OK, serious LA question.....(was this part of the myth correct?)

12…4

  1. Cosmic Kid

    offline
    Member

    Reportedly, LA admitted to Oprah that the was doping pre-cancer. For me, this raises the question of what changed going into 1998 and on when he suddenly was contending for GT's?

    So was the myth about his upper body weight loss, but retaining his previous power levels, somewhat accurtate? Did the transformation of his body, due to the treatments, allow him to successfully contest the Tour? If not, what turned him into a GT contender since he was doping before cancer?

    Just say "NO!!" to WCP!

    "Want to get faster? Work harder, eat better, cut the crap. Instead of talking the talk, work the work"
    Posted 4 months ago

  2. Keith RIchards

    offline
    Moderator

    He certainly lost weight...I thought the assertion that he kept the same (or increased) power output while dropping 15-20 made the difference.

    It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong.
    Posted 4 months ago

  3. iamus72

    offline
    Member

    cosmic...rumor has it that the roids and other PEDs LA was choking down pre-cancer were what gave him cancer in the first place. That he looked a bit thick for a pro-cyclist and more like a weightlifter riding charity rides says something. He gets cancer, loses a ton of weight, muscle mass and finds that he rides better as a twig, well I suspect that's when he discovered micro-dosing and EPO and 'hyperbaric chambers' were the real dope. ya dig?

    Posted 4 months ago

  4. Jah

    offline
    Member

    I think that may be true to an extent, CK. The weight loss helped. In reading the reasoned decision it also seemed that he was a bit more reckless/daring with his "program", particularly in 1999 and 2000. The gist seemed that many top riders were a bit gun shy after the 98 Tour and backed off their program a bit while boy wonder went full tilt and was a lot more professional about it.

    I think that others were micro-dosing EPO and that kind of thing while Postal had doctors, masking agents and were much more scientific in their approach. Later on I think Postal started micro-dosing along with playing with transfusions when the EPO test made them have to change. They were a step ahead for years and had the cash to keep it insulated, no 3rd parties like Fuentes. Ferrari might be the closest one

    Posted 4 months ago

  5. Cosmic Kid

    offline
    Member

    We'll never know if the 'roids he was taking early in his career caused or exacerbated his cancer.

    But he was not just taking 'roids pre-cancer, but EPO as well, so the basics of the doping program did not change. Further, micro-dosing did not become necessary until 2000 when the first EPO test was developed. Prior to that, you could use all the EPO you wanted as long as you stayed below 50% (when tested).

    So if he was using EPO pre-cancer, then what caused the transformation from Classics / week long stage racer to GT contender? If he retained his previous power levels (or even increased them) but lost the weight, his watts / kg obviously would have skyrocketed.

    So perhaps that part of the myth is actually correct...

    Posted 4 months ago

  6. 7tdf-SpearofLance

    offline
    Member

    Actually, the fact that he changed his pedal cadence with Chris Carmichael before and after his sickness.

    http://oldsite.freewheel.com/Misc/cadence.htm

    Posted 4 months ago

  7. Keith RIchards

    offline
    Moderator

    Sentence structure! For crying out loud man...

    Posted 4 months ago

  8. gobuck

    offline
    Member

    The weight loss was a myth. He weighed 75 kilos in Sept of 93, and 79 kilos in November of 99. He might have lost 5 kilos max when he was at his lightest.

    "His weight preseason 1992 and around his World's win in 1993 was around 3kg lighter than 1999 preseason, when he supposedly lost all that weight after cancer treatment."

    Posted 4 months ago

  9. Entheo

    offline
    Member

    here's my guess -- merckx introduced ferrari to armstrong in 1995. armstrong was diagnosed with cancer in oct. of 1996, so there wasn't much time between those dates (taking latencies into account,e.g. time it would take for them to sort out the details of the relationship and then LA starting to feel like crap etc.) for a real program to kick in. post cancer it was full steam ahead with ferrari.

    Posted 4 months ago

  10. Cosmic Kid

    offline
    Member

    Hmmmm....interesting thought, Entheo.

    Maybe we need to take ti a step further - the cancer prevented him from reaching GT contender levels, despite the doping? IOW, he was getting sicker and sicker, and the disease was impacting his performances.

    I dunno....I just think it is fascinating that something clearly changed post-diagnosis, and it seems that it was NOT the introduction of doping products, since he was doping beforehand.

    Posted 4 months ago

  11. Sustanon

    offline
    Member

    Please do some research and hard fact finding before discussing the weight loss hypothesis, because it has already been debunked as pure PR propaganda. LA actually weighed more in 1999 during his comeback than he did in the early 1990's. This is not some well kept secret.

    Look into blood doping practices, because it's what turned Bjarne Rijs from a domestique into a tour contender.

    Posted 4 months ago

  12. Entheo

    offline
    Member

    like the old rolling stones' song "the singer not the song", although he was using before cancer he didn't have enough time to implement il maestro's regiment.

    Posted 4 months ago

  13. Orange Crush

    offline
    Member

    Entheo's post seems to make sense.

    Which begs a big question, will Merckx be put in the hot seat? IMO, that would be much bigger as a mental blow for cycling than pressure on UCI, which will see a major overhaul regardless.

    The wise man said follow me...and he walked behind.
    Posted 4 months ago

  14. Serotta94

    offline
    Member

    Setting aside what "official or other" sources said, I don't see how anyone can think that LA weighed more when winning the Tours than he did in the early 90's. I saw him up close and personal. My teammates came back from Utah Nationals calling him fat boy. He was smooth. Winning his Tours he was ripped.

    Not saying that this was why he won - ar from it - but it did not hurt.

    Posted 4 months ago

  15. pascal

    offline
    Member

    Sustanon and gobuck--you may be right that his weight didn't drop much as he started his comeback, but look at the pics from the later tours he won. You'd have to be blind to think that he was the same weight. He got THIN. You'll never convince me otherwise. The guy was much smaller. Kind of wimpy, really.

    Take a look at the photo from the Worlds he won. He was pretty jacked then. Fat head and all.

    Posted 4 months ago

  16. jmdirt

    offline
    Member

    CK, good Q but it will be tough to answer without a lot of facts that we will likely never have.

    Those who question the weight issue will stand in front of a blue car and tell you that its not blue because they read that it wasn't. "Your story is a myth but my story is true!"

    Do I believe anyting that came out of the LA machine, no but do I know what I saw, Yes.

    Posted 4 months ago

  17. efred

    offline
    Member

    yep!

    He got a Ferrari

    Posted 4 months ago

  18. JS

    offline
    Member

    Not sure about " the facts" but to my eyes he looked huge in the videos I have of him racing pre cancer compared to after.

    For all the good they've done me, I might as well have stuck them up my arse. - Mark Renton
    Posted 4 months ago

  19. Cosmic Kid

    offline
    Member

    Just for reference....

    I have a hard time buying that he weighed MORE post-cancer.

    Posted 4 months ago

  20. Keith RIchards

    offline
    Moderator



    He had more upper body development as a 16/17 year old than he did during his prime TdF win years.

    Posted 4 months ago

  21. iamus72

    offline
    Member

    agree with KR and CK above. The pictures show much beefier LA pre-cancer. Hinting at my earlier comment that he was probably dosing with steroids, HGH in a way to add strength not necessarily finesse. Go back and watch his earlier pre-cancer racing days and the guy was strong but cracked more often than not. Post cancer, he's leaner because of the 'patient wasting' caused by the cancer and chemo-therapy and recovery. His muscle mass and tone is different. Start riding like a long-distance rider versus the pedal masher he was before and the you mix in a doctor-prescribed & administered doping regimen that is not like he was doing before and we see the leaner body with a higher power-to-weight ratio.

    Posted 4 months ago

  22. Sustanon

    offline
    Member

    Listen up guys. I'm not making this up. Go do your own researche as to how much he weighed in 1999 compared to 1994. look at the numbers as opposed to photos from magazine in order to draw a conclusion. Now, did he carry more fat in the early days compared to 1999? Possible, but keep in mind that lean muscle weighs more than fat.

    Posted 4 months ago

  23. Sustanon

    offline
    Member

    From the journal of applied physiology listing LA's weight on different occasions:

    Nov 1992 78.9 kilograms
    Jan 1993 76.5 kg
    Sep 1993 75.1 kg
    Aug 1997 79.5 kg
    Nov 1999 79.7 kg

    ....no evidence of some massive 14-20 lb. weight loss while maintaining the same wattage output.

    Posted 4 months ago

  24. ibex

    offline
    Member

    Just because he was doping before the CA and after doesn't mean that his results would be the same. His doping program clearly became more systematic and more refined. There is probably little doubt that his overall training and diet changed after the CA as well. He became totally focused and controlling about everything. Exercise, wind-tunnel training, diet, and doping. It all works together. He clearly changed many things in his life after the CA diagnosis and treatment.

    However just because everyone is doping doesn't mean there is a level playing field. Some doping programs work better then others. There is little doubt that Lance had an "unlevel" doping playing field. It was probably more refined, better researched, better funded and more controlled. There is also little doubt that during his cancer treatment he gained alot of insight in the medical world and how to approach doping more systematically. I am sured he picked the brains of many medical personnel and many people form the pharmaceutical industry.

    All doping is not equal. Some will kill you, some will do nothing, especially if you are not dosing appropriately and not using a tiered approach that builds to a goal with the treatments, and some will give very good bang for the buck.

    The myth that because others doped, that there was a level playing field, is just that, a myth.

    Posted 4 months ago

  25. cerv

    offline
    Member

    That's your evidence? One off season 1999 weight? That could all be cookies and beer after winning his first tour that would come off again once he picked his training back up. Tells nothing of his body composition, amount of muscle mass, etc.
    Got any tour weights to compare to pre-cancer race weights? Look at the pictures. There's no way he didn't lose some upper body mass.

    The pictures tell a different story. You say it's a myth. You got anything better for evidence?

    Posted 4 months ago

12…4

Reply »

You must log in to post.