How is it that Lance Armstrong was able to get away with sporting fraud (doping) for 7 straight years?

Question

-Cycling is a sport which is based on pure athleticism. To merely participate in the sport, one has to be unusually gifted. To excel, one has to be a freak of nature.

-Lance Armstrong's chief rivals have all been caught doping, yet somehow he makes these elite dopers look like clowns when he rides.

-So many people have come out against him over the years including personal trainers.

-The previous 2 winners (Pantani, Ullrich) have been CAUGHT red-handed doping, and there is strong evidence that Indurain and Riis were dopers as well.

Answer 1

First of all, Lance has never tested positive for any performance enhancing drug under the current UCI/WADA list of banned substances. So saying that he has gotten away with sporting fraud is a bit unfair since there has never been any official evidence of wrong-doing.

But that said, let's consider the situation that we now have with the evidence gathered from Operation Puerto. In this sting operation, a number of top cyclists (Jan Ullrich, Ivan Basso, etc.), who have also never tested positive for performance enhancement drugs have now been implicated in receiving substances and medical support (autologous doping) that are banned.

I don't think that it's fair to accuse any of the implicated riders as guilty, but it's not looking good. Fuentes, being the medical doctor that he is, kept pretty good records, and systematic doping that skirts around all the testing is pretty difficult to do without a comprehensive plan (and the help of a doctor).

So now, let's make a very bold assumption that all the implicated riders from Puerto did indeed participate in some sort of banned performance enchancement regime. Are we to believe that Lance Armstrong beat all the best cyclists in the world just on Powerbars, Cytomax, and 6 hour training rides in the rain? Yes, Lance is certainly a physiological freak of nature, but I'm willing to bet that Ullrich, and Basso have equally impressive numbers that match Lance's. Considering that it's been reported that EPO can boost an athlete's performance by as much as 20%, it's pretty difficult to believe that Lance was not doing some sort of performance enhancement if the rest of his competition was enhancing also.

But one thing that really needs to be consider in this whole discussion is what constitutes performance enhancement/sporting fraud/doping? Yes, I'm aware that there is a list of banned substances and tests designed to detect such substances. But are any of those substances really all that different than (still legal) practices such as sleeping in altitude tents, or even eating a PowerBar during a ride? And what about undetectable substances or drugs not yet on the banned list?

To a world-class athlete, where even a 1% performance advantage merits attention (think about how much time and money were invested in Lance's project F1 in which his support team micro-managed his bike, clothing and riding position in an attempt to shave seconds off his TT time), undetectable performance enhancement medical practices are sure to have taken place. We've seen our first glimpse with Operation Puerto, I'm sure that it's only a matter of time that other systematic doping regimes are exposed.

Answer 2

Probably because he wasn't doping.
Lance Armstrong has been the most tested athelete for the last 7 years...probably because the French are so offended at the idea of an American dominating their biggest event. Most riders are tested once during the Tour, Lance was never tested less than twice. And no one ever found any evidence of doping. Face it, he's just that good.

Answer 3

Who really knows? He hasn't tested remotely positive for anything since his salve incident in 1999. But most of the nailed dopers don't get caught through testing, it's through getting found out through their connections to the doctors and suppliers, ala Festina 1998 and now Operacion Puerto 2006. (take Heras, Hamilton, Millar, Mierhaghe and few other names out - it pales in comparison to the number of "clean" testing riders that Puerto is coming up with) Some that I ride with think Armstrong is guilty as sin, and others think the sun shines out of his bum. To really be objective you have to recognize the focus that went into his Tour accomplishment. His personal focus, his team's focus, his sponsors' focus - it was all for him to win the Tour. That was the only goal. US Postal over the years, and then his Discovery squad, were unbelievably strong teams supporting that goal. Just look what the riders that left those teams have gone on to do.

It's not entirely fair to call him a one-trick pony as some do - he won other big races post-cancer, including the Dauphine and the Tour de Suisse, but it was really all just prep for the big show in July. Lance never even raced the Giro, compare that to Merckx who smacked everyone around from spring to fall, including doing the "double". Lance didn't risk riding the other grand tours, as he felt it wasn't compatible with his preparation for the Tour. I interpreted that as he wasn't capable of being the king all season all long, though his talent, motivation and training could carry him through his one goal in July: theTour. Many of his rivals had competing goals, or didn't appear as clearly motivated.

So don't just look at the record he set, and assume it must be doping. Look at the big picture, including what he couldn't do in order to win the Tour 7 years in a row.

Answer 4

Lance Armstrong is one of the greatest cyclers. The doping fraud only came out to stop him from winning 7 Tour de France. He has retired. Let it go.

Answer 5

HE IS INNOCENT, everyone who has helped him is jealous, and his competitors are more sprinters than mountan climbers. They got caught cuz they needed a way to keep up with Lance, and couldnt climb the mountains. Lance stays with the pack on the flats and exels in the mountains from ENDURANCE and he is LIGHTWEIGHT u dont get those two from doping. His competitors try to out muscle him in the sprints but cant keep up in the mountains as we've seen in years past. Again LANCE IS INNOCENT!!!

Answer 6

You make it seem as if he simply floated up the hills by making his competitors "look like clowns" this is not the case. Lance struggled just like anyone else, his win are not by hours but minutes or seconds. He is able to endure and train better than anyone he raced against. It is silly to say that anyone could make ulrich, vino, or basso look like a clown. I truely believe that he didn't dope, anyone who says he did had a chip on their shoulder and had something to gain from saying that he did.

Answer 7

He is a consumate athelete and a sportsman.

There has never been a shred of proof that he doped, and he has bone the acusations and suspicion of the french and the media with grace and dignity.

He is retired after an umblemished career, so now it is time for you to shut up and sit down on your flabby hindquarters.

Answer 8

(a) Not all drugs are detectable. If the doping agency doesnt know they exist, then anybody can use them and it will go undetected.

(b) Full doping tests werent approved in the tour de France until a few years back.

Answer 9

your points don't actually add up to anything.

lance is a freak of nature, aided by a serious illness that stripped away every ounce of extra weight and taught him the meaning of true suffering.

these things combined to make a champion the likes of which he had no dreams of becoming back in the early '90s.

Answer 10

He's American, just like Carl Lewis did Olympic game after Olympic game