be based on pure conjecture but at least their my thoughts. This is Lance. You don't think he and his team is putting ever spin they can out there. He's got eveything to lose. These other guys have nothing to lose at this point.

To the own opinion thing, are you somehow in with Lance's doctors and have looked at the test results from his heart study to determne that all that physiological mubojumbo is correct. Bull$%&#, eveything you're saying is your own opinoin. In realty you too have no clue just like the rest of us.

Thank you for admitting that your comments are not factually based. Regardless of the source, mine are still based on fact. Unless you can dispute the facts with a better argument than "Come on man" I think you really need to accept the facts as they are. By the way, while I have seen several shows about Lance I'm not really sure which one you are talking about. I have also read his books, and every article in every magazine I could get my hands on including medical journals, cycling magazines and of course sports illustrated. All of them have tackled the same basic question; What makes Lance so good? The reasons listed in my "ridiculous" post earlier come from this research. There is absolutely no proof of any kind that he ever used doping to enhance his performance and tons of proof that explain his amazing ability . I'm an avid reader and an avid cyclist. That is why I know so much. May I recommend that you do a little reading of your own. And while your at it. Climb on a bike and go for a ride. It might clear your head.

All I can say is wow. I love your quote "That is why I know so much". When I hear people say that it makes me think one thing, EGO. WOW.

Let me make this clear so you don't take it personal. I don't care how big his heart is, there's no way he can beat another pro rider on EPO, let alone 20 guys on EPO. Not for seven years running. Lance is not Superman. Too many people have stepped up to comtradict Lance and that is what I base my "OPINION" on. I too have done some reading on this fact so chill out. What you call fact is not fact. Just because you've seen it on TV doesn't make it a fact.

You know what Buddy, I think I'm going to have to throw the BS flag. I don't think you have read any more than what a quick Google search will tell you. As to my Ego, since when is someones willingness to actually research something before they form an opinion considered an Ego problem? I'm sorry but compared to the army of doctors, and trainers that have worked with Lance and explained his abilities, along with the complete lack of any proof that he has used any kind of performance enhancing drug, your "OPINION" means absolutely nothing.

In the words of Winston Churchill, it is better to be quiet and thought a fool, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Hey Sintesi - If not for those casual 'Lance Fans' our sport wouldn't be on tv in the US. Don't forget where your bread is buttered.

Buddy - You wrote that there is absolutely no way if other riders were on EPO that Lance could beat them without also being on EPO. I object to your logic in this matter.

Very minute differences in performance on a bike tend to be amplified on long big climbs and in Time Trials. All that would be necessary to beat other riders on EPO is for Lance's physiological advantages to offset the EPO advantages. That's it, it's not really rocket surgery. While his physiological advantages have been very well documented, I don't know of a study that compares them to other top riders he has competed against. So is it possible to measure this using science? Certainly, but I don't know that it's been before.

The other big factor that people seem to really not understand about Lance is his burning rage and hate for his adversaries. He really is quiet a dick to people in general and especially on the bike if they are a threat to his success. It is just part of what makes him the champion he is and I think most of us accept that. His age, maturity, fatherhood, etc. may be working against him on this but if he can still tap into that he can win yet again. It's going to be a hell of tour...

That doesn't excuse him for taking PED's to gain a competitive advantage and the PED's can be a cause of cancer...I'm happy that he recovered but a cheat is a cheat...

So where is the evidence that he did take steroids. You can't consider him a cheat, because there IS NO evidence that he did get caught.

If you are the type that listens to others prattle along and believe every word, then you are a very sad person.

People are always amazed at what Lance has done, but has anyone looked at how the chemotherapy drugs may have changed his body? How did they affect his heart? His muscle structure? His lung capacity? Or does he have a higher pain threshold than other men?

Lance was an elite athlete before he had cancer, he's NEVER been caught cheating and has been the most tested athlete ever... What if his cancer and subsequent treatment changed his body... NOT PEDs... He deserves to be celebrated for his accomplishments, not torn down by hearsay. What if Floyd and all the others used the PEDs because they wanted to be as good as Lance is without them!

Also, why are we surprised when athletes cheat? If there was one job opening a month in your profession and getting that job would open doors for you, be something you would always be able to put next to your name... What would you do to get that job? Some people would let there performance speak, others would look for angles to secure the job. If you watched others get the job each month and you believed you were better than they were but kept getting passed over, would you compromise your values/morals at some point to win the job? Or would you continue to toil and strive while holding your values? What if you had a family to support and you needed to provide more? Athletes have a very limited shelf life... they need to make their mark quickly and figure out how to monetize their name... Since their body is their tool, they will try to enhance it to maximize their abilities... It's human nature.

Enduring hard chemotherapy (especially in the years that Armstrong went through it) eventually has severe consequences later in life. It is a miracle he lived through his cancer and its treatment. The man is strong. He sets his mind on a goal and works for it. If he's arrogant, well, there isn't a successful alpha-personality that isn't. It's what gets them to their goal(s).

I don't know anything about his personal life (other than the slobber that the media hypes), and I don't care about it. I admire the public man.

In Armstrong's case if he had been doping then someone from the French side would have been having to help him and that wouldn't happen once let alone 7 times.

Ceasar has stated it perfectly.

A large part of the motivation from the French is that they were so hoping for a Frenchman to win the Tour. It galled them no end (pardon the pun) that it was an American who won, not just once, but 7 times.