Lance is innocent - Indurain

2012-10-23 16:13

Madrid - Spanish champion cyclist Miguel Indurain said on Tuesday he believed Lance Armstrong was innocent of the doping scandal that has seen the USA rider stripped of seven Tour de France titles.

"Even now I believe in his innocence. He has always respected all the regulations... He has won all the cases he's had," said Indurain, who won the Tour de France five times consecutively in 1991-1995.

The International Cycling Union (UCI) on Monday gave its backing to a report by the US Anti-Doping Agency that placed Armstrong at the heart of the biggest doping programme in sport.

It annulled his record back to August 1, 1998, making Indurain once again the joint record-holder in the world's top cycling race, alongside the Belgian Eddy Merckx and Frenchmen Bernard Hinault and Jacques Anquetil.

Indurain expressed doubts about the disciplinary procedures against Armstrong, who was sanctioned on the basis of testimonies by former team mates cited in the US agency's report, not on the results of doping tests.

"I am a bit surprised. It is a bit strange that this has only been based on testimonies," Indurain said on Radio Marca. "The rules said one thing and now it seems they have changed."

Indurain added that Armstrong "has always been a fighter. What surprises me is that he doesn't keep fighting... I think he will come back and appeal and try to show that he played fair for all those years".



  • kevin.moxham.3 - 2012-10-23 19:02

    Tyron - your argurment is based on what - 11 testimonies - how can they be crediable especially with the incentive to get a reduced 6 month ban. So all you have is here-say - anyway you have a view and so do i..! Cheers

      tyronlouw - 2012-10-23 19:39

      No, Kevin. There is a lot more to it than testimonials. Even so, its strange that you dont trust the sworn testimonies of Hincappie (11 TdF & Lance's best mate) and Lapenheimer (got kicked of his own team for admitting to doping, ruined his career), but you are so ready to accept Indurains opinion (even though it is just a hunch). Please read this post for more info about why it was not just based on testimony, its actually a great website for sport science issues in general. Enjoy.

      lex.holmes2 - 2012-10-23 20:03

      Tyron what you are forgetting is that he passed the dope tests and that is all that counts. That is what the law state . How can they change the laws??

      tyronlouw - 2012-10-23 20:33

      Lex what you are not understanding is that them passing the tests does not mean that they werent doping. All it means is that they were not caught. They didnt pass it because what they were using was legal, the passed it because what they were using was directly undetectable. The laws were never changed - The use of EPO, testosterone and blood doping was never legal. PLEASE read the post from the link I added above it explains the point very well and in much more detail than I can manage here.

      Tyron Louw - 2013-06-14 11:21

      Well this is all very embarrassing for you now!

  • tyronlouw - 2012-10-23 20:53

    Everybody: Lets entertain for a second that Lance is innocent: How on earth did he manage to win 7TdF titles while EVERYONE around him was doping, and we know this is the case because they were either caught or admitted to it. We acknowledge the extent to which these drugs can improve performance, so that means that Lance not only won 7TdF titles, but he was in reality significantly better than the guys who finished behind him. Based on the studies done on him by Prof Coyle at Uni of Texas, we know that Armstrongs efficiency and Vo2Max is not significantly better than his fellow elite cyclists. So something has gotta give. We are left with two options: 1) Either Lance was in fact cheating and he is just a normal human being (or at least like all other elite cyclists) or 2) He wasnt cheating and the drugs had no effect on the performance of the other cyclists. I leave it to you, good people, to reach your own conclusion as to which explanation is the most reasonable.

      Ryan - 2012-10-23 22:41

      Lance Armstrong is an obvious cheater. A witch hunt? For what.... a legendary American cancer survivor? There's not even anything to attack in that. USADA's case is so well presented that the international cycling association stripped him of everything too. Go read all the text messages, emails and documents between the team members if you're a skeptic. He will go down in history as one of sports greatest criminals and he deserves to be disgraced forever.

      colleen.balfour - 2012-10-24 08:49

      Third option: He wasnt cheating and was simply better than the rest? Fourth option: He was cheating and was still better than the rest?

      tyronlouw - 2012-10-24 09:22

      Colleen, option 3) we know he could not simply have been better than every other cyclist who was on EPO, testosterone, blood doping - studies show that his physiology is not so much better that it can offset the use of drugs. option 4) been through this in previous posts, and if you admit that he was cheating then its a sad day.You said you prefered to wait for the dust to settle and ALL the facts to emerge before arriving at a fixed opinion. Not to be funny, but the facts are there, you have arrived at your opinion, and you are using every excuse under the sun to justify it. The difference with me is that I only made up my mind after reading the USADA resport.

  • Ryan - 2012-10-23 22:45

    What an irresponsible comment by Indurain, after several huge organizations agreed about Armstrong and his role as the ring leader of a doping ring.

  • burger.geldenhuys - 2012-10-24 03:07

    Tyron that was an idiotic statement! Tu no sabes nada. si no tens res intel ยท ligent que dir, no diguis res! Vale Ok

  • colleen.balfour - 2012-10-24 09:09

    It really makes no difference to the end result, whether they were all doping or not - Lance Armstrong still beat them all. Seven times, and nothing will change that fact. All the doping in the world will not miraculously morph everyone into a winner, as proven in all those races. It takes more than an 'enhancement' to become a top athlete.

      tyronlouw - 2012-10-24 09:31

      You cant go back on your claims that he was innocent and say "well everyone did it so its ok" . Stick to your guns, he's either is guilty or not. If he is guilty, it takes the shine off his wins anyway, so I dont know why you would idolise him? Well, I suppose I do, but even though it still wansnt a level playing field, its still not something id want to support. I guess it comes down to why those who still support him actually support him.

  • colleen.balfour - 2012-10-24 10:38

    Tyron, No matter what the circumstances, Lance beat them all. I accept that his accusers say they were all doping and I still believe we havent had all the facts yet and that there is more to this story. However, no matter what the final story is, [True/false/guilty or not/cheat/saint] my belief is that Lance Armstrong was the best in his time. The moral issue of whether sportsmen should use enhancements or not, is a separate debate argued according to personal perspectives and prevailing influences. Some declare that the USADA report is based on the testimony of guys whose punishment was drastically reduced to 6 month ban as reward, contains overstated, emotive language and no independently reviewed and proven facts? All depends on perspective of the reader, I guess.

  • pages:
  • 1