|
What's wrong with Leaps of Judgement?
Hey, worked for D. Cheney. |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 8697140)
Hey, worked for D. Cheney.
Go Steelers. |
Yeah, this tread is more interesting with turrets.
|
F Lance. I can turn this into a thread about me by noon.
|
Originally Posted by Associated Press - Paris
In France, drug testers take an oath before a court to discharge their duties honestly before they are allowed to work.
|
It's really not too difficult to imagine how this went down. Armstrong, used to being tested by WADA /UCI is put off by the French guy showing up. Responds along the lines of F'U. Takes a bit of time to sort out, before its clear he has to submit to the test.
French guys respond back with "no F'U" by raising this little pissing contest (no pun intended). Armstrong's known for being less than tactful on occassion, and I'm betting he pissed them off. |
Originally Posted by gsteinb
(Post 8697104)
No offense I honestly don't care what you do. I actually know what I'm talking about. There's about a million things on the banned list for no other reason than they mask the use of PEDs. Floyd's camp tried to put out that he wouldn't have used testosterone because it wouldn't be of benefit to an endurance athlete (false) and then that it wouldn't be of use just one time (also false but also misleading in that getting caught once doesn't prove that he wasn't on it all along). It's actually far more likely and logical that he messed up the dose, his body responded differently due to the stress of bonking the day before, or that something went awry with his masking agent. These aren't wild speculations but more logical and fact based explanations of how someone who failed a test did so. Of course, it could have been the jack daniels :rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by telebianchi
(Post 8697176)
Well, that settles it. Lance is guilty. Someone should pop all of his tires and switch out the Trek's for a bunch of rusty old Huffy's.
Judges in this country take oaths, some of them are crooked. Same with policemen, politicians, and just about everyone else. |
We'll need more popcorn for this thread. I'm settling in. I see 20+ pages coming.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 8697141)
Sorry RW.
Go Steelers. BTW...I was glad to see that Eric Holder legally supported the Article II Executive Powers and said wiretaps, (the ones that were unconstitutional last year) will continue. But I digress... :D |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 8697253)
We'll need more popcorn for this thread. I'm settling in. I see 20+ pages coming.
Lance is a Texan, of course he doesn't take any BS. |
Try to behave you Red State Road Nazi. But wait, now you live in a Blue State.
Oh well. Like I said, Go Steelers. By the way, the Undefeated Mets' Magic Number is now 160. |
Originally Posted by gsteinb
(Post 8697104)
No offense I honestly don't care what you do. I actually know what I'm talking about. There's about a million things on the banned list for no other reason than they mask the use of PEDs. Floyd's camp tried to put out that he wouldn't have used testosterone because it wouldn't be of benefit to an endurance athlete (false) and then that it wouldn't be of use just one time (also false but also misleading in that getting caught once doesn't prove that he wasn't on it all along). It's actually far more likely and logical that he messed up the dose, his body responded differently due to the stress of bonking the day before, or that something went awry with his masking agent. These aren't wild speculations but more logical and fact based explanations of how someone who failed a test did so. Of course, it could have been the jack daniels :rolleyes:
Really...you believe what you like as you don't have any proof to your supposition but I agree its plausible. There is a big difference between Floyd and Lance. Floyd was caught. His bonk and then dominance suggested something wasn't right and quite possibly he cheated. I give you that. He may not have cheated and possibly was framed but likely he did cheat. The difference with Lance is...the most winning and loathed rider by the French (leap) of all time in their race..is the guy has been tested a lot and never found to have cheated. Some can't accept that Lance's genetic gifts and work ethic trump a need to cheat when the converse has never been proven. |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 8697294)
Try to behave you Red State Road Nazi. But wait, now you live in a Blue State.
|
Originally Posted by Campag4life
(Post 8697346)
Is that your proof?...lol.
Really...you believe what you like as you don't have any proof to your supposition but I agree its plausible. There is a big difference between Floyd and Lance. Floyd was caught. His bonk and then dominance suggested something wasn't right and quite possibly he cheated. I give you that. He may not have cheated and possibly was framed but likely he did cheat. The difference with Lance is...the most winning and loathed rider by the French (leap) of all time in their race..is the guy has been tested a lot and never found to have cheated. Some can't accept that Lance's genetic gifts and work ethic trump a need to cheat when the converse has never been proven.
Originally Posted by classic1
(Post 8697184)
Landis had multiple positives for artificial testosterone. He had one test that had the ratios screwed up so they did further testing and found artificial testosterone. Further testing on his other samples showed artificial testosterone.
|
If Lance doped/dopes, why does that diminish any of his accomplishments?
As we've pretty much estabilshed, he won 7 Tours during one of the peaks in doping for the sport (which has ebbed and flowed for about five decades now). They were basically all doing it. |
Originally Posted by roadwarrior
(Post 8697370)
Not for long.
|
I wonder if Lance did break the testing rules? I know he came up negative, but what are the rules when someone comes to you for a random test? If you are required to standby the tester without leaving his site. I am sure Lance knew this. These guys know the rules, it's fine that they were getting the credentials of the tester but why create the suspicion by leaving for 20 mins?
|
Originally Posted by WCroadie
(Post 8696800)
He takes all the tests, he has never been proven guilty, he is good for the sport.
Look at the Google trends for "trek bicycles": http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=t...eekly_img&sa=N It's not hard to notice the "Lance effect" in July, when he was and wasn't racing. In 2004 Backroads filled 22 trips to the TdF. In 2007, they ran one trip. Trek Travel had 500 guests in 2004, only 150 in 2007. Lance effect? Primarily, I think. Tour de France Marketing Hits Uphill Stage Then there's Tour of California. Attendance in 2008 was 1.6 million, but jumped to 2 million with Lance's arrival in 2009. |
Since they can't find a positive test, they have to resort to something like this?
Absolutely, positively pathetic. |
Personally, I honestly believe "the French*" will do whatever it takes to keep LA out of the race.
* - ASO, French media, drug testers, public. |
Originally Posted by roadwarrior
(Post 8697073)
Second paragraph.
Originally Posted by gsteinb
(Post 8697104)
No offense I honestly don't care what you do. I actually know what I'm talking about. There's about a million things on the banned list for no other reason than they mask the use of PEDs. Floyd's camp tried to put out that he wouldn't have used testosterone because it wouldn't be of benefit to an endurance athlete (false) and then that it wouldn't be of use just one time (also false but also misleading in that getting caught once doesn't prove that he wasn't on it all along). It's actually far more likely and logical that he messed up the dose, his body responded differently due to the stress of bonking the day before, or that something went awry with his masking agent. These aren't wild speculations but more logical and fact based explanations of how someone who failed a test did so. Of course, it could have been the jack daniels :rolleyes:
You say you know what you are talking about, but you are simply jumping to wild and unfounded conclusions. Citing the data at hand (the large numbers of clean tests and no failed tests), it is not jumping to conclusions to say that he has raced clean. He has raced certifiably clean, as best as the system can determine that. He has passed all the tests. |
Originally Posted by classic1
(Post 8697184)
Landis had multiple positives for artificial testosterone. He had one test that had the ratios screwed up so they did further testing and found artificial testosterone. Further testing on his other samples showed artificial testosterone.
|
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 8696951)
Is it really a glaring violation of testing protocol to ask the guy to wait 20-30 minutes while his credentials are verified? Maybe so. Sounds like much ado about nothing. Somebody show me the EXACT WORDING IN THE RULES that makes Lance's conduct a violation and maybe I'll come around.
It's a big Kabuki Dance of Mirrors. Reminds me of the relationship between Americans and the IRS, actually. ... Armstrong "did not respect the obligation to remain under the direct and permanent observation" of the tester. So apparently the rules are that once the tester appears, the testee is supposed to remain in his sight. Anyone have a copy of the exact rules? http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...Y9IKwD97ETUKO1 |
Originally Posted by patentcad
(Post 8696708)
It's really hard not to think that French officials don't have it in for Lance. They should kiss his ass and pay him a million friggin Euro we-hope-you-actually-make-an-appearance fee for even announcing he's doing their stupid race considering that fact that such news will boost the interest in the event 100% globally.
Doping Schmoping. Somebody should send these Frog Morons to Economics 101. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:34 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.