tour de france bike tour, beaux voyages logo image
BEAUX VOYAGES
Cycling News
Scroll down to read these articles from the web site of L'Equipe.  Translated by Walt
Ballenberger  
Cycling News Home Page


Armstrong ready to counterattack- 08/25/05
ARMSTRONG In Torment- 08/23/05

Armstrong ready to counterattack- 08/25/05

Two days after the revelations of L’Equipe, Lance Armstrong does not exclude legal action
to determine how the daily sports newspaper procured confidential documents permitting it
to accuse him of doping with EPO.

The specialized cycling site “Cyclingnews” reports Thursday remarks by Lance Armstrong
from a teleconference organized the day before in Washington at the headquarters of
Discovery Channel.  “Legal action would cost me a million and a half dollars and a year of
my life.  I have better things to do with a million and a half…  and with my time.  In the end,
that’s the question that I need to ask myself”, declared the seven time winner of the Tour,
scratching back at the Director of the Tour de France, Jean-Marie Leblanc, who made
remarks that were “absurd”, according to him.

Jean-Marie Leblanc stated that the Texan had cheated the organizers of the “Grand
Boucle” (the Grand Loop, meaning the Tour de France) and the world of cycling by doping
himself.  “To say that I cheated people, that’s ridiculous.  I’ve had controls for a long time.  
There isn’t just one year of sample B; they have seven years of samples A and B.  They
are all negative”.  

According to L’Equipe, traces of EPO were found in retroactive analyses on group B of
samples taken in 1999, at the time of the first victory for Armstrong in the Tour de France.  
“It doesn’t surprise me at all that they have samples.  But when I gave those samples (in
1999), the didn’t contain EPO.  I guarantee it”, retorted Lance Armstrong, suggesting that
the French laboratory had perhaps violated rules of the World Antidoping Agency by not
assuring anonymity for the B samples.

ARMSTRONG In Torment- 08/23/05

A clap of thunder.  One month after having won his seventh victory in the Tour de France
this summer, Lance Armstrong, newly retired, again is on center stage.  But this time it is a
question of doping.  Six of his urine samples, collected at the time of the Tour in 1999 and
analyzed after the fact by the lab of Châtenay-Malabry, contained the signature of EPO.  
In its Tuesday edition of 23 August, L”EQUIPE shows the proof.  However, the Texan
continues to deny that he was using doping products on his internet site.

Official documents given as proof-  Often suspected, but never tested positive.  Lance
Armstrong, seven time winner of the Grande Boucle (Great Loop, referring to the Tour de
France) finds himself in the spotlight for reasons other than his sporting exploits.  The
newspaper l’Equipe, with official documents as proof, demonstrated that the American
showed traces of doping products in 1999 at the time of his first Tour de France victory.

Four months of investigation by the sporting daily brought forth this evidence.  The facts
cannot be denied: the leader of the Discovery Channel, also during six seasons head of
the US Postal team, was regularly using banned substances in 1999 and thus was lying
when he claimed not to be using any banned substance in competition.  Six samples taken
during the 1999 Tour were positive:  after his prologue victory at Puy-du-Fou on July 3
1999, and at the stages Montaigu - Challans (1st), Grand-Bornand - Sestrières (9th),
Sestrières - L'Alpe d'Huez (10th), Saint-Galmier - Saint-Flour (12th) et Castres - Saint-
Gaudens (14th), his samples were marked with the signature of this synthetic hormone,
which, by increasing the number of red blood cells, would permit a more efficient muscular
oxygenation and a possible gain in physical performance of up to 30%.  These results
were made by the laboratory of Châtenay-Malabry, the same lab that perfected tests to
detect EPO.  Starting in 2004 the lab worked on frozen samples taken in 1998 and 1999, a
time in which the use of EPO was common in the peleton.  The scientists were aiming to
improve their methods of detection and not trying to find guilt in riders several years after
the fact.

In total twelve samples were analyzed by the famous laboratory in an experimental effort,
six of them belonging to the Texan, and six from riders who were not identified.  As proof,
the paper published the numbers of the samples taken from Armstrong, of which six
corresponded to those with positive results.  “Until proof to the contrary appears, no
doping samples taken from the American were positive since the Tour 2000.  And this
affair cannot, paradoxically, have any disciplinary follow-up”, noted however the sporting
daily, stating that this was not a question of taking sanctions.  The conditions in which the
tests were run do not permit the UCI to take any sanctions.  But the affair may result in
repercussions.  The World Antidoping Agency is studying in fact the possibility of eventual
legal action.  …….