Lance
-
-
Yeah well it’s not even on ESPN in the UK it seems. The only way you can watch it here is on ESPN player for a separate monthly subscription.
Update for UK:
It’s on BT Sport 2. Part 1 is being replayed Sunday May 31 @ 2200. Part 2 is on Mon Jun 01 @ 2130.
Geez, you're still paying for sport channel subscriptions?
-
Not everyone dopes. Indeed I suspect the vast, vast majority of global, elite sportsmen never had and never, ever would.
Don't take this post as a troll @sparky , because it's definitely not intended that way.
I used to think that way, but at the top level drugs make a fair old difference, and you're dealing with such fine margins. Given that no major drug users have been picked up during their careers; it's all been whistle blowers or confessions rather than testing, I don't think that you can conclude that drug testing works (except in unusual cases like Ostapchuk using old drugs in competition).
To put it another way, if Lance Armstrong, the most tested athlete on the planet never tested positive, how the hell can we expect to pick up anyone?
Therefore, all we can do is 'hope' that most people aren't doing drugs. And 'doping' is a wide ranging statement too; the performance comes from the TEU (Sky, looking at you), Sharapova's 'Meldonium medicine', and so on.
I don't think most people dope. But, for the winners, we don't know who is and isn't doping, and frankly that took away from my enjoyment of a lot of (particularly athletic) sport. I really didn't engage with the last olympics, because you just don't know who's clean and who's not, and most of them are some shade of grey.
Hell, we don't know how many Kiwis are doping, or even All Blacks/Rugby players. Doping wouldn't be a massive contributor in Rugby, but it'd sure help.
There's a great book written by an early professional who headed over to France (googled it: Confessions of a Rugby Mercenary). He talks frankly about doping, eye gouging, and life as a pro. It's a good read, and shows the 'sport as a business' that Rugby was rapidly becoming.
Anyway, back to your statement - most don't, but I'd be surprised if most winners weren't doping somehow.
-
So Lance is on ESPN NZ tonight at 11pm. Not sure how a "30 for 30" doco goes for 120mins, but hey.
So I'm a bottle+ deep already and still 2hrs from kick off. Luckily they're showing kobes farewell game right now to get me to the start line.
A warning, please disregard all posts I make for the next 4 hours (more than you usually would)
-
-
-
-
@WillieTheWaiter said in Lance:
@WillieTheWaiter
They injected EPO. Just like every other team, and pretty much every other professional sportsman.Not everyone dopes. Indeed I suspect the vast, vast majority of global, elite sportsmen never had and never, ever would.
Defend Armstrong if you want to but please don't slander the vast majority of clean athletes.
Call me cynical, but I'd suggest it's the opposite.
-
@Bones probably right. Though 1st impressions of Whitianga are good! Sweet little town, great beach. Quality beach hotel, heated pool, tennis court, scooters for the kids, and I can supervise all of the above from my balcony with a wine in hand . What more could you want?
-
@nzzp I've read John Daniell's book and knew its author a bit at one point.
Doping in Rugby is not uncommon and has been rife in top French amateur and South African schoolboy Rugby. This oa a few years old but worth reading.
Doping in rugby: an exclusive Rugby World investigation
In the April 2014 edition of Rugby World magazine, we ran the following longread investigation into the state of doping in rugby....
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
-
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
Cheers.
Frankly, the quote is spot on - it's rare, because the improvement isn't massive comapred to technique and skill. Therefore the risk/reward is quite different. Otherwise I reckon it'd be rife (I'm cynical as all hell these days)
-
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.
derp
-
@mariner4life said in Lance:
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.
derp
you're being deliberately obtuse. In Rugby, being slightly faster is useful, but you can have a great career (Conrad Smith) wihtout being a physical specimen. In athletics, though, strength, or speed is the win or loss, it's everything.
That's why the risk/reward for Rugby is different, and I don' think doping is as pervasive
-
@mariner4life said in Lance:
derp
I don't know what derp means. Am I not doing the internet correctly?
-
@mariner4life said in Lance:
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.
derp
you're being deliberately obtuse. In Rugby, being slightly faster is useful, but you can have a great career (Conrad Smith) wihtout being a physical specimen. In athletics, though, strength, or speed is the win or loss, it's everything.
That's why the risk/reward for Rugby is different, and I don' think doping is as pervasive
Conrad Smith had to put on a fair amount of weight to make it though.
There is such a broad range of PEDs that do different things, and the difference at the top level between making and not is so light, that i have no doubt it's rife. And in my mind it would be naive to think it is.
Do i think it's like cycling where everyone is on it just to compete? No. But a couple of the comments here smack of "oh, rugby is different and above such things"
-
@nzzp I've read John Daniell's book and knew its author a bit at one point.
Doping in Rugby is not uncommon and has been rife in top French amateur and South African schoolboy Rugby. This oa a few years old but worth reading.
Doping in rugby: an exclusive Rugby World investigation
In the April 2014 edition of Rugby World magazine, we ran the following longread investigation into the state of doping in rugby....
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
Eat clen, tren hard.
-
@mariner4life said in Lance:
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.
derp
Lol, true. Isn't the point that a sport like rugby is more dynamic and multi-faceted than a sport like sprinting or cycling? So, whereas in sprinting and cycling, doping can significantly improve overall performance by improving the major facet of what makes a good performance, in rugby, or other ball and team sports, doping doesn't make you catch and pass better or improve your spatial awareness and decision-making.
I'm not saying it won't improve physical output for a rugby player - it will almost certainly will. But it won't turn James Marshall into Dan Carter.
-
@mariner4life said in Lance:
@mariner4life said in Lance:
That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.
yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.
derp
you're being deliberately obtuse. In Rugby, being slightly faster is useful, but you can have a great career (Conrad Smith) wihtout being a physical specimen. In athletics, though, strength, or speed is the win or loss, it's everything.
That's why the risk/reward for Rugby is different, and I don' think doping is as pervasive
Conrad Smith had to put on a fair amount of weight to make it though.
There is such a broad range of PEDs that do different things, and the difference at the top level between making and not is so light, that i have no doubt it's rife. And in my mind it would be naive to think it is.
Do i think it's like cycling where everyone is on it just to compete? No. But a couple of the comments here smack of "oh, rugby is different and above such things"
Based upon stories of which people have been caught, and where, together with my own anecdotel evidence, I think it's mainly an issue at the level just below pro or semi-pro rugby, where there are heaps of guys on the cusp of making it and where the testing regimes are less rigorous.
Once you've made that the pro grade, I just don't see there being the kind of incentive to dope, particularly when the clubs will be running their own nutrition and supplement programs, some of which might operate in the grey areas and through which you can get good gains without taking the unnecessary risk.
EDIT: I'm not saying that there aren't some big-time pros who are doping - i'm vervain there are - i just see this being more of a problem at the lower levels
-
Watched Lance. I find it and him riveting. It's also great gearing so many of the other riders being open and honest.
He was a prick no doubt, but he sure is charismatic. Lots of traits shared by MJ (e.g. inventing personal battles with people to get himself fired up), doping (hopefully) aside.
Can't wait for the final episode.
