Originally Posted by wolfboy
I just don't understand how you can insist that it's so unlikely that Braun may have been doping since he was in college. Unfortunately, we don't have the benefit of the whole story for most athletes, but Armstrong is certainly an interesting case study. Armstrong, just like Braun, was one hell of an athlete before he started doping. Read up on how highly regarded he was even as a teenage athlete.
Armstrong (by his own admission) started doping in his early twenties, almost twenty years ago. He never got caught during that entire time. While he had an elaborate system in place by the end of it all, I have serious doubts that was the case in the early 90s when he started, or at every point along the way. Make no mistake about it, his elaborate steroid regime became more and more complex as the promotional dollars started pouring in.
A) I don't need to read up on how highly Armstrong was regarded. He was an instant celebrity in the cycling world, a bigger draw at events like the Tour Du Pont than Greg LeMond before Armstrong had even won anything. People used to head out to see road races to catch a glimpse of the boy wonder. I was one of them.
B) Armstrong had an entire team and profession that was well-versed in PEDs guiding his usage. Lance was always part of a large and coordinated operation. It got more sophisticated as the sport introduced testing (and pretty much every team in cycling was doing things similar to U.S. Postal), but he always had doctors, managers, trainers and teammates working with him. Doping in cycling goes back decades before Armstrong showed up. He was never a lone agent.
C) Braun would have had to run an Armstrong-like operation largely by himself. He didn't have the resources of a team aiding his usage. And he would have to figure all of this out in college and then run his regimen flawlessly until 2011. Could it be done? Sure. But it would be a really impressive feat on Braun's part. It's a lot of planning and execution and, to date, no one's found any trail he left behind. And you don't get to call 2011 the tip of Braun's iceberg without, you know, producing evidence of the actual iceberg.
Your story is mostly holes. And this is the problem Braun's accusers have. If you want to argue he was guilty that one time in 2011, then we're back to dead horse kicking. If you want to argue he's been using his whole life, it's all accusation and no evidence.