hey, brendon, someone asked me, "having viewed the now ubiquitous video of lance and dave wiens doing leadville, if it was obvious that lance--not in tip-top shape, but still able to do what no one had done before, that is, leadville in sub-seven hours--had not doped during his tour wins."
any thoughts on that one, my southern man?
and can i quote you on that?
You can quote me on this:
I do not believe that Lance's performance at the Leadville 100 is in any way indicative of evidence for or against any doping committed by Lance Armstrong during his professional racing career. His performance in the most recent Leadville 100 is impressive as this is a very grueling one-day racing event contested by a group of unique cyclists. While many excellent cyclists participated, it is difficult to compare the start list at the Leadville 100 with any of the start lists at the multi-day Tour De France during his tenure at the top of the cycling world. Additionally, it is important to consider there is no formal UCI drug testing protocol (at least I could not find any indication of it) at this event. I would never falsely or otherwise imply a cyclist had doped at this event without a positive A sample followed up by a confirmation of the positive B sample. In the event a positive B sample was indicated then a discussion of the rider and their actions would be appropriate.
Brendon S. Hale, Ph.D.
Department of Kinesiology
Mississippi State University
* * * * *
how about you, dear readers and listeners: what do YOU think about lance's performance at leadville? do you think this is vindication for him? do you think this puts to rest any question about whether or not lance juiced his way to seven tour titles? i pose this question as it was put to me by a regular listener of the radio show.
leave your thoughts here in the comments, and save them for discussion on an upcoming leadville episode.