Does it make sense to talk to a doper, fraud and criminal? Is he honest about his confession or still defending his actions? Does this even matter?
Lance Armstrong participated in a Q&A with Professor Roger Pielke, Jr. and the Introduction to Sports Governance class at the University of Boulder/ Colorado on Monday. Armstrong, former pro-cyclist (was stripped of all his Tour de France (TdF) titles because of extensive doping), spoke to the CU sports governance class in Boulder/ Colorado. He promised:“ You’re not going to hear any bullshit today. Everything you hear today is true.“ The first question was wheather Armstrong could have won the TdF titles without blood doping. His answer was: no.
(http://launch.newsinc.com/share.html?trackingGroup=92450&siteSection=prairiemp&videoId=30423385)
Interesting remarks during the Q&A:
- „This era that we were in, this era of doping was so powerful.“
- “EPO in that era was not like testosterone, HGH or cortisone.“
- “I often refer to it as high-octane and low-octane. HGH, testosterone, cortisone (…) It’s kind of low-octane, those are one-percenters; EPO is a 10-percenter.“
-
“In any sport, if you throw 10 percent into it (…) You might find some success on a stage by stage basis, in a one-day race, but you won’t get over the mountains and win time trials with other guys that are high-octane.”
-
Weiterlesen „What we can learn from the Armstrong case“
Gefällt mir:
Gefällt mir Wird geladen...
der ball lügt nicht 