I agree with you. Armstrong took doping to another level. He embraced doping and then perfected it. Greg Lemond said that Armstrong's natural talent was average (which looks that way if you look at his early tour history). He also added, “If Armstrong had given Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton the same stuff he was taking, he would never have won - they would have beaten him."
a truly idiotic comment. walsh helped keep the story alive when most other journalists were worshipping at armstrongs feet. he played his part in bringing truth to sport of cycling. now, dont you think he's entitled to write a book or two about that?? also, not all riders are on drugs, like you lazily say. at moment, the fight is been won, that could change, but as it stands, it is possible to believe that winning clean is possible and is being done
yeah , merckx would probably have used epo in 90's. about 90% of peloton on epo in 90s, so 90% chance merckx would have doped. it also means 90% chance that you Ryan, or me or anyone reading this would also have been on epo. the point is that before epo, no drug could turn an average rider into a champion. after epo donkeys like riis could be turned into champs. some riders got 2% increase in performance, some got 20%, so cant tell who the real champions wer. cant say that about any pre-epo drug
merckx was cought taking pemoline and iodinated glycerol. anyone who equates stone-age agents like that to EPO is delusional. these drugs were highly unlikely to have even been slightly performance enhancing. he is the greatest champion of all time and walsh is right to distinguish pre and post epo eras. epo changed everything, it decided who won. iodinated glycerol never made a champion out of anybody
Sky's performace was very, very suspect. HOWEVER, and I stress this, Wiggins is 10x the rider Armstrong was. Wiggins has been world class his entire career, whereas Armstrong only became so BECAUSE of the doping.
I sort of get what he means, he is admitting Merckx cheated really, its just he didnt have the EPO boost, which has probably been the most effective drug
Because of genetics, no competition will ever be "fair". Take two dedicated cyclist, one is genetically gifted, the other is not, no matter how disciplined, committed, intelligently trained and intensity of training, the non-gifted cyclist will never win a CAT3 race. Obviously there are different levels of gifted genetics, which means competition is simply a display of God's best design with an equal measure of work....in other words the winning combination is 50% God given - 50% driven. It is very sad that the world considers athletic winners as the one who wanted to win the most and took the steps to make it happen.....so untrue. I can guarantee you that the cyclist finishing in 100 position of the Tour-De-France is more committed than the winner. So now enters cheating, drugs, more unfairness to an already unfair game, who cares. Stop racing and start riding for the fitness, the connection to outdoors, the excitement of wilderness travel, the mind clearing meditation of cycling, and all the health that comes from this discipline. Don't race so you can commit your life to something of importance instead.
He differenciates between pre epo and post epo but seems to forget these guys WOULD have used this if available so IMO a cheat is a cheat is a cheat. Mind you Walsh often speaks with the heart so can be forgiven.
i think the thing you have to look at when you say that, about EPO and L.A doing nothing very different to many of the others, is this: he helped set up and facilitate the most elaborate, best funded, most sophisticated doping set-up in cycling. it was a doping arms race and U.S Postal had the big budget and L.A was prepared to work with and lie about working with for the longest time, the dirtiest doctor in the sport...he was prepared to do and had the funds to do what others couldn't/wouldn't
just checked armstrongs worth online. it is 125 million. yeah he will lose alot in having to resettle court cases, but the final message of this episode is win at any cost. society frowns as he drives off in a ferrari.
and that's what makes his denial and hijacking of the sport and destruction of careers and the whole 'don't dare question this man who has survived cancer', all the more sickening.
My answer to the doping problem is random health tests combined with testing for drugs that are known to be dangerous (don't just ban everything). Athletes would have random physicals year round and would be suspended if they are found to be in ill health (high blood pressure, elevated liver enzymes, elevated hematocrit, suffering from injuries). If were really supposed to looking out for the athletes lets put are money where are mouth is.
this was an amazing interview. but ultimately i feel sick. a great man speaking the truth, with 5k views on a youtube channel, compared to a known liar and cheat on oprah with millions of views and pounds. please try to get this interview on a maintstream channel. or i just feel that cheating is worth it. glory over honesty, winning over competing.
Outstanding. Good work GCN with this Walsh interview you've really established yourself as essential viewing for anyone who follows Pro Cycling. Cheers 808
you stated wiggins served a drug suspension. you then stated it was because of a positive test for testosterone (presumably excessive) as a track cyclist at the beginning of his career. as both are totally false and groundless why did you a) state them as true and b) then expect anyone to read, let alone take remotely seriously, anything else you write? if you really are concerned with cycling and doping i suggest the very lest you do is ensure you do not perpetrate complete lies. good day sir.
Walsh is a bitter man. He made a name for himself pursuing LA, name of one of his books. He contradicts himself non stop. Best rider? Merckx, tested positive 3 times. Anquetil? Author of the statement "leave me in peace, everyone takes dope, only a fool would imagine it was possible to ride on just water." According to Mr. Walsh, everyone used doping, but what LA did to Emma O'Rilley was terrible. So Lance's crime was not doping, but act as a gangaster. DW is not to be taken seriously.
David Walsh is the epitome of tainted journalism as he is only focused on certain fascists of the story not the root cause and its a shame a journalist of with his Palmares is so deaf , dumb and blind to prior generations of cycling and PED's going back to the 1940's. For an old guy he is very immature in his knowledge of the sport and the fact he can unequivocally mention Merckx show he has an agenda and if he looked heard at Merckx the way he looked at Lance he would be disappointed but Merckx is a much larger legend and to try and investigate him and take him down the way he did Lance he would receive 100x the resistance he did with Armstrong.
I can understand what he's saying about EPO, but in Lance's case, all the other top guys were on it too. I don't like looking at it this way, but he was still the best of the cheats. Eddy Merckx did the same. Perhaps not with as powerful drugs, but they all still used them. Hopefully once Oprah's interview comes out everyone can move on and make doping a thing of the past. For good this time.
I agree with you. Armstrong took doping to another level. He embraced doping and then perfected it. Greg Lemond said that Armstrong's natural talent was average (which looks that way if you look at his early tour history). He also added, “If Armstrong had given Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton the same stuff he was taking, he would never have won - they would have beaten him."
a truly idiotic comment. walsh helped keep the story alive when most other journalists were worshipping at armstrongs feet. he played his part in bringing truth to sport of cycling. now, dont you think he's entitled to write a book or two about that?? also, not all riders are on drugs, like you lazily say. at moment, the fight is been won, that could change, but as it stands, it is possible to believe that winning clean is possible and is being done
Congrats. to David Walsh and GCN. Excellent series!
Looking forward to a great but clean 2013
I love ya David Walsh, but Mercxx doped too.
yeah , merckx would probably have used epo in 90's. about 90% of peloton on epo in 90s, so 90% chance merckx would have doped. it also means 90% chance that you Ryan, or me or anyone reading this would also have been on epo. the point is that before epo, no drug could turn an average rider into a champion. after epo donkeys like riis could be turned into champs. some riders got 2% increase in performance, some got 20%, so cant tell who the real champions wer. cant say that about any pre-epo drug
merckx was cought taking pemoline and iodinated glycerol. anyone who equates stone-age agents like that to EPO is delusional. these drugs were highly unlikely to have even been slightly performance enhancing. he is the greatest champion of all time and walsh is right to distinguish pre and post epo eras. epo changed everything, it decided who won. iodinated glycerol never made a champion out of anybody
Sky's performace was very, very suspect. HOWEVER, and I stress this, Wiggins is 10x the rider Armstrong was. Wiggins has been world class his entire career, whereas Armstrong only became so BECAUSE of the doping.
It's not part of sport you naive, it's part or human nature. Cheat , son cheat.
totally false. any simple internet search will show this is simply untrue.
I sort of get what he means, he is admitting Merckx cheated really, its just he didnt have the EPO boost, which has probably been the most effective drug
Because of genetics, no competition will ever be "fair". Take two dedicated cyclist, one is genetically gifted, the other is not, no matter how disciplined, committed, intelligently trained and intensity of training, the non-gifted cyclist will never win a CAT3 race. Obviously there are different levels of gifted genetics, which means competition is simply a display of God's best design with an equal measure of work....in other words the winning combination is 50% God given - 50% driven. It is very sad that the world considers athletic winners as the one who wanted to win the most and took the steps to make it happen.....so untrue. I can guarantee you that the cyclist finishing in 100 position of the Tour-De-France is more committed than the winner. So now enters cheating, drugs, more unfairness to an already unfair game, who cares. Stop racing and start riding for the fitness, the connection to outdoors, the excitement of wilderness travel, the mind clearing meditation of cycling, and all the health that comes from this discipline. Don't race so you can commit your life to something of importance instead.
He differenciates between pre epo and post epo but seems to forget these guys WOULD have used this if available so IMO a cheat is a cheat is a cheat. Mind you Walsh often speaks with the heart so can be forgiven.
i think the thing you have to look at when you say that, about EPO and L.A doing nothing very different to many of the others, is this: he helped set up and facilitate the most elaborate, best funded, most sophisticated doping set-up in cycling. it was a doping arms race and U.S Postal had the big budget and L.A was prepared to work with and lie about working with for the longest time, the dirtiest doctor in the sport...he was prepared to do and had the funds to do what others couldn't/wouldn't
just checked armstrongs worth online. it is 125 million. yeah he will lose alot in having to resettle court cases, but the final message of this episode is win at any cost. society frowns as he drives off in a ferrari.
and that's what makes his denial and hijacking of the sport and destruction of careers and the whole 'don't dare question this man who has survived cancer', all the more sickening.
My answer to the doping problem is random health tests combined with testing for drugs that are known to be dangerous (don't just ban everything). Athletes would have random physicals year round and would be suspended if they are found to be in ill health (high blood pressure, elevated liver enzymes, elevated hematocrit, suffering from injuries). If were really supposed to looking out for the athletes lets put are money where are mouth is.
this was an amazing interview. but ultimately i feel sick. a great man speaking the truth, with 5k views on a youtube channel, compared to a known liar and cheat on oprah with millions of views and pounds. please try to get this interview on a maintstream channel. or i just feel that cheating is worth it. glory over honesty, winning over competing.
no he hasn't. that's completely false.
Yes he does. He was zinged for Tes(osterone)t in his early days. Before he was a tour rider when he was just a track cyclist.
Outstanding. Good work GCN with this Walsh interview you've really established yourself as essential viewing for anyone who follows Pro Cycling.
Cheers
808
Except of course the Wiggins also has a drug suspension in his past.
GC contenders or every rider in the peloton aka professional riders?
EXACTLY!!!
durianrider?
you stated wiggins served a drug suspension. you then stated it was because of a positive test for testosterone (presumably excessive) as a track cyclist at the beginning of his career. as both are totally false and groundless why did you a) state them as true and b) then expect anyone to read, let alone take remotely seriously, anything else you write? if you really are concerned with cycling and doping i suggest the very lest you do is ensure you do not perpetrate complete lies. good day sir.
you pity yourself pal, we're cyclist we ride our bikes, no one is my hero. Admiring an athlete has nothing to do that person being a hero.
Walsh is a bitter man. He made a name for himself pursuing LA, name of one of his books. He contradicts himself non stop. Best rider? Merckx, tested positive 3 times. Anquetil? Author of the statement "leave me in peace, everyone takes dope, only a fool would imagine it was possible to ride on just water." According to Mr. Walsh, everyone used doping, but what LA did to Emma O'Rilley was terrible. So Lance's crime was not doping, but act as a gangaster. DW is not to be taken seriously.
I still like Lance Armstrong, he was the best rider in all 7 tours
David Walsh is the epitome of tainted journalism as he is only focused on certain fascists of the story not the root cause and its a shame a journalist of with his Palmares is so deaf , dumb and blind to prior generations of cycling and PED's going back to the 1940's. For an old guy he is very immature in his knowledge of the sport and the fact he can unequivocally mention Merckx show he has an agenda and if he looked heard at Merckx the way he looked at Lance he would be disappointed but Merckx is a much larger legend and to try and investigate him and take him down the way he did Lance he would receive 100x the resistance he did with Armstrong.
I can understand what he's saying about EPO, but in Lance's case, all the other top guys were on it too. I don't like looking at it this way, but he was still the best of the cheats. Eddy Merckx did the same. Perhaps not with as powerful drugs, but they all still used them. Hopefully once Oprah's interview comes out everyone can move on and make doping a thing of the past. For good this time.
Walsh has/had an unhealthy obsession with Armstrong. Armstrong was a doper NOT a serial murderer!!
A doper who used the resources he acquired from cheating to viciously hurt anyone who tried to tell the truth about him.