Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Lance Armstrong – Six-time Tour Champion?
Surprise, surprise – L’Equipe is reporting they have definitve proof that Lance Armstrong was on EPO when he won the Tour. In 1999.
A French medical lab is claiming that the traces of EPO were discovered in urine samples taken during the 1999 Tour, though there were no official urine tests for EPO at the time. Such tests were first introduced at the Sydney Olympics in 2000. (The hematacrit testing was introduced in 1997, but that test does not distinguish between natural and artifical EPO.)
Jean-Marie Leblanc, director of the Tour de France told the French sports daily that he was “disappointed” by Lance, and that he would follow the lead of the UCI in deciding on a sanction. Ominously, he did not rule out declassification of Lance’s win. (That would give the 1999 Tour to Alex Zülle, one of the protagonists of the 1998 Festina EPO scandals.)
Lance of course denies any wrong doing. But rather then look into the merits of the case, Leblanc’s response is intriguing. Leblanc has quite often been in the vanguard of anti-doping efforts, and to his credit the Soceite du Tour de France has often advocated stronger anti-doping measures, only to see them rolled back by the UCI.
But Lebalnc’s suggestion here that doping could be punished, even six years after the fact seems unlikely to help protect the sports (or the Tour’s) integrity. “Sanctions” are certainly unlikely in this case as even L’Equipe’s article notes the science is not foolproof nor were normal testing precautions – e.g., a b-probe – taken. But if Leblanc’s logic is accepted, a very large “Provisional” should be added to ever results listing in cycling’s books. Even the ProTour series leader board should carry the provisio “Riders are credited with the following points until proven otherwise through scientific investigation.”
Leblanc clearly believes he has the integrity of the Tour at heart. But in reality he would be not only making riders prove they were clean even beyond the approved testing, but also help to grow the seed of doubt already in many cycling fans’ minds. “Wait until next year” will be replaced with “Wait until science advances enough to prove that your boy was doped, so my boy will be awarded the Tour even if he’s sitting in a nursing home when it happens.”
If you can’t prove a doping allegation by the end of the cycling season – or at least the end of the year – it is not worth opening the can of worms by suggesting declassification is an appropriate sanction.
On the other hand, maybe it would be enlightening to see similar results for Pantani, Ullrich, Riis, Indurain, Lemond, Delgado, Roche, Fignon, and Hinault. Something tells me, though, the French lab would stop with Roche.
A French medical lab is claiming that the traces of EPO were discovered in urine samples taken during the 1999 Tour, though there were no official urine tests for EPO at the time. Such tests were first introduced at the Sydney Olympics in 2000. (The hematacrit testing was introduced in 1997, but that test does not distinguish between natural and artifical EPO.)
Jean-Marie Leblanc, director of the Tour de France told the French sports daily that he was “disappointed” by Lance, and that he would follow the lead of the UCI in deciding on a sanction. Ominously, he did not rule out declassification of Lance’s win. (That would give the 1999 Tour to Alex Zülle, one of the protagonists of the 1998 Festina EPO scandals.)
Lance of course denies any wrong doing. But rather then look into the merits of the case, Leblanc’s response is intriguing. Leblanc has quite often been in the vanguard of anti-doping efforts, and to his credit the Soceite du Tour de France has often advocated stronger anti-doping measures, only to see them rolled back by the UCI.
But Lebalnc’s suggestion here that doping could be punished, even six years after the fact seems unlikely to help protect the sports (or the Tour’s) integrity. “Sanctions” are certainly unlikely in this case as even L’Equipe’s article notes the science is not foolproof nor were normal testing precautions – e.g., a b-probe – taken. But if Leblanc’s logic is accepted, a very large “Provisional” should be added to ever results listing in cycling’s books. Even the ProTour series leader board should carry the provisio “Riders are credited with the following points until proven otherwise through scientific investigation.”
Leblanc clearly believes he has the integrity of the Tour at heart. But in reality he would be not only making riders prove they were clean even beyond the approved testing, but also help to grow the seed of doubt already in many cycling fans’ minds. “Wait until next year” will be replaced with “Wait until science advances enough to prove that your boy was doped, so my boy will be awarded the Tour even if he’s sitting in a nursing home when it happens.”
If you can’t prove a doping allegation by the end of the cycling season – or at least the end of the year – it is not worth opening the can of worms by suggesting declassification is an appropriate sanction.
On the other hand, maybe it would be enlightening to see similar results for Pantani, Ullrich, Riis, Indurain, Lemond, Delgado, Roche, Fignon, and Hinault. Something tells me, though, the French lab would stop with Roche.
Comments:
<< Home
After 20 years of failure in their own national tour, an insistence on outdated training techniques includng the mistaken provision that the 35hr work week applies to pro cycling, the "shrinking" French influence in Europe and no hope on the French cycling horizon, yes, Christophe Moreau is not going to win the tour, it comes down to try an trashing the American...sounds all too familar...
# posted by 
: 2:05 AM
: 2:05 AM
French chauvanism would certainly account for the popular reaction (and I'd go so far as to say the lab's interest in Armstrong), but it doesn't explain Leblanc's reaction. He's been a Lance supporter through the years, due no doubt to his realization that capturing the attention of the American market would only be a boon for the Tour. At the same time, too, Leblanc has been a critic of the French cycling federation and teams for not developing riders with modern techniques, etc. That he throws a sop every year to "promising" French teams is understandable and probably necessary for the director of what is still a national Tour. But Lebalnc shouldn't be lumped in with the Frenchman on the street looking to trash an American Tour champion purely out of spite.
Leblanc is the Tour Director...which means he works for ASO...thats newspaper that has he owner of l'Equipe...a French sports newspaper that has been running a campaign since 1999 to discredit Lance...Leblanc started to waver some time ago.
He is hedging his bets...the whole thing is suspect and cannot be confirmed...what can be is the 700 some odd tests passed by Lance...
Imagine USA Today leading a campaign against Zidane for 7 years...and he actually tested positive while he was at Juventus...and there were no disputes about this...
He is hedging his bets...the whole thing is suspect and cannot be confirmed...what can be is the 700 some odd tests passed by Lance...
Imagine USA Today leading a campaign against Zidane for 7 years...and he actually tested positive while he was at Juventus...and there were no disputes about this...
# posted by : 4:04 PM
: 4:04 PM
I wasn't sure if Le Tour was still connected with L'Equipe, so thanks for clarifying that aspect. I was also thinking about exploring the possibility Leblanc is essentially playing a different public (or international) and private (or even to the domestic audience) game. But even if his motivations are completely above the board -- which is why I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt in the original post -- his position is unteneable.
As for the Zidane analogy, it falls flat for a few reasons. First if Lance did test positive in the Tour once, he would be guilty, even if he passed 700 other tests. (Don't read this as I'm saying he was guilty in 1999.)
Second, no one on the US really cares about Zidane, unless he took up NASCAR.
And finally, if Zidane were at the center of a major scandal, the French would react by pointing out that he's actually Algerian.
As for the Zidane analogy, it falls flat for a few reasons. First if Lance did test positive in the Tour once, he would be guilty, even if he passed 700 other tests. (Don't read this as I'm saying he was guilty in 1999.)
Second, no one on the US really cares about Zidane, unless he took up NASCAR.
And finally, if Zidane were at the center of a major scandal, the French would react by pointing out that he's actually Algerian.
the French loved their doping King...Mr. King of the "rack up Mtn. points on every minor hill in the first week of the tour" Richard Virenque...who was so full of EPO he could have supplied all of the chemo patients in France. He is a "pied noir" but they didn't abandon him and say he was Moroccan.....
also...if you read lance's comments today he says that his 30 min conversation with leblanc...was very different from the supposed "public comments" Leblanc made in L'Equipe
also...if you read lance's comments today he says that his 30 min conversation with leblanc...was very different from the supposed "public comments" Leblanc made in L'Equipe
# posted by : 2:11 AM
: 2:11 AM
I remember a French journalist coment on Virenque in particular but on French acceptance of doping in general (recall the doping bans were always announced by the French as riders inactive because of "tendonitis") many years ago. He mentioned that the sin of doping endeared a cyclist to the French hearts because it showed that they were not completely superhuman and infalliable. Rather they had an element of the tragic hero that accorded so well with your average Frenchmen and allowed him to identify better with them.
I'm wondering if this same journalist (unfortunately I can't recall his name) would come forward now and say this current episode is just another chapter in the French love affair with Lance...
Surprisingly, it seems the Spanish press is the only press reacting nearly as hostile as the French. Did he annoy his neighbors when living there? (Actually a few of the Swiss papers have also taken their lead from L'Equipe. Odd that you can get a reaction from a people that so often resemble the living dead. No doubt influenced by the implication that Zuelle would presumably get the 1999 maillot jaune.)
Post a Comment
I'm wondering if this same journalist (unfortunately I can't recall his name) would come forward now and say this current episode is just another chapter in the French love affair with Lance...
Surprisingly, it seems the Spanish press is the only press reacting nearly as hostile as the French. Did he annoy his neighbors when living there? (Actually a few of the Swiss papers have also taken their lead from L'Equipe. Odd that you can get a reaction from a people that so often resemble the living dead. No doubt influenced by the implication that Zuelle would presumably get the 1999 maillot jaune.)
<< Home
