This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/reality-check/2013/jun/28/impossible-to-win-tour-de-france-without-doping-armstrong
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Is it 'impossible' to win the Tour de France without doping? | Is it 'impossible' to win the Tour de France without doping? |
| (3 months later) | |
| When French newspaper Le Monde, suggested an interview to Lance Armstrong a few months ago, his initial response was "fuck off" before realising "it was a bloody good idea". | When French newspaper Le Monde, suggested an interview to Lance Armstrong a few months ago, his initial response was "fuck off" before realising "it was a bloody good idea". |
| Perhaps one reason for his change of heart was the opportunity to explain to Le Monde's readers that winning the Tour de France seven times would have remained a dream without the assistance of a few tricks that he believes are of the trade: doping. | Perhaps one reason for his change of heart was the opportunity to explain to Le Monde's readers that winning the Tour de France seven times would have remained a dream without the assistance of a few tricks that he believes are of the trade: doping. |
| Armstrong's argument rests on prevalence. It would be foolish for him to suggest that he would not be the strongest cyclist if none of the 186 cyclists he rode with used doping. Instead, he is arguing that the odds would be impossibly stacked against him if he were to compete against others without using the same performance enhancers they had. | Armstrong's argument rests on prevalence. It would be foolish for him to suggest that he would not be the strongest cyclist if none of the 186 cyclists he rode with used doping. Instead, he is arguing that the odds would be impossibly stacked against him if he were to compete against others without using the same performance enhancers they had. |
| To test whether the 'winning would be impossible' claim has any truth, we've tried to find the facts on how many of the men cycle in the Tour de France with a little extra je ne sais quoi. | To test whether the 'winning would be impossible' claim has any truth, we've tried to find the facts on how many of the men cycle in the Tour de France with a little extra je ne sais quoi. |
| 1 in 3 test positive | 1 in 3 test positive |
| That's the shocking statistic to emerge from the site cyclisme-dopage.com where they've collected statistics starting from 1968. The year isn't totally arbitrary - an anti-doping law was only passed in France in 1965. | That's the shocking statistic to emerge from the site cyclisme-dopage.com where they've collected statistics starting from 1968. The year isn't totally arbitrary - an anti-doping law was only passed in France in 1965. |
| Though the overall prevalence has varied from 27% in 2009 to 84% in 1997, the average rate of 36% still appears incredibly high. The site compiled the numbers by defining 'positive' as a Tour de France participant who has contravened the anti-doping rules. | Though the overall prevalence has varied from 27% in 2009 to 84% in 1997, the average rate of 36% still appears incredibly high. The site compiled the numbers by defining 'positive' as a Tour de France participant who has contravened the anti-doping rules. |
| These are riders who have tested positive for drugs (including an observation of a deficiency or haematocrit), have acknowledged that they have been doped or have been punished for doing so. Which leaves one question: what on earth is haematocrit? It's the percentage of red blood cells in the blood, which can be artificially elevated to allow an individual to be physically stronger. | These are riders who have tested positive for drugs (including an observation of a deficiency or haematocrit), have acknowledged that they have been doped or have been punished for doing so. Which leaves one question: what on earth is haematocrit? It's the percentage of red blood cells in the blood, which can be artificially elevated to allow an individual to be physically stronger. |
| One of the ways that a higher haematocrit allows athletes to perform better is that their bodies can work hard, even at higher altitudes. So Antoine Vayer a French journalist spent years of research with other contributors to find the difference between mountainous human successes and unbelievable superhuman acts. | One of the ways that a higher haematocrit allows athletes to perform better is that their bodies can work hard, even at higher altitudes. So Antoine Vayer a French journalist spent years of research with other contributors to find the difference between mountainous human successes and unbelievable superhuman acts. |
| The power of 21 cyclists (literally, watts generated) on L'Alpe d'Huez was compared to test Lance Armstrong's claims that his rivals' performance was 'not normal'. They then classified them from 'human' to 'suspicious', 'miraculous' and 'mutant'. The performances they point out as being impossible to achieve without doping include Armstrong - in fact, they include all but one of the 21 riders they looked at. | The power of 21 cyclists (literally, watts generated) on L'Alpe d'Huez was compared to test Lance Armstrong's claims that his rivals' performance was 'not normal'. They then classified them from 'human' to 'suspicious', 'miraculous' and 'mutant'. The performances they point out as being impossible to achieve without doping include Armstrong - in fact, they include all but one of the 21 riders they looked at. |
| What's the verdict on Armstrong then? Given that most of his competitors would have used some form of doping, his claim that it would have been impossible to win without doing the same is probably true. Does that serve as a justification for his actions? We'll leave it to you to decide by posting a comment below. | What's the verdict on Armstrong then? Given that most of his competitors would have used some form of doping, his claim that it would have been impossible to win without doing the same is probably true. Does that serve as a justification for his actions? We'll leave it to you to decide by posting a comment below. |
| Video: Tour de France in numbers 1903-2012 | Video: Tour de France in numbers 1903-2012 |
| Download the data | Download the data |
| • DATA: download the full spreadsheet | • DATA: download the full spreadsheet |
| Every winner of the Tour De France: vital stats listed on Guardian's Datablog | Every winner of the Tour De France: vital stats listed on Guardian's Datablog |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |
Previous version
1
Next version