Sort of finishes off the previous discussion. What a dope.
Ken
From velonews:
World time trial champion David Millar was formally placed under judicial investigation on Thursday for illegal possession of toxic products, his lawyer said.
Millar told a court west of Paris that he had used the banned blood booster Erythropoietin (EPO), a fact he had already revealed during 48 hours of police custody last week, lawyer Paul-Albert Iwens said.
The 27-year-old rider was released with no restrictions on his freedom of movement, Iwens said.
Millar was detained last week over allegations he had used EPO, and was subsequently barred from racing in the Tour de France which starts on Saturday.
He was second to Australian Bradley McGee in last year’s Tour prologue. Millar’s Cofidis team has been under investigation since January when seven
riders and staff were charged with doping offenses.
Millar, who has never failed a drugs test, had originally denied the accusations, but admitted to doping after police found several empty EPO vials in his apartment.
The Scot might now be dropped by the British Olympic team for Athens where he had hoped to race in both the road race and time trial and in the individual pursuit on the track.
The disappointing thing to me about this is that Millar struck me as having some staying power in the sport.
I thought that when his career on the bike was over that he would become one of the better cycling commentators in the post-Liggett era.
Millar had a flair for language and usually offered a good interview and had exceptional camera presents with his juanty fashion sense and dashing good looks.
Millar once described a time trial stage in the Tour de France as “daunting”, a word not even in most cyclist’s vocabulary.
I am concerned he may never shake the specter of this drub scandal. I hope he can, he is a fine athlete (despite the drug use- I mean before it so to speak) and a promising on-camera talent.
While his judgement was certainly flawed, I do wish him the best in terms of learning from this experience and moving forward with the grace and wisdom he has demonstrated in the past.
You have to give the guy a little credit for coming clean and not trying to insult everyone’s intelligence with tales of midnight breakins and planting, or toothpaste spiking, or they weren’t my vials!
I feel sorry for todays cyclists and runners. For years the powers that be in sports ignored drug use and pretty much condoned it so long as the athletes kept it quiet and didn’t do anything dumb like OD or break a bunch of world records aged 35.
The message sent, and the reality of the situation was, that you couldn’t compete at the top of your sport unless you were doping. There are guys in cycling with team leader type talent who I’m sure couldn’t even make it onto a team without drugs…for a guy like Millar you had two choices, walk away from the sport you love and have dedicated your life to or take the drugs in order to be able to stay in and compete. The majority took the drugs and who can blame them?
Then you had the Ben Johnson fiasco. He just took too much and ran too fast and athletics was forced to act. You can’t have a guy with yellow eyes walking away with the gold medal. Flo JO dies and all of a sudden the IAAF, WADA and to a lesser extent the USATF want heads on poles to show they are cleaning up athletics. People and activities they turned a blind eye to for years suddenly became targets.
IN cycling the 98 tour was the turning point. I’m not that knowledgeable about cycling, but having lived in France for a while and understanding their passion for the sport, I’d guess the doping witch hunts began because Frenchmen weren’t winning the tour anymore. If Indurain or Lemond had been French, there wouldn’t be a crusade against doping in France right now.
Sport created a situation where it was impossible to compete without doping, and now they are throwing the athletes to the lions because it suits their purposes. I genuinely feel sorry for these guys, they aren’t the real criminals…the governing bodies are.
"You have to give the guy a little credit for coming clean and not trying to insult everyone’s intelligence with tales of midnight breakins and planting, or toothpaste spiking, or they weren’t my vials! "
I don’t give cheats any credit…he denied it all along and was adament about his position in lots of interviews earlier in the year. The only thing I’d give him is the Idiot of the Year Award for having vials of the drugs in his apartment, in France, two weeks before the Tour started while his team is under investigation.
Like I said I’m not that knowledgeable about cycling and my theory is just that, a theory.
Dirty Dieter’s toothpaste spiking excuse is NOTHING! American sprinter, Dennis Mitchell, tested positive for testosterone and claimed that he had sex with 4 women and drank a 6 pack of beer the night before his test which resulted in elevated hormone levels.
I hadnt heard the Dennis Mitchel story. That is awesome. Previously I had always liked Paola Pezzos eating too much Belgian Beef and Davidenko’s(Navigators) story of eating alot of Beef Jerky before their tests. I remember some doctor, after reading Pezzos claim, saying that she would have had to have eaten a couple cows, whole, to get to the levels appearing in her test. How much Beef Jerky did Dopadenko claim to have eaten? I know most pro cyclists live on the stuff right?
Now, I’m not accusing Lance of anything here but I’ll jump in to the argument for argument’s sake. What’s the more plausible situation:
everyone in cycling EXCEPT Lance is doping because they couldn’t even make it into the pro peloton without doing it, yet somehow Lance is sooooo far superior to them that he can beat even the best, most heavily doped riders or sheer natural talent,
or…
Lance is doping like everyone else, and lying about it like everyone else.
I sincerely hope it’s #1. I have no reason to believe that it’s #2. But I can tell you which one sounds more plausible on the surface. Mind you, Lance is far wealthier than most other cyclists, so it’s entirely possible that he’s using something that’s not YET banned so he can say with a clear conscience that he’s not using banned substances. This is still doping in my book.
everyone in cycling EXCEPT Lance is doping because they couldn’t even make it into the pro peloton without doing it, yet somehow Lance is sooooo far superior to them that he can beat even the best, most heavily doped riders or sheer natural talent,
or…
Lance is doping like everyone else, and lying about it like everyone else.
Or:
Doping is rampant within cycling, but not universal, as far as we know. Therefore, as long as there is no evidence to indicate an individual cyclist is doping, there is no reason to assert that his denials are lies.
Therefore, as long as there is no evidence to indicate an individual cyclist is doping, there is no reason to assert that his denials are lies.
Agreed. I’m not making any such assertion.
Doping is rampant within cycling, but not universal, as far as we know.
This still means (to me) that the vast majority of the peloton is not clean. These guys are all naturally talented riders, doping or not. My point is that, given the widespread use of drugs in cycling and the fact that everyone is a naturally gifted cyclist, it seems highly improbable that someone could dominate (not just beat, but dominate) the entire field for as long as he has. To put a less accusatory spin on what I’m saying, if Lance is indeed clean, as he claims, it would make his 5 (or 6) victories in the TdF that much more incredible.
so it’s entirely possible that he’s using something that’s not YET banned so he can say with a clear conscience that he’s not using banned substances.
Except on his Web site is the declaration Lance Armstrong utterly denies ever
having taken any performance enhancing drugs. He may be lying, but those aren’t weasel words.
What I’m talking about is stuff like the artificial blood that was discussed in another thread that can carry 2-3x more oxygen per unit than real blood. Is that a “drug”? It certainly has performance-enhancing effects from what I’ve heard. What about altitude tents. I’m sure Lance uses one. How many people can afford those? I’m sure there are sorts of things that cannot clearly be labeled PED’s that are nonetheless performance enhancers and cross into that PED grey area to varying extents.
"I’m not really making a judgement on Lance any more than I am on anyone else because Lance would win if they were all taking drugs, and he would win if none were taking drugs, he is a machine. "
Yes, but the question at hand seems to be can he win if everyone but him is taking drugs?