Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    262
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    I thought Novitsky was going to have something on LA by June ?

    I haven't seen ANYTHING on the Armstrong doping investigation, and google fails to reveal anything recent. Did I miss something? I am a LA homer, don't want to see it or believe it, but wondering if anything has come out. Landis continues to degrade his credibility. Thx.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    262
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Must not be real racing season. 23 views and no comments even from the Lance haters.

  3. #3
    starting pistol means war YMCA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    east coast
    My Bikes
    Cervelo R3
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Personally, I'd rather talk "anything", but doping.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    people's republic of eugene oregon
    Posts
    744
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i was going to bump the 'feds & the end of oneball' thread but it's gone... or maybe it went to trollheim? i was hoping to get a few more giggles out of the lance haters.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by PeddlingPilgrim View Post
    i was going to bump the 'feds & the end of oneball' thread but it's gone... or maybe it went to trollheim? i was hoping to get a few more giggles out of the lance haters.
    Whats so "funny" about a guy(who along w/others), helped bring down a sport,( we all love), a few notches? No disrespect, but, I dont "get" that. Do I "hate" Lance? No, do I think he doped?Sure do. He's seemingly(not alone, others as well), made it, so that now ALL riders are under the microscope. Now, how do we know who's clean& who isnt? A huge cloud of controversy, now hovers over the sport, thanks to the actions of others.

    So, go ahead, and "giggle" all you want.(shakes head)
    Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 09-18-11 at 01:47 AM.

  6. #6
    Senior Member bobvonb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Apple Valley, CA
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
    Whats so "funny" about a guy(who along w/others), helped bring down a sport,( we all love), a few notches? No disrespect, but, I dont "get" that. Do I "hate" Lance? No, do I think he doped?Sure do. He's seemingly(not alone, others as well), made it, so that now ALL riders are under the microscope. Now, how do we know who's clean& who isnt? A huge cloud of controversy, now hovers over the sport, thanks to the actions of others.

    So, go ahead, and "giggle" all you want.(shakes head)
    hmmm. I don't think the previous poster was saying anything was 'funny' about Lance, but about the Lance haters. You say you don't hate, and I will take you at your word, but you are definitely not a Lance fan and he (the previous poster) may, just maybe, have been talking about those with a similar view to your own.

    It seems to me that Lance has elevated the sport, not brought it down a few notches. This will remain true until there is some proof of his alleged indiscretions. Those that have been proven to dope are the guilty, to whatever degree the sport has been brought down. However, it seems like things are improving, with better racing, more tours, more fans, and more cyclists.

    So, while I admire your devotion to Mr. LeMond, who certainly did great things, I must respectfully disagree with your leaps of logic regarding Mr. Armstrong.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bobvonb View Post
    hmmm. I don't think the previous poster was saying anything was 'funny' about Lance, but about the Lance haters. You say you don't hate, and I will take you at your word, but you are definitely not a Lance fan and he (the previous poster) may, just maybe, have been talking about those with a similar view to your own.

    It seems to me that Lance has elevated the sport, not brought it down a few notches. This will remain true until there is some proof of his alleged indiscretions. Those that have been proven to dope are the guilty, to whatever degree the sport has been brought down. However, it seems like things are improving, with better racing, more tours, more fans, and more cyclists.

    So, while I admire your devotion to Mr. LeMond, who certainly did great things, I must respectfully disagree with your leaps of logic regarding Mr. Armstrong.
    What do my screen name & "Mr Lemond" have to do with the op? Nothing. Many here have given info, that Lance had pretty much admitted to doping, so, how hes "elevated the sport"? Is beyond me. He cheated, he should be punished accordingly, like others who have cheated have been. Mr Armstrong, has also contributed to bringing the sport down a notch. He, along w/others, made doping acceptable, until recently. I get you're an LA fan, but please, take the blinders off & admit, he(LA) was no angel & played a huge role in the doping scandal, that has rockec the sport. Imo, I doubt that admission is in your vocabulary.

    PS, its not "my logic", its FACT, your man Mr. Armstrong, has been embroiled in a lenghty battle, with just about EVERYONE, over allegations of his involvement in the doping scandal.

    You mustve been living under a rock, the last 5-6 years?
    Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 09-19-11 at 05:13 AM.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    262
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
    What do my screen name & "Mr Lemond" have to do with the op? Nothing. Many here have given info, that Lance had pretty much admitted to doping, so, how hes "elevated the sport"? Is beyond me. He cheated, he should be punished accordingly, like others who have cheated have been. Mr Armstrong, has also contributed to bringing the sport down a notch. He, along w/others, made doping acceptable, until recently. I get you're an LA fan, but please, take the blinders off & admit, he(LA) was no angel & played a huge role in the doping scandal, that has rockec the sport. Imo, I doubt that admission is in your vocabulary.

    PS, its not "my logic", its FACT, your man Mr. Armstrong, has been embroiled in a lenghty battle, with just about EVERYONE, over allegations of his involvement in the doping scandal.

    You mustve been living under a rock, the last 5-6 years?
    See, I knew I missed something here. I guess I missed the news of his conviction and positive proof of doping...

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Haunchyville
    Posts
    5,634
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How did we know who was clean before Lance? If you want clean cycling the microscope was needed long before LA:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ses_in_cycling

    Lance was just really good at winning the TdF during the doping era. You should really thank him as cycling may be headed to a cleaner future due to all the attention that he has brought to the matter. With out the current increase in testing guys may have flown under the radar for years.

  10. #10
    Forum Admin lotek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    n.w. superdrome
    My Bikes
    1 trek, serotta, rih, de Reus, Pogliaghi and finally a Zieleman! and got a DeRosa
    Posts
    17,606
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not saying he did, or he didn't, that's for the prosecutors to decide
    but I've got to go back to what Maitre Jacques said (and i paraphrase)
    "What do they think we do ride around on Perrier water?"

    The longer this goes on the less impact it's going to have on
    the general public atmo. I don't think the general public is going
    to care all that much 4 or 6 months down the road when the
    indictments come rolling in.
    it may shake up standings and have changes in who won past
    tours but current procyling? I don't think so.
    Sono pił lento di quel che sembra.
    Odio la gente, tutti.

    Are you a registered member? Why not? click here to register. Its free, and only takes 27 seconds!
    Want to upgrade your membership? Click Here.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by canam73 View Post
    How did we know who was clean before Lance? If you want clean cycling the microscope was needed long before LA:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ses_in_cycling

    Lance was just really good at winning the TdF during the doping era. You should really thank him as cycling may be headed to a cleaner future due to all the attention that he has brought to the matter. With out the current increase in testing guys may have flown under the radar for years.
    That was my point in earlier threads, how do we know who was/wasnt clean?

    You dont have yo be proven guilty to be guilty. Perfect example is Roger Clemens. Suspicions are there & have been for awhile.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Haunchyville
    Posts
    5,634
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
    That was my point in earlier threads, how do we know who was/wasnt clean?

    You dont have yo be proven guilty to be guilty. Perfect example is Roger Clemens. Suspicions are there & have been for awhile.
    If your talking about the past, we won't ever know with absolute certainty. That's why a witch hunt will become pointless. Is it fair to only be able to punish those who happen to have an old random blood sample still intact in a lab and let the majority of riders who don't go free? I don't think so.

    Going forward maybe the 'biological passport' deal will help keep a better record. But if there is money to be made by cheating people will try it and some will get away with.

    As for condemning people off of suspicions.....seriously?

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If your talking about the past, we won't ever know with absolute certainty. That's why a witch hunt will become pointless. Is it fair to only be able to punish those who happen to have an old random blood sample still intact in a lab and let the majority of riders who don't go free? I don't think so.
    So, we shouldnt hold 7 time TDF winners to the same standards(and punishments) as others receive? got it. You cant bend the rules, because YOU like someone, and not for others. He should be punished, if it's found out that he did dope(and it's a pretty good conclusion he did). Who you are, should have no bearing on whether or not you skate through w/o any type of punishment handed down.

    Going forward maybe the 'biological passport' deal will help keep a better record. But if there is money to be made by cheating people will try it and some will get away with.
    Probably right.



    As for condemning people off of suspicions.....seriously?
    Pretty sure it's more than just "suspicions" we're talking about here? Could be wrong, but, again, read my response above. We should hold EVERYONE accountable, not just who YOU think shouldnt be, and others should be. Landis/Contador/Ullrich have all been banned, and their tour wins rescinded, shouldnt we hold LA to the same standards as well?

    My guess would be no, considering your explanations, and favortism for LA.
    Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 09-19-11 at 04:52 PM.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Haunchyville
    Posts
    5,634
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
    So, we shouldnt hold 7 time TDF winners to the same standards(and punishments) as others receive? got it. You cant bend the rules, because YOU like someone, and not for others. He should be punished, if it's found out that he did dope(and it's a pretty good conclusion he did). Who you are, should have no bearing on whether or not you skate through w/o any type of punishment handed down.



    Probably right.



    Pretty sure it's more than just "suspicions" we're talking about here? Could be wrong, but, again, read my response above. We should hold EVERYONE accountable, not just who YOU think shouldnt be, and others should be. Landis/Contador/Ullrich have all been banned, and their tour wins rescinded, shouldnt we hold LA to the same standards as well?

    My guess would be no, considering your explanations, and favortism for LA.
    I've already told you I'm not a Lance fan and that I think he doped. But at the time he passed the same scrutiny that the rest of the riders did. I'm sure a few guys were clean, but most of the real competition was not, and you will never catch them now. It has nothing to do with who he is.

    Ullrich and Contador have not had their wins rescinded. Look it up. In fact, if you throw Lance out, it would make Ullrich a 4 time winner, 1 more than Lemond. If you found a way to chuck Basso from 2005 then Ullrich would be tied for the record at 5. Does that make sense to you?

    And if it would take more than suspicions and allegations for you to throw somebody out then what exactly would your standard be?

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by canam73 View Post
    I've already told you I'm not a Lance fan and that I think he doped. But at the time he passed the same scrutiny that the rest of the riders did. I'm sure a few guys were clean, but most of the real competition was not, and you will never catch them now. It has nothing to do with who he is.

    Ullrich and Contador have not had their wins rescinded. Look it up. In fact, if you throw Lance out, it would make Ullrich a 4 time winner, 1 more than Lemond. If you found a way to chuck Basso from 2005 then Ullrich would be tied for the record at 5. Does that make sense to you?

    And if it would take more than suspicions and allegations for you to throw somebody out then what exactly would your standard be?
    Oh thats right....we've already had this same discussion before. You must've forgotten about it?

    My mistake on Contador/Ullrich, I was thinking Landis/someone else......But, Ullrich was banned for a few years?

    Of course, he(Ullrich) and others have been banned for "suspicisons of doping" too, so there you go.

    YOU know where I stand on all of this, so i dont "get" why you keep bringing it up, to try to porve a point,that isnt there?

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Haunchyville
    Posts
    5,634
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
    Oh thats right....we've already had this same discussion before. You must've forgotten about it?

    My mistake on Contador/Ullrich, I was thinking Landis/someone else......But, Ullrich was banned for a few years?

    Of course, he(Ullrich) and others have been banned for "suspicisons of doping" too, so there you go.

    YOU know where I stand on all of this, so i dont "get" why you keep bringing it up, to try to porve a point,that isnt there?
    I didn't forget, I reminded you.

    Take a look at a few of the years that Lance won. Look up the next few guys in line until you find somebody who there are no "suspicisons of doping (sic)". Tell me who the winners should be.

    I don't bring it up anymore than you do. I was responding to you. It's a forum. That's what people do here. You're free to stop posting and I won't have anything to respond to or you can put me on your ignore list.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I didn't forget, I reminded you.
    Of what exactly did you "remind me of"? that our opinions differ from one another? If so, then yes, you did forget.


    Take a look at a few of the years that Lance won. Look up the next few guys in line until you find somebody who there are no "suspicisons of doping (sic)". Tell me who the winners should be.
    I never singled him out, YOU keep doing so...I've maintained that he, along with others have doped. But, since you're bringing it up, there probably couldve been others who couldve won? didnt Contador come in second in 2-3 of the Tours Lance won? there you go, but then again, he's a supposed "doper" too, so he might not count. Regardless, what is your point exactly? that b/c there werent any other "clean" alternatives to LA/Contador, that it's ok that Armstrong won?


    I don't bring it up anymore than you do.
    Oh but you did/do. You seem to follow me around, wherever I post, and inject your take on the situation. You have that right, even though it's off base, you do.


    I was responding to you. It's a forum.That's what people do here.
    Probably best to heed your own advice here, one would think? we'll agree to disagree. You keep responding, b/c apparently you feel you've been offended in some way? That LA has been tarnished in some way? Im sorry if you have, its a touchy subject I'm sure, one with no real answers & most likely, never will have. There's always going to be a cloud of controversy around the man/subject, I cant do anything about that. Happened before I/we started posting, and Im sure, will continue, long after both of us are gone? Dont beat yourself up over it, it's not worth it.



    You're free to stop posting and I won't have anything to respond to
    You're free to stop telling me what to do? When you start paying my bills, then, maybe.... or, how about just going about your business, and not worrying about what I say, that I've somehow "offended you", and that you're on this crusade of sorts, to troll people, who's opinions,/beliefs, dont mirror yours?

    You're "free" to knock it off anytime. That way, you dont have to "respond to anything I post",and your blood pressure, will go down, we wont have to hear anymore incessant diatribes, or oneupsmanship from you, and we wont continue dragging this dead horse into the ground, any longer than it should? But, thats too easy isnt it, and you cant help yourself, can you? I told you, they have medicine for that.

    I can post all kinds of suspicions surrounding the man(as well as other riders), as Im sure, you can post stuff to the contrary? So, neither would win, or have their point stand out more than it has? = no win situation.


    or you can put me on your ignore list.
    Why? You arent important enough to me, to do so. That would be a perfectly good waste of "ignore" wouldnt it?

    PS, hopefully, you can now stop with all of this, so that we can stop wasting bandwidth, on a story/subject, there really isnt any right or wrong answer to? We'll agree to disagree, thats what makes this country so great.

    By all means, keep showing how you just cant handle it though, and continue posting, proving me right
    Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 09-19-11 at 09:06 PM.

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Haunchyville
    Posts
    5,634
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve View Post
    didnt Contador come in second in 2-3 of the Tours Lance won?
    Yes, this would be a good place to stop since you obviously don't actually watch cycling.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Without even reading, I won $5 from my friend, thanks to you. I bet him that you wouldnt be able to help yourself & youd reply, I won, thanks.

    Oh yeah, my bad, I was thinking of Jan Ullrich, not Contador.

    PS, thanks for proving my point.
    Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 09-19-11 at 11:46 PM.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Haunchyville
    Posts
    5,634
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Should I be concerned? The money doesn't come from my pocket.

    Enjoy your payday.

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Posts
    74
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't care much about whether Lance will be punished or not but saying you need more proof to believe he was doping does sound a bit weird to me.

    Probably all of those things were discussed before, I could barely get through this thread, apologies for not looking at the others but in case you missed something:
    As everyone knows, he tested + for cortisone in 1999. He wasn't banned because he presented a backdated TUE- which may be enough to avoid suspension but it's hardly logical to assume he was innocent.
    http://nyvelocity.com/content/interv...chael-ashenden If you don't feel like reading the whole thing (though there's some good analysis there), just have a look at " '99 Tour Urine Samples Re-Tested in '05" and "Lance Armstrong's '99 Samples Test Positive". You can choose to believe those tests aren't credible but I would think such detailed interpretation by Ashenden is worth a little bit more than Lance saying he likes his word and pitying people for not believing in miracles.
    http://www.cbc.ca/sports/indepth/lan...ntmessage.html The conversation between Vaughters/Andreu. They weren't 100% right about everything, some of the things they say are just rumours but it's a nice description of the climate around Lance. And as they were only talking to each other, I can hardly think of any reason why they'd make something up on purpose.
    Also the whole Ferrari thing. If you believe someone would work so close with him and pay him so much just for good training advice- and that belief would be not only against common sense but also claims of people like Willy Voet- well, that's your choice.

    And even without all that, it's a bit naive to believe that Lance was so talented and so much more motivated than his rivals to beat them when they were all blood doping. Given the benefits, it's virtually impossible. Zulle admitted to taking EPO, Dufaux is a confessed doper, Escartin was riding for Kelme (whole team on the program), Ullrich and Basso were both Fuentes clients, Heras tested positive for EPO, Gonzalez tested + twice for salbutamol, Rumsas caught as well, just like Vino, Hamilton, Mayo, Mancebo. There's nothing to suggest Armstrong could beat them clean. Some of those were considered incredible talents while Armstrong wasn't even thought of as (future) GC contender before his cancer. Where would Lance find those few percent to close the gap made by doping if he wasn't juiced himself? I rate mental strength and hard work but... well, I guess I don't believe in miracles. I'm pretty sure there were more extremely motivated and hard working riders between 1999 and 2005.

    Sure if you strip Armstrong off the titles (and you can only go back 7 years btw, that's why they couldn't do anything when Riis confessed), you'll face the problem- what to do with them? Anyway, you can't rewrite the whole history of cycling and if you try, you'll probably only damage it further. And Armstrong is as guilty in ruining cycling's reputation as others- he might have had a better program and he might be an a$$ but it's pretty irrelevant here. (But think about what would happen if other sports were similarly exposed, had similar number of anti-doping tests blah blah blah- you'd quickly see tennis players and footballers bringing their respective sports into disrepute.) Time to move on, he's a closed chapter and no reason to keep bringing him up and arguing over him.




  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by paperbackwriter View Post
    I don't care much about whether Lance will be punished or not but saying you need more proof to believe he was doping does sound a bit weird to me.

    Probably all of those things were discussed before, I could barely get through this thread, apologies for not looking at the others but in case you missed something:
    As everyone knows, he tested + for cortisone in 1999. He wasn't banned because he presented a backdated TUE- which may be enough to avoid suspension but it's hardly logical to assume he was innocent.
    http://nyvelocity.com/content/interv...chael-ashenden If you don't feel like reading the whole thing (though there's some good analysis there), just have a look at " '99 Tour Urine Samples Re-Tested in '05" and "Lance Armstrong's '99 Samples Test Positive". You can choose to believe those tests aren't credible but I would think such detailed interpretation by Ashenden is worth a little bit more than Lance saying he likes his word and pitying people for not believing in miracles.
    http://www.cbc.ca/sports/indepth/lan...ntmessage.html The conversation between Vaughters/Andreu. They weren't 100% right about everything, some of the things they say are just rumours but it's a nice description of the climate around Lance. And as they were only talking to each other, I can hardly think of any reason why they'd make something up on purpose.
    Also the whole Ferrari thing. If you believe someone would work so close with him and pay him so much just for good training advice- and that belief would be not only against common sense but also claims of people like Willy Voet- well, that's your choice.

    And even without all that, it's a bit naive to believe that Lance was so talented and so much more motivated than his rivals to beat them when they were all blood doping. Given the benefits, it's virtually impossible. Zulle admitted to taking EPO, Dufaux is a confessed doper, Escartin was riding for Kelme (whole team on the program), Ullrich and Basso were both Fuentes clients, Heras tested positive for EPO, Gonzalez tested + twice for salbutamol, Rumsas caught as well, just like Vino, Hamilton, Mayo, Mancebo. There's nothing to suggest Armstrong could beat them clean. Some of those were considered incredible talents while Armstrong wasn't even thought of as (future) GC contender before his cancer. Where would Lance find those few percent to close the gap made by doping if he wasn't juiced himself? I rate mental strength and hard work but... well, I guess I don't believe in miracles. I'm pretty sure there were more extremely motivated and hard working riders between 1999 and 2005.

    Sure if you strip Armstrong off the titles (and you can only go back 7 years btw, that's why they couldn't do anything when Riis confessed), you'll face the problem- what to do with them? Anyway, you can't rewrite the whole history of cycling and if you try, you'll probably only damage it further. And Armstrong is as guilty in ruining cycling's reputation as others- he might have had a better program and he might be an a$$ but it's pretty irrelevant here. (But think about what would happen if other sports were similarly exposed, had similar number of anti-doping tests blah blah blah- you'd quickly see tennis players and footballers bringing their respective sports into disrepute.) Time to move on, he's a closed chapter and no reason to keep bringing him up and arguing over him.


    Excellent post

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    912
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I find it ironic that the people who respond to threads like this are the ones who care the LEAST about the topic because they already have their minds made up.

    Quote Originally Posted by LemondFanForeve
    You dont have yo be proven guilty to be guilty.
    Well, for the sake of THIS discussion, yes, you do. Whether it's murder, a parking ticket, or doping, that is the standard that we, as a civil society, have agreed upon, at least until we have some supreme God-like power to perfectly tell the past. The alternative that you suggest is akin to what society has tried in the past, be it to discover witches in Salem, or anything else. We tried it, it wasn't fair, and we grew up as a society. Join us.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I find it ironic that the people who respond to threads like this are the ones who care the LEAST about the topic because they already have their minds made up.
    I find it even more ironic, that people who dont know what they're talking about, are chiming in? Read the links the above poster, was kind enough to include.....come back and tell me anything said is untrue?





    Well, for the sake of THIS discussion, yes, you do. Whether it's murder, a parking ticket, or doping, that is the standard that we, as a civil society, have agreed upon, at least until we have some supreme God-like power to perfectly tell the past. The alternative that you suggest is akin to what society has tried in the past, be it to discover witches in Salem, or anything else. We tried it, it wasn't fair, and we grew up as a society. Join us.
    Actually, for the sake of this arguement: NO YOU DONT. Armstrong hasnt been "proven guilty", yet it's a pretty well known fact that he did dope. Or did you miss the post 2 posts up, saying that very thing?

    All I've heard from folks here is "well, Lance didnt do anything...blah blah blah, where's your proof that he did...what proof does he have to give that says he didnt..blah blah blah" & major butt hurtness from folks who dont like the fact(or, dont want to believe-ehich is more accurate) that Lance could be a doper, and a scam artist. You dont have to be proven guilty, to be such, case in point Lance Armstrong. C'mon, even someone such as yourself, has to admit...LA just got busted?

    "Witches in Salem" or not, he's guilty, you know it, I do, the poster who posted facts does, just admit it and move on. Problem is, LA & his supporters cant seem to do that.

    Let it go...your man has been busted........time to move on.
    Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 09-20-11 at 05:50 PM.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Pasadena, CA(for now)
    Posts
    1,102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Interesting read, those articles. Really details what I've stood by all along. This part, especially stands out to me(and proves that alot of what I said, was/is right on):

    4. Trust. See page 179 of "Its not about the bike", where Armstrong says: ""The old me had weighed 175 pounds. Now I was 158, my face looked narrow and hawkish, and you could see every sinew in my legs." In the context of the book, this was post-cancer shortly before he resumed racing. 175 pounds (~79kg) vs. 158 pounds (~72kg). Later, Armstrong confirmed under oath that he had never raced at 72 kg - yet this leaner body weight has entered folklore (and Coyle's publication!) as the explanation for his improved performance. He had lied to the public about his weight loss. To quote Armstrong's agent Bill Stapleton, when questioning the motives of allegations against his friend: "He lied once, therefore it brings everything else into question".

    (We have a winner!!!)

    Now, pardon me for speaking out of turn here, but if your own agent throws you under the bus, it's a pretty good assumption, you're guilty.
    Last edited by LemondFanForeve; 09-20-11 at 05:52 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •