[dd74]

Lance hides it better (the doping) than the others racers.

Millions of $$$ is invested in his name - he is a brand. He, in fact, is Trek's brand. They need him to win to keep selling $10,000 Trek Livestrong Madone race bikes to fat lawyers and investment bankers who "want to be like Lance."

As for LeMond - his yap dropped him from Trek because he (LeMond) badmouthed Armstrong and his alleged doping.

Doesn't matter though: LeMond owns a huge percentage of SRAM who aside from Shimano and Campagnolo, are the only heavy hitters in bike components. In short, LeMond is himself making millions because SRAM is so widely used now.

W/o a doubt, the entire peloton is doping. EPO, Cera, nicotine, Vicodin, hell, even Drain-O can be found in these guys. They're more polluted than a possum.

Some feel it's a good thing in pro cycling since it seems the human body has outlived its natural usefulness, leaving the drugs, durability and the execution of smart racing as the main components of pro cycling.

I mean, really, can anyone here spin a 53-15 gear uphill for 20 clicks at a sustained 90 RPM and 12-15 mph? I wouldn't doubt the majority of us would have a coronary trying; For the pro rider, this is where the drugs come into play; they supposedly "protect" the cyclist by tricking the body into riding faster - sort of like "chipping" a car's computer.

I like Danica Patrick's take on doping - which has now supposedly spilled over into auto racing for endurance and strength: She says, "Is it wrong if everyone does it?" (sic)

On a somewhat related note - a poll was conducted among MLB fans, asking what their biggest baseball-related complaint was. Many said ticket prices; few said doping.