The argument that someone never tested postive, therefore its proven they didn't dope has a fundamentally flawed premise.

Here's hoping you never find yourself as a defendant in a court of law with that attitude. Guess the whole "Innocent until proven guilty" thing is foreign to you, eh? And for what it's worth, I naver said Lance 100% didn't. Just said it was "unlikely" and that the extensive string of negative tests tends to support that (as it does for Ulrich and the others to be honest). You might refresh yourself on "reasonable doubt" then we'll continue the discussion. Aw hell, why am I arguing with a troll?

Yup, I might be wrong, ole lancey may have been high as a kite, but I'll get over it a lot sooner than those who can't get over the possibility that he never was.

Amen.

Edited out just 'cause there's no sense firing the troll train up again...

Has anyone seen any articles that looks to compare the cycling cadence of the top cyclists?
Just curious as one of the things that helped Lance was the way he has increased this (which was shown in the journal linked URL).

I remember Ulrich has commented about Lances cycling cadence being higher than his own in the mountains and that his thoughts were this was helping Lance.

Would be interesting to know.

Here's hoping you never find yourself as a defendant in a court of law with that attitude. Guess the whole "Innocent until proven guilty" thing is foreign to you, eh? And for what it's worth, I naver said Lance 100% didn't. Just said it was "unlikely" and that the extensive string of negative tests tends to support that (as it does for Ulrich and the others to be honest). You might refresh yourself on "reasonable doubt" then we'll continue the discussion. Aw hell, why am I arguing with a troll?

I thought the argument was true. For instance I've never tested positive for PEDs, does that mean I've never doped, or does it mean I never doped prior to a test? IOW, It has not been proven that I don't dope. There are three levels of question: Proven Innocent, Found Not Guilty, Found Guilty. The latter means you are Guilty. The middle means you might be guilty, but there is doubt, the first means evidence shows without a doubt that you are innocent. Personally, I think LA is in the middle section of this. I think there's strong evidence (circumstantial as it may be) that he has used PEDs other than for Cancer recovery. It hasn't been proven though, so I won't say he DID dope, just that I think its likly that he did. If on a Jury in a trial against LA, it would take solid proof before I'd find him guilty, even though I 'think' he is. Do you understand the difference here? (not trying to condescend. I realize it could be taken that way, but I don't want to re-write it, so just accept that its not my intent please.)

Yeah, I understand your point completely and it's well-reasoned. Personally, I would place Lance closer to the "innocent" than the "guilty" simply because circumstantial evidence is just that: circumstancial. depending on the context in which you view it, it may or may not show guilt. Lance has "never tested positive" and appears to be successful in court. These two things, combined with what appear to be scientifically accurate tests showing his body functions unlike that of any other rider currently in the peloton, suggest to me that there is more burden on those who wish to find him guilty than those who insist he's innocent. His lactic acid "ability" combined with a VO2 Max that rivals Indurain (if you consider body size) are genetic gifts of which any cyclist would be enviable. Combine this with what cancer did to his overall physique and you have elements of someone who can do all this "naturally". Of course, he uses an altitude tent, eats a certain way, etc, etc, etc which, depending on your PoV, is as unfair an advantage as doping. I'm not inclined to defend Lance's innocence 100% (wouldn't stake my life on it, for example) but I think to maintain his guilt based entirely on circumstantial evidence is silly-- especially when those same people would cry "foul" if they were convicted of a crime in a court of law based entirely on circumstantial evidence. On top of that, they have the gall to insult someone who rests their beliefs on the evidence to date.

I guess my beef is with the phrase "Lance Armstrong doped" versus "I believe he doped" (like your comment). The latter is accurate. The former (so far) is not.

As for the the argument that "they all dope", it's preposterous. It results in an inifinite chain when taken to the logical conclusion. If the Pros dope, those wishing to get into the pros dope, meaning those wishing to get to the point where they can think about going pro have to dope, meaning those wishing to get to THAT point dope and so on until the guy beside you at the local MS150 is doping just because he has a saddle crammed up his butt. It's just silly.

PS Dogboy, the above is mostly a generic rant. I got exactly what you said and am inclined to agree with it 100%.

As for the the argument that "they all dope", it's preposterous. It results in an inifinite chain when taken to the logical conclusion. If the Pros dope, those wishing to get into the pros dope, meaning those wishing to get to the point where they can think about going pro have to dope, meaning those wishing to get to THAT point dope and so on until the guy beside you at the local MS150 is doping just because he has a saddle crammed up his butt. It's just silly.
well reasoned and well said. Thank you.

I suppose my powergels could be considered doping for me at my level of (non)performance if they help me ride longer and/or faster...however, they are legal...but so is my asthma inhaler; I'll bet the use of it in a race could be construed as performance enhancement.

I think if you take your Viagra pre-ride, it's performance enhancing too. But I hear that if your ride lasts longer than 4 hours, you need to call your doctor ;)

Do you know what beats the hell out of me ? How come "the implicants" didn't complained and/or protested when accused ? Say, you're up for the TDF, where you have a good chance to be the champion, and someone comes along blaming you for something: you'd raise your voice and protest denying all charges and fight your way back into the competition, wouldn't you?
Instead, they calmly chose to withdraw......very strange, I think there's more than meets the eye, highly suspicious if you ask me.

Corsaire :mad:



from cadenaSER radio:

Son cuatro cajas de folios, de las que se ha levantado el secreto para tres. La Guardia Civil ha identificado los códigos con los que el doctor Eufemiano Fuentes camuflaba en sus libretas los nombres de los cicilistas que hacían uso de sus servicios. La lista es de poco más de cincuenta corredores y, de momento, sólo hay ciclistas.

En esa lista están Jan Ullrich, Ivan Basso, Francisco Mancebo, Joseba Beloki, Roberto Heras, Tyler Hamilton, Santi Pérez, Santiago Botero, Quique Gutierrez, y así hasta 56 ciclistas.

El secretario de Estado para el Deporte, Jaime Lissavetzky, se va reunir mañana con el ministro de Deportes francés y es posible que la organización tome medidas muy dureas e impida la salida de todos estos corredores.

LA LISTA DE LOS PRESUNTAMENTE IMPLICADOS

ASTANÁ WURTH

MICHELE SCARPONI
MARCOS SERRANO
DAVID ETXEBARRIA
JOSEBA BELOKI
ANGEL VICIOSO
ISIDRO NOZAL
UNAI OSA
JAKSCHE JOORG

C.S.C.

IVAN BASSO

Caisse D'Espagne Illes Balears

CONSTANTINO ZABALLA

Saunier Duval

CARLOS ZARATE

AG2 R

FRANCISCO MANCEBO

T-Mobile

JAN ULLRICH
OSCAR SEVILLA

Phonak

JOSE ENRIQUE GUTIERREZ
JOSE IGNACIO GUTIERREZ

Comunitat Valenciana

VICENTE BALLESTER
DAVID BERNABEU
DAVID BLANCO RODRIGUEZ
JOSE ADRIAN BONILLLA
JUAN GOMIS LOPEZ
ELADIO JIMENEZ
DAVID LATASA
JAVIER PASCUAL
RUBEN PLAZA
J.LUIS M. JIMENEZ

Unibet.com

GARCIA QUESADA

Actualmente retirados o suspendidos por dopaje

ROBERTO HERAS
ANGEL CASERO
SANTIAGO PEREZ
TYLER HAMILTON

Do you know what beats the hell out of me ? How come "the implicants" didn't complained and/or protested when accused ? Say, you're up for the TDF, where you have a good chance to be the champion, and someone comes along blaming you for something: you'd raise your voice and protest denying all charges and fight your way back into the competition, wouldn't you?
Instead, they calmly chose to withdraw......very strange, I think there's more than meets the eye, highly suspicious if you ask me.

Corsaire :mad:

I know what you're saying, but we also live in a "Deny everything" world. I agree that their silence is odd, but I don't think it's a sign of guilt or innocence. Even if there was a picture of them actually receiving the injection they'd deny it (after calling Tyler for some tips). I think they've lawyered up and were advised to say nothing as they gear up for a huge legal battle after the Tour...

I think if you take your Viagra pre-ride, it's performance enhancing too. But I hear that if your ride lasts longer than 4 hours, you need to call your doctor ;)

Only if you pedal with your... uh, never mind.

Only if you pedal with your... uh, never mind.

Well, I really only have ONE leg... ;)

Notable that CSC and T-Mobile both lost their leaders and still finished on the podium.