The mystery of Lances lost body weight

Patrick1983

The myth is he lost 20% of his body weight with no loss in power

this would mean him losing totally fat and no muscle which anyone in medicene will tell you is impossible

plus back in 1994 pre-cancer he stated he was "165 pounds" which is according to my maths 75 kg

http://outside.away.com/magazine/0794/947flanc_2.html

today on the official tour website he claims to be 75 kg which means a grand total percentage of

0 yes 0% weight loss

can some one please explain who came up with this myth that he lost 20% of his body weight

kennf

Personally, I've never heard that myth before. Most of the figures I've seen say he lost 10 pounds. I'm not sure how you come up with the statement that if he didn't lose power, he must have only lost fat. You can certainly lose weight off your upper body, and power is not 100% connected to muscle mass. This is an aerobic sport after all.

House

Everything I have read says 10-15lbs and it was all the extra muscle from his upperbody from swimming. Go find a pre cancer pic of Lance and you'll see it's quite obvious.

3_days

^^^^^ I heard the same thing as House ... 10 - 15lbs, upper body weight from swimming ...

Patrick1983

my point is that can anyone explain the improvment in his climbing when he weighs the exact same as he did pre cancer

lumpy

He moved the main muscle mass to where he needed it. All his muscles atrophied during the cancer battle. When he went back to training he developed where he needed to.

Your body will develop where it needs to. Lance clearly has less upper body mass now than his pre-cancer physique.

Coming back from cancer allowed him to use his knowledge to sculpt himself into the cyclist he needed to be.

Patrick1983

how exactly do you dictate where you want muscle?

you cycle a bike ,you cannot dictate where the muscle goes

it is all lies imo

the reason for the improvment is DRUGS

kennf

So... your first post was just a troll? You're right. There's no possible way to improve on the bike if your weight stays the same. Hmmm. I'll have to rethink my training.

House

Perhaps you should do some research before making a comment as stupid as this.

House

Two comments:

1) Anyone who thinks you can't dictate where you make muscle gains is simply someone with absolutely no knowledge of what he is talking about.

2) Notice how Flyer conveniently goes away from the discussion into another tirade...the one based on his latest google find...which he has posted at least 10 times, at least 8 of which were in one thread.

House

Nice comeback coward (still waiting for the response to my last PM about that track race, but then I did say you were to much of a coward to respond!)

Why don't you try (for once) to have an actual comeback to what was posted???


I'll help you out: Try arguing against what I said in #1

Are you up for it coward or will you just repost some old tirade?

lumpy

You're on the money House with both comments.


I used to dig ditches for a living and have the arms, upper body strength and size to prove it. Hard physical labor caused my body to develop where it needed to. I didn't need steroids to get 17" arms. However because of my size, I pay dearly on rides.
Lance built his muscles where he needed them, core strength and legs. Of course the cardio too.

I'm getting so tired of Flyer hijacking threads and beating us over the head with his incessant dope rants. Fine, he has an opinion and I respect that, but I'm sure tired of reading it everywhere.