Interesting podcast with Lance Armstrong

[GregL]

Whether you love, hate, or are indifferent to Lance Armstrong, the subject podcast/video is (IMO) the best interview ever conducted with him. Peter Attia keeps Armstrong comfortable and engaged while pulling out lots of information that I've never heard Armstrong discuss. This interview and last year's ESPN 30 For 30 documentary provide fascinating insights into both Armstrong and the "high octane" era of blood doping in bike racing.

Greg

[Mr. Pink]

This was a great interview/podcast. I learned a lot. Highly recommended. He still sounds like a grade AAA jerk, but, that's Lance.

I liked the comment at the end: "I dont drive anywhere to bike."

[benb]

I have a lot of respect for any cyclist that says that.

It keeps me from looking at mountain bikes that are biased too far away from being able to pedal and it jives with the whole "bikes should be green" thing.

I've been thinking about it a bit lately as my son is getting increasingly into MTB and he's in this weird situation where he's getting pretty good down singletrack but still has a bit of trouble navigating roads if we ride to the trail system and it really stinks to load bikes on the car if it takes as long to load & unload the bikes as it does to ride to and from the trail system.

[Gummee]

Originally Posted by benb

I have a lot of respect for any cyclist that says that.

It keeps me from looking at mountain bikes that are biased too far away from being able to pedal and it jives with the whole "bikes should be green" thing.

I've been thinking about it a bit lately as my son is getting increasingly into MTB and he's in this weird situation where he's getting pretty good down singletrack but still has a bit of trouble navigating roads if we ride to the trail system and it really stinks to load bikes on the car if it takes as long to load & unload the bikes as it does to ride to and from the trail system.

My neighbors are definitely anti bike on our farm country back roads. They want me to drive elsewhere to ride someone else's roads or worse, the MUT next to the parkway.
I live on the edge of civilization and if I pick the correct direction: S and W I head into farm country that's still farms.

Why should I be one more car on the road driving to go exercise?
Why should it take longer to put the bike on the car to drive to go exercise?
why should it take longer to drive to the ride when I can hop out my back door?

Nope. I ride road because I live where the roads are. I rode mtn in college because the trails were 20min out my door and I could ride to the trails, ride the trails, and ride home.

I'm constantly reminded that my idea of 'a bike ride' isn't the same as a recreational rider's idea of 'a bike ride' and they can't conceive riding for a few hours at a cruising speed of ~18mph

M

[Ewiser]

https://www.velonews.com/news/road/f...france-riders/

New doping coming to light.

[benb]

Originally Posted by Gummee

My neighbors are definitely anti bike on our farm country back roads. They want me to drive elsewhere to ride someone else's roads or worse, the MUT next to the parkway.
I live on the edge of civilization and if I pick the correct direction: S and W I head into farm country that's still farms.

Why should I be one more car on the road driving to go exercise?
Why should it take longer to put the bike on the car to drive to go exercise?
why should it take longer to drive to the ride when I can hop out my back door?

Nope. I ride road because I live where the roads are. I rode mtn in college because the trails were 20min out my door and I could ride to the trails, ride the trails, and ride home.

I'm constantly reminded that my idea of 'a bike ride' isn't the same as a recreational rider's idea of 'a bike ride' and they can't conceive riding for a few hours at a cruising speed of ~18mph

M

This is what keeps me riding road mostly, your thinking is similar to mine but my neighborhood/area is not hostile to cyclists. But when I want to ride MTB I am heavily biased towards riding to the trailhead. Gravel works too but it all makes the sweet spot for me on a MTB somewhere between XC and a fast trail ride/free ride bike.

It's so counterproductive to get to the trailhead and see 25 SUVs at the trailhead that carted one bike and one person each, 50 tons plus of vehicle driven there to cart 25 guys and the bikes.

[benb]

Originally Posted by Ewiser

https://www.velonews.com/news/road/f...france-riders/

New doping coming to light.

That's interesting stuff. I'd suspect it is indicative of what they're trying to do these days.

I just listened to a podcast about the whole Nike Project Oregon doping scandal.. what they were doing there was essentially diagnosing training stress/over training medically and then trying to figure out how to "treat" it without violating the doping rules. Mixing and matching drugs that were not banned yet or combinations of small doses of drugs that were banned but which in combination could provide an edge without exceeding thresholds for failing tests.

It sounded like the kind of thing that could defeat passport type testing as the goal was to put all the kinds of hormone levels and blood markers and such into a healthy range when they would normally not be in a healthy range due to extreme training.

Same kind of thing with something like HCT.. if it drops under extreme training/racing just dope just right and just enough to make it not drop. If the passport doesn't dictate the markers should drop the way they would for an undoped rider the passport doesn't flag the rider.

[RonW87]

Originally Posted by LegendRider

Lance said his pre-cancer weight was 175lbs and his post-cancer, Tour weight was 160 - 165lbs. Using these figures along with the 450 watts (estimated clean) and 500 watts (juiced/actual) he claims from testing on the Madone, you can see what a huge difference the weight loss/EPO make.

50 additional watts from EPO seems high, but needing a ~7 watts/kg to win the Tour during that era seems plausible.

Aren't the 450/500 numbers for 30 mins. vs. 7 w/kg is a one hour number?

[reuben]

Originally Posted by Ewiser

https://www.velonews.com/news/road/f...france-riders/

New doping coming to light.

I'm pretty sure that I will never see a truly clean grand tour during the remainder of my lifetime - if I ever have.

Then there are all of the other races over a day, a week, etc.

And it's not just pros.

[bocobiking]

Originally Posted by rain dogs

Of course. No disagreement here, but the narrative that the Armstrong camp has always used is reframing "widespread" - meaning a significant %, but not everyone - to "absolutely everyone" with the implication that is 100%.

Of course, the easy bait, is to take it as 100% and thus absolve Lance (see, you've just been played), where they can then also hide behind the 'easy out' concept of "everyone who had a chance to win"... or "my key competitors" which is both flawed logic because it would be extremely hard to be competitive without joining in and doping (thus ignoring potential), AND that's subject to Lance et al's idea of who was a legit competitor (where he can choose only the other riders who take it "seriously" - meaning doping - and thus "everyone").

In all cases, it's untrue. Not everyone doped in the EPO era, not even close. Not everyone of the key competitors or highly talented individuals doped. You only have to talk to pros during that era who raced who know.

So, "Everyone" is a manipulation, another PR story spun by Lance. Lance didn't dope because a large % of people were doping... he doped because he wanted to ensure he won by any means possible including fullscale cheating. that's what's important. He should never be absolved by "some (or in Lance's eyes 'all') of my key competitors were doing it". Because then the apologists echo the mantra "Everyone, Everyone, Everyone, Everyone"

How do You know?

[LegendRider]

Originally Posted by RonW87

Aren't the 450/500 numbers for 30 mins. vs. 7 w/kg is a one hour number?

Yes, the 450/500 numbers are from Lance's Madone test which took approximately 30 minutes.

I don't know if it's the exact same segment, but Porte has the Strava KOM at 34:43.

I've always taken the watts/kg numbers bandied about for Tour winners to be what they could do on the decisive climb often at the end of the stage. I don't think even during the supercharged era they held 7 watts/kg for an entire hour.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by 9tubes

Good points, Jimmy. Lance was always coy about his weight. He was reportedly 5'10" and 75kg would be pretty porky at that height. With his (and Signor Ferrari's) obsession with weight I'd bet closer to 70kg. I suspect the team inflated his weight number in case someone calculated his wattage from climbing times.

At 70kg and 450watts, he would be at 6.5w/kg. Could he do that undoped? I doubt it but who knows. His early results speak volumes. But who cares? We know the real story now. Lance isn't going to rehabilitate himself with more bloviating unsupported claims.

I met him at NAHBS in Portland. I am 5’11”, no way he’s 5’10”….he’s a shrimp.

I'm pretty sure that I will never see a truly clean grand tour during the remainder of my lifetime - if I ever have.

You haven’t. Said it before, all teams/pros have MDs on staff. They know the doping ‘rules’ inside and out. They have their riders take all sorts of stuff that isn't(yet?)illegal, like the spinal cord stuff mentioned, that ‘may’ help them ride or recover. Often w/o telling the rider what it is….

NO different than any ‘pro’ sport anywhere and lots of non pro ones.

[mg2ride]

Thanks, Very much enjoyed and glad to hear that even at the height of the scandal, in his day to day life the public was mostly indifferent.

You would never think it by reading this forum but the haters are few and far between.

[weisan]

Just finished watching the podcast recording in video. Being able to see the body language and facial expressions made the whole interview even more compelling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaGLfau1tRs

[gurk700]

.