grantelmwood

I know nothing about cycling and I was transfixed by this interview
Attia indeed CRUSHES it as the interviewer.

This is a very technical interview, nothing like Oprah media fluff.

The cancer discussion was a medical class
Headache, blurry vision, and coughing up blood as a testicular cancer marker.
Orchiectomy due to seminomatous tumor vs. choreocarcinoma
The downsides of BEP bleomycin chemo, the progression of 4 cycles of chemo.
I forgot that Lance also has brain cancer spread.

The PED discussion was a medical class
Hematocrit levels, etc.

The race discussion was a cycling history class
Giro, Tour, Vuelta, etc.
He recalls every race he rode in detail year by year, 97,98,99,00,01,etc.
​​​​​​​
Please do not comment unless you've completed listening to the podcast episode.

This may be the best Lance interview on record.
Attia is a medical researcher and a huge bike nerd, etc.
These are questions that are technical as hell, and Lance remembers details and numbers even from the 80s and 90s.
A must listen for any bike (history) nerd.

For those who can't read so good:
Please do not comment unless you've completed listening to the podcast episode.

Koyote

I did not listen to the podcast episode.

I don’t care what Lance has to say about anything.

By the way, I do read pretty good. Better than you can write, apparently.

You don’t get to dictate the terms of a discussion.

smd4

Don’t think I’m gonna spend two and a half hours watching that anytime soon…

shelbyfv

In general, I dislike posts that consist of nothing more than links to some random video. It's as if the poster has nothing to share from personal experience but is compelled to participate. JMO. Edit- Is it truly 2.5 hours?

tempocyclist

I haven't listened to the podcast, but I'm commenting simply because you said not to. 😝


That said, I likely will listen to it at some point. I find that era pretty interesting. Lance, the good and the very bad, is certainly something else!

veganbikes

While I find Lance to be an interesting topic it would be nice to hear from the OP on the subject rather than just here is a video I watched you need to watch it too and don't say anything unless you have watched it. That is a guaranteed bad time. Discussion will happen naturally and if you try to dictate it you will only make people mad or frustrated or just not like you or your threads. I am not trying to be mean towards ya but it is just not a great way to go about a thread.

What are your personal thoughts on that video that you didn't feel like sharing on the video comments?

I am not going to watch it I don't have almost 2.5 hours to watch a podcast on Lance. I did some minor scrolling and it is two dudes sitting by microphones and 2.5 hours of that is just a lot. I am sure the talk is at least semi-interesting as it is about cycling and a very controversial figure within it but talking directly to that person but I want to see videos and more a documentary style for that long.

nomadmax 

I watched the entire thing IN 2001. Nothing new.

A thief will steal, a murderer will kill, but you never really know where you stand with a liar.

MaxKatt

____________________

Classic. Bonus points for doing it while ripping someone else for poor writing.

livedarklions

I'm just going to say I watched the video and then when you point out I'm lying about it, I'm going to sue you, commit perjury and get you fired from your job while ruthlessly badmouthing you.

You ever notice he didn't admit the PED use until the statute of limitations was up on all of the perjury he committed? I could forgive the PED use, but not the vicious illegal attacks and bullying.
​​​​​

BTW, his bicycling history officially never happened.

Koyote

Try reading the original post, genius:

Since you like pics, MaxKatt , here's one for you:

Paul Barnard

Lance was the best of the best. He cleaned house playing the same game everyone else was.

gkamieneski

Are you serious?

Barry2 

grantelmwood ,

OK, no comment.
Nope I just can't do it... I'm gonna comment.

Nope, I can resist.
Honest I can.

Really I can.

Let me think on it, and I'll come back and edit this post.
Unless it turns out I can resist.

Camilo

Tyler Hamilton's book is a good read and sheds some light on this as do others. I agree with Paul Barnard as far as the doping goes. Lance was certainly the strongest among the dopers, and I think it was unlikely that a person could be on a pro team and be competitive at all without doping. But the way he lied and the $hi**y way he treated and ruined others also surpassed everyone else. To me, that's where his villainy resides.

veganbikes

Are you serious? Name me someone from that era who was a better doped rider than Lance? He had 7 TdF victories while doped which is something nobody else of that era had.

You may not like Lance and you shouldn't like what he did in terms of doping but there is no denying he was the best of the dopers at least on a bike.

Eric F 

Are you under the impression that Lance was the only one using PEDs during his era?

Eric F 

I have less of an issue with the doping than I do with him being an a-hole to the people around him. He played the game that was being played, and played it better than everyone else.

1999
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Alex Zülle (‘98 busted for EPO)
3. Fernando Escartín (Systematic team doping exposed in ‘04)
4. Laurent Dufaux (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Ángel Casero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2000
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Christophe Moreau (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Roberto Heras (‘05 busted for EPO)

2001
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Andrei Kivilev
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2002
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Raimondas Rumšas (Suspended in ‘03 for doping)
4. Santiago Botero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2003
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
4. Tyler Hamilton (Suspended ‘04 for blood doping)
5. Haimar Zubeldia

2004
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Andreas Kloden (Named in doping case in ‘08)
3. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
4. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Jose Azevedo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2005
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
3. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Fransico Mancebo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)

tomato coupe

This will turn out to be the best Lance interview on record.

I can't listen to it right now -- I've got to finish listening to Charles Manson's best interview.

indyfabz

This is not going to end well.

grantelmwood

I love all the specific data they discuss about performance
For example, is maintaining 500 watts for 30 minutes on 8% grade considered good these days?

livedarklions

First of all, best of the dopers isn't his accomplishment, it's his medical team's. Second, I absolutely refuse to recognize any honor in that. Third, he was also by far the leading squelcher of whistleblowing. I will never forgive him for how he treated Greg Lemond, and I think that alone is reason enough for LA to be permanently shunned. I have absolutely no interest in listening to LA's tale of post-fall "growth", the list of people he harmed and betrayed is far too long, and his role in establishing and extending the PED era far too obvious.

shelbyfv

There you have it. Maybe a better way would be "I watched this video about Lance (link) and I was wondering if maintaining 500 watts for 30 minutes on 8% grade considered good these days?" You'd have something specific to discuss. FWIW, half that power for 30 minutes would be excellent for any mere mortal.

badger1

I seem to recall that years ago there came to be a kind of 'rule' around here: no Armstrong/doping discussion, at least not in 'General.'

Don't know whether that rule was informal or formal (instituted by our mods), but as with at least a couple other topics I can think of, discussion on this one inevitably turns pointlessly toxic.

bikemig 

Nice job of backing up your point with data. I'm not defending Lance being an a hole but I always figured that his personality is a big part of what made him such a tough competitor. When I watched him race, I thought he did an impressive job of beating his opponents physically and mentally. Again, this is not a defense of Lance but an observation.

livedarklions

He's an unindicted felon by his own admission, both for the PED use and the perjury. Since the perjury had real victims (crushing legal costs, jobs and reputation), I don't see why this forum should be open to apologetics on his behalf.