PDA

View Full Version : So what does LANCE think of Floyd's win?


BumbleBeeDave
07-20-2006, 10:38 PM
I have seen nothing--zip--nada--anywhere today as far as quotes from Lance or reaction to Floyd's win. I watched the OLN expanded coverage this evening and there was nothing. I can find nothing on VeloNews, or Cyclingnews.com. Lance's own website doesn't seem to have been updated since June 27.

Coincidence? Quotes from what seems like just about everyone who is anyone today in cycling, but not a word from Lance. Meanwhile, Discovery Channel was non-existent in the final standing of today's stage.

Has anyone else seen any comment from Lance? Anywhere?

Maybe he was out riding with Matt and Jake and doesn't even know about it yet? . . . :rolleyes:

BBD

scienceguy08
07-20-2006, 10:41 PM
training :beer: for RAGBRAI and can't be reached for comment ;)

fiamme red
07-20-2006, 10:44 PM
He's been roping steers.

manet
07-20-2006, 10:44 PM
he's out searching for someone that'll sell him a soccer ball for his kids

slowgoing
07-20-2006, 11:50 PM
I could understand why LA wouldn’t want to comment. Everyone is saying this is the best bit of cycling they’ve seen in the history of the Tour, meaning better than anything LA accomplished in his last seven years. Others are saying the only thing that ranked near it was the Lemond/Fignon finale, again, skipping right over LA. What’s LA going to say to that? His head is too big to acknowledge that it just might be true.

I think we’re all lucky Floyd bonked yesterday so we had the pleasure of watching him dig deep and ride like he had nothing to lose today. It’s a crazy series of events that led to this particular performance, and it might easily have never happened.

flyingscot
07-21-2006, 02:34 AM
On Wednesday it appeared that Lance's efforts in sticking pins into his Floyd voodo doll worked
But not yesterday!

As the winner of the last 7 years (and a media whore!) I am surprised LA has not been more vocal in his praise/criticism of the efforts of those who seek to emulate him on the the podium

I guess he is too busy single handedly wiping out doping from all pro sports

Ray
07-21-2006, 04:44 AM
On Wednesday it appeared that Lance's efforts in sticking pins into his Floyd voodo doll worked
But not yesterday!

As the winner of the last 7 years (and a media whore!) I am surprised LA has not been more vocal in his praise/criticism of the efforts of those who seek to emulate him on the the podium

I guess he is too busy single handedly wiping out doping from all pro sports
I'm not generally one to cut Lance a lot of slack, but I'll cut him some here. He was at the Tour for stages 15 and 16 and was quoted after Floyd's really bad day, the day before. And he was extremely gracious and sympathetic, which I wouldn't have expected. More or less saying that despite their less than perfect history together, he was really pulling for Floyd (I'm sure he wouldn't have said this if anyone from Disco was still in the race, but that horse had left the barn) and was really sad to see him on his bad day. I don't know if he was still around the Tour yesterday - he literally might be in-transit to Ragbrai or elsewhere.

If he doesn't say something in the next few days, I'll jump on the bandwagon, but I'd just as soon think a little better of him for now.

Its also worth mentioning that all of the rumors about a Rabobank/Disco alliance to hurt Floyd in the mountains surely didn't seem to materialize. Maybe because Disco just wasn't there, maybe because Menchov disappeared as a contender as soon as they hit the Alps. I was well prepared to believe that one, but I sure didn't see it.

-Ray

William
07-21-2006, 05:16 AM
Seriously... I don't really care what Lance has to say about it. What Floyd did speaks for itself.

atmo,

William

sspielman
07-21-2006, 06:19 AM
I guess he is too busy single handedly wiping out doping from all pro sports

His retirement was a great first step.....

BumbleBeeDave
07-21-2006, 06:45 AM
I don't care so much ,either, about exactly what he says. But if he says NOTHING, then that in itself is very telling about the man.

Guess we'll see . . . I just thought it interesting that the "Lance Fest" that is OLN sure did change yesterday. But it looked like Frankie was their only guy mobile on the course, and if Lance won't speak to him, then, well . . .

BBD

onekgguy
07-21-2006, 08:11 AM
I don't understand all the Lance bashing I see here from a bunch of guys who on their best day couldn't keep Lance in sight on his worst day. Maybe one has to bash Lance to be cool here...I dunno...atmo...whatever that means.

I thank Lance for his contributions to the sport I love. We should all be thanking Lance for helping to create an interest within America (read OLN) for cycling where little existed before he came along...say nothing for all his efforts toward fighting cancer. I applaud him...atmo...whatever that means.

Kevin

atmo
07-21-2006, 08:18 AM
I don't understand all the Lance bashing I see here from a bunch of guys who on their best day couldn't keep Lance in sight on his worst day. Maybe one has to bash Lance to be cool here...I dunno...atmo...whatever that means.


this (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=172672&postcount=13) should explain it atmo.

Frustration
07-21-2006, 08:22 AM
I guess he is too busy single handedly wiping out doping from all pro sports


Kinda Like OJ Simpson's crusade to find "the real killers"?

J.Greene
07-21-2006, 08:26 AM
I don't understand all the Lance bashing I see here from a bunch of guys who on their best day couldn't keep Lance in sight on his worst day. Maybe one has to bash Lance to be cool here...I dunno...atmo...whatever that means.

I thank Lance for his contributions to the sport I love. We should all be thanking Lance for helping to create an interest within America (read OLN) for cycling where little existed before he came along...say nothing for all his efforts toward fighting cancer. I applaud him...atmo...whatever that means.

Kevin

ATMO he's a fraud.....and a great bike racer, a cancer advocate, a rock star. But to me he is also a fraud.

LA from the podium

But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. But this is one hell of a race. This is a great sporting event and you should stand around and believe it. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it.

JG

onekgguy
07-21-2006, 08:34 AM
Lance has likely been tested for blood doping and enhancers more than any other cyclist in this decade. Where is the proof? Do any of you give genetics and a focus on training second to none any credit for his success? He's a human freak for sure but I'm not prepared to lable him a doper. atmo...I get it now.

Kevin

Frustration
07-21-2006, 08:36 AM
JGREEN:
ATMO he's a fraud.....and a great bike racer, a cancer advocate, a rock star. But to me he is also a fraud.

LA from the podium

But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. But this is one hell of a race. This is a great sporting event and you should stand around and believe it. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it.




Didn't he say that flanked by Jan and Ivan? Or was it the Podium where he was standing next to Beloki and Rumsas? Or was that the Podium speach after having doused Pantani? I can't remember, but you gotta believe!

William
07-21-2006, 08:40 AM
I don't understand all the Lance bashing I see here from a bunch of guys who on their best day couldn't keep Lance in sight on his worst day. Maybe one has to bash Lance to be cool here...I dunno...atmo...whatever that means.

I thank Lance for his contributions to the sport I love. We should all be thanking Lance for helping to create an interest within America (read OLN) for cycling where little existed before he came along...say nothing for all his efforts toward fighting cancer. I applaud him...atmo...whatever that means.

Kevin

Hmmm, does the fact that I don't care what Lance has to say about Floyd's come back make me a "Lance Basher"?

If it does, then I guess I'm a Bob Roll basher...
and a Frankie Andreu basher......
and a Al Truatwig basher...
etc....and so forth and so on....



William :rolleyes:

flydhest
07-21-2006, 08:41 AM
Lance has likely been tested for blood doping and enhancers more than any other cyclist in this decade. Where is the proof? Do any of you give genetics and a focus on training second to none any credit for his success? He's a human freak for sure but I'm not prepared to lable him a doper. atmo...I get it now.

Kevin

I think the problem with that argument is that it isn't an either/or proposition. No one could take performance ehancers and win the Tour without training extremely hard for it. No doubt, the training and natural ability were instrumental in winning. When I read others refering to LA as a doper on this board, I don't think any of them believes for a moment that he's a couch potato that only won because of enhancers. No one can deny that the man was/is extremely focused and trained like nobody's business.

atmo
07-21-2006, 08:43 AM
Lance has likely been tested for blood doping and enhancers more than any other cyclist in this decade. Where is the proof? Do any of you give genetics and a focus on training second to none any credit for his success? He's a human freak for sure but I'm not prepared to lable him a doper. atmo...I get it now.

Kevin


how long have you been following pro bicycle racing atmo?

catulle
07-21-2006, 08:51 AM
Lance has likely been tested for blood doping and enhancers more than any other cyclist in this decade. Where is the proof? Do any of you give genetics and a focus on training second to none any credit for his success? He's a human freak for sure but I'm not prepared to lable him a doper. atmo...I get it now.

Kevin

Oh, hmmm, so he never inhaled either?

J.Greene
07-21-2006, 08:54 AM
Lance has likely been tested for blood doping and enhancers more than any other cyclist in this decade. Where is the proof? Do any of you give genetics and a focus on training second to none any credit for his success? He's a human freak for sure but I'm not prepared to lable him a doper. atmo...I get it now.

Kevin

there are the vials of urine from the 99 tour that somehow contain epo

there are the statements under oath from respected former teamates

The strock settlement with his coach

The italian doctor

and this is just fraction, about 3mm atmo

JG

swoop
07-21-2006, 08:56 AM
and so basso and ullrich have never been tested? your point is viable .. it's possible he doesn't dope. it's possible he has. it's more likely at some point in his career he has at leat once taken a banned substance.. it' plausable he hasn't.

the amount of times he's passed the test is moot point (mute point?) it's earlyand spelling is not so easy ;)... anyway.. if you can beat the test once you can beat it every time.

there sure is a lot of doping in this sport. that is a fact. the rest is just stats.

it's just not big deal either way.. you have your brush with it (everyone has their moment).. and you move on our get busted and move on. no biggie.

tulli
07-21-2006, 09:13 AM
I don't understand all the Lance bashing I see here from a bunch of guys who on their best day couldn't keep Lance in sight on his worst day. Kevin

Why does this keep getting brought up?. Does that fact that he can outride us somehow make him morally superior? I just don't understand the logic that we should not criticise someone if we can't out ride them.

People who aren't artists criticise art, why can't we criticise Lance?

atmo
07-21-2006, 09:14 AM
People who aren't artists criticise art, why can't we criticise Lance?


should be a sticky atmo

chrisroph
07-21-2006, 09:29 AM
I suppose you would expect the recently retired 7 time winner, the winner of the last tour, and american ex-teammate of floyd to comment. OTOH, maybe he is in his private jet and presently unavailable.

Hinault reportedly said "it was almost vengeance what he did today. He said, yesterday I had a bad day and today I showed them I can make them have a bad day. He's a warrior. He didn't show it until now but today he really proved he wanted it. He proved he can make a huge move without worrying about anyone else."

Floyd made the most audacious, potent, meaningful move in years. It showed what he is made of.

It had the most dramatic impact since lance won his first. A lot of you guys are tired of him and think he is scarred. I can relate. But think back to 1999 and how you felt during that tour.

The present emotions come from LA's dominance, his political correctness, and the belief without a "conviction" that he is a doper.

I say thank him for retiring. If he hadn't, we wouldn't have had yesterday, a move that will become part of the lore of the tour.

onekgguy
07-21-2006, 09:39 AM
People who aren't artists criticise art, why can't we criticise Lance?

You're free to criticize Lance all you want as am I to question why you would do that given you have no grounds other than words from disgruntled persons or newspapers with an agenda.

Kevin

atmo
07-21-2006, 09:41 AM
The present emotions come from LA's dominance, his political correctness, and the belief without a "conviction" that he is a doper.


i have a hard time with the pc part of this atmo.

Andreu
07-21-2006, 09:42 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/5191800.stm

atmo
07-21-2006, 09:42 AM
You're free to criticize Lance all you want as am I to question why you would do that given you have no grounds other than words from disgruntled persons or newspapers with an agenda.

Kevin
do you believe he never doped, or just that he never tested postitive?

BumbleBeeDave
07-21-2006, 09:55 AM
. . . is an extremely fascinating individual. He's emblematic of what we Americans seem to want from our "heroes," yet also what we love to hate. He's an amazing athlete, yet also a real person--and often, it seems, a troubled one despite the picture of perfection his handlers attempt to paint.

I am increasingly beginning to think that the qualities that were his crucial ingredients for success as a Tour winning athlete will also become his undoing as he attempts to balance the obscurity of retirement he has chosen vs. the spotlight he evidently continues to crave.

I don't worship him, nor do I hate him. But it's his behavior in circumstances like this that can tell us a lot about the man behind the image. He allegedly went to France to inspire "his" team, of which he is now part owner. Yet even with him in the team car to cheer them on, the team has shown no signs of competitive life. I'm fascinated by the fact that he was not sought out more actively for comment. Even if he declined comment, that in itself would have been interesting and most probably would have been reported.

Judging from atmo's link, he seems to think journalists are not the most savory characters. That may well be true in many cases, but from my own experience as a journalist I've found that what a public figure DOESN'T say can be just as revealing about them as what they DO say. That's particularly true on a local level, when we in the newsroom often know quite a bit more about the local politics and personalities behind he story than we have the ability to print. I have no reason to believe it's any different on any national or international level, but since I'm not an intimate of the Tour community, I have to go by the obviously public part of what's going on.

So HAS anyone seen Lance quoted anywhere as to reaction to Floyd's performance? I stand by my comment--if he very obviously says nothing, it will be very revealing.

BBD

J.Greene
07-21-2006, 10:00 AM
. . . is an extremely fascinating individual. He's emblematic of what we Americans seem to want from our "heroes," yet also what we love to hate. He's an amazing athlete, yet also a real person--and often, it seems, a troubled one despite the picture of perfection his handlers attempt to paint.

I am increasingly beginning to think that the qualities that were his crucial ingredients for success as a Tour winning athlete will also become his undoing as he attempts to balance the obscurity of retirement he has chosen vs. the spotlight he evidently continues to crave.

I don't worship him, nor do I hate him. But it's his behavior in circumstances like this that can tell us a lot about the man behind the image. He allegedly went to France to inspire "his" team, of which he is now part owner. Yet even with him in the team car to cheer them on, the team has shown no signs of competitive life. I'm fascinated by the fact that he was not sought out more actively for comment. Even if he declined comment, that in itself would have been interesting and most probably would have been reported.

Judging from atmo's link, he seems to think journalists are not the most savory characters. That may well be true in many cases, but from my own experience as a journalist I've found that what a public figure DOESN'T say can be just as revealing about them as what they DO say. That's particularly true on a local level, when we in the newsroom often know quite a bit more about the local politics and personalities behind he story than we have the ability to print. I have no reason to believe it's any different on any national or international level, but since I'm not an intimate of the Tour community, I have to go by the obviously public part of what's going on.

So HAS anyone seen Lance quoted anywhere as to reaction to Floyd's performance? I stand by my comment--if he very obviously says nothing, it will be very revealing.

BBD

great post BBD. I think one of the most interesting things about LA is that he is all of the good and bad things one can say about him. He gives his critics and supporters almost endless material.

JG

atmo
07-21-2006, 10:08 AM
Judging from atmo's link, he seems to think journalists are not the most savory characters.

BBD

my link?
my text in that link (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=172672&postcount=13) was a prop to what
you were saying. just saying, atmo.

onekgguy
07-21-2006, 10:08 AM
do you believe he never doped, or just that he never tested postitive?

I don't know. Would I be surprised to find out that he did? Probably not. I'm not prepared to hang the doper lable on him until it's proven...that's all.

I too am disappointed that he didn't offer some congratulatory words for Floyd and agree with what BBD said in his previous post. That sort of stuff is covered in Public Image 101.

Kevin

atmo
07-21-2006, 10:16 AM
[COLOR=Navy]I don't know. Would I be surprised to find out that he did? Probably not. I'm not prepared to hang the doper lable on him until it's proven...that's all.



by chance are you following racing since the late 90s
when l.a. returned to the sport? if so, your pov is normal.
he has a huge following rooted in his comeback from
illness. it's remarkable - and good on him for inspiring
so many to do so much. but the sport is the sport, and
peds and doping have been part of it since the beginning.
if you think they all do this without help, please study
what came before all this. you owe it to yourself to have
a broader perspective. the 1980 hockey team was a miracle.
this bike racing stuff is not atmo.

fiamme red
07-21-2006, 10:22 AM
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/breakingnews/feedstory/0,,-5958609,00.html

"Quite honestly, I wasn't coming to the Tour de France. The only reason I came is because of what happened," Armstrong told reporters on Tuesday.

"I think that now is the time that fans of cycling have to stand up and say, 'I'm a fan'.

"I want to come and I want to be supportive, not just of the team, not just of the race, but of the sport of cycling, which to me is still the most beautiful sport there is," added the former Discovery Channel rider, who retired after his record seventh victory last year.

Odd then, that he had nothing to say after Landis' win. But graciousness to his former teammates isn't LANCE's forte.

Johny
07-21-2006, 10:40 AM
I don't know. Would I be surprised to find out that he did? Probably not. I'm not prepared to hang the doper lable on him until it's proven...that's all.



Lance has 6 EPO positive samples in the 1999 TdF...but then who wants to trust the test...it's only 6 B samples.

SoCalSteve
07-21-2006, 11:05 AM
Lance has 6 EPO positive blood samples in the 1999 TdF...but then who wants to trust the test...it's only 6 B samples.

Who know's how they were stored?

Who knows how they were tested?

Why did the "A" samples come up negatively?

Where did the source of all this come from?

What was their motivation?

Did they make money from this?

Just askin...

Oh, there is a 500 page report stating that Lance was NOt doping in 1999.

Just sayin...

BumbleBeeDave
07-21-2006, 11:12 AM
My sincere apologies . . . I misinterpreted the content of the link you posted in relation to your own reaction to what I was saying. I was wrong in my interpretation and I'm sorry about that.

BBD

J.Greene
07-21-2006, 11:16 AM
Who know's how they were stored?

Who knows how they were tested?

Why did the "A" samples come up negatively?

Where did the source of all this come from?

What was their motivation?

Did they make money from this?

Just askin...

Oh, there is a 500 page report stating that Lance was NOt doping in 1999.

Just sayin...

The A samples were not tested for epo because they didn't exist. The test did not also exist in 99.

The lab was not aware of who the samples belonged to, they were working on improving the tests.

To be declared positive all samples must be tested and protocol followed. It is no longer possible to sanction LA because the protocols can't be followed 7 years later. It does not address how epo got in those samples though. It's like OJ, he is "not guilty", but also not innocent atmo.

What I want to know is what beer Floyd drinks to get that performance.

JG

atmo
07-21-2006, 11:16 AM
My sincere apologies . . . I misinterpreted the content of the link you posted in relation to your own reaction to what I was saying. I was wrong in my interpretation and I'm sorry about that.

BBD
i love ya' man atmo.
i was stung the first time we met at northampton,
and a perfect town it was to get stung by a fellow of
my own gender atmo.

BumbleBeeDave
07-21-2006, 11:35 AM
Careful! People will start talking! ;) :rolleyes: :crap:

BBD

atmo
07-21-2006, 11:53 AM
Careful! People will start talking! ;) :rolleyes: :crap:

BBD
eff em atmo -
what are we but fodder for our neighbors’ amusement?

Ginger
07-21-2006, 11:58 AM
What I want to know is what beer Floyd drinks to get that performance.

JG
Whatever he picks up off the side of the road.

bcm119
07-21-2006, 12:11 PM
Why are folks so hung up on this
Lance has 6 EPO positive blood samples in the 1999 TdF...but then who wants to trust the test...it's only 6 B samples.

and this
What I want to know is what beer Floyd drinks to get that performance.
?

The gains from doping are less significant than the differences in individual genetics. Whether Lance doped or not, his dominance in the tdf was due mostly to 2 things: 1) his genetics and 2) his training focus on one event per year.

Now, all the same people who questioned the authenticity of his tdf dominance because he may or may not have been one of the many dopers in the peleton are sceptical of Floyds performance, based simply on the greatness of it. There are 2 points to make here too: 1) after a complete meltdown, the body can often start from a clean slate in terms of energy stores, in an attempt to overcompensate for the extreme deficiency the day before, similar to the carbo loading process. And 2) basing any assumption of doping on a single dominant performance is very naive. Doping can slightly increase baseline fitness and recovery ability but it can't catapult you 9 minutes out in front of a peleton of other dopers.

Frustration
07-21-2006, 12:47 PM
Why are folks so hung up on this

The gains from doping are less significant than the differences in individual genetics. ...

Respectfully, That's BS...

As an Ex steroid user from the good old college days when your school docs could give you "supplements" all season, I can say, with direct knowledge, that the cocktails of combined endurance, strength and recovery drugs that these guys are getting provide MASSIVE gains...

There's a lot more to this than a couple of red cells.










(and please don't interpret that as me thinking I am in any way better for it or find it acceptable. I don't, I was NEVER ok with it or properly informed by the school. I find organized doping one of the most disgusting things imaginable)

.

bcm119
07-21-2006, 01:17 PM
Respectfully, That's BS...

.
I was talking about epo. You're right about 'roids. The controversy surrounding Lance is focused on epo though. Testing for most steroids is very difficult or impossible and its likely they all use them to one degree or another.

Johny
07-21-2006, 01:17 PM
The gains from doping are less significant than the differences in individual genetics. Whether Lance doped or not, his dominance in the tdf was due mostly to 2 things: 1) his genetics and 2) his training focus on one event per year.



Nobody argues that genetics is not important, but one cannot overlook environmental factors that trigger the genetic program.

The point is that he was tested positive with EPO*. EPO is one environmental factor that cannot be taken out of this gestalt thang.

* The EPO* made in the Chinese hamster cells.

OldDog
07-21-2006, 01:36 PM
[QUOTE=
.[/QUOTE]

To the French: all in all Floyds just a...
nother brick in Les' Balls.



Ha! Now thats funny....

onekgguy
07-21-2006, 01:38 PM
ATMO he's a fraud.....and a great bike racer, a cancer advocate, a rock star. But to me he is also a fraud.

Okay...then who out there in the world of professional cycling isn't a fraud? Surely, with your logic you must also believe that Eddie Merckx was the biggest fraud of them all and he may have been.

What would you like Lance to have said from the podium? How's this...would this make it better?
...But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. I'm sorry you don't believe in the miracles of blood doping and EPO. But this is one hell of a race. This is a great sporting event and you should stand around and believe it. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets anymore - this is a hard sporting event and hard work along with the right amount of EPO wins it.


Again, I ask...who in this sport in your opinion is not a fraud and if they are all frauds why do you even follow it?

Kevin

atmo
07-21-2006, 01:51 PM
Okay...then who out there in the world of professional cycling isn't a fraud? Surely, with your logic you must also believe that Eddie Merckx was the biggest fraud of them all and he may have been.

What would you like Lance to have said from the podium? How's this...would this make it better?
...But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. I'm sorry you don't believe in the miracles of blood doping and EPO. But this is one hell of a race. This is a great sporting event and you should stand around and believe it. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets anymore - this is a hard sporting event and hard work along with the right amount of EPO wins it.


Again, I ask...who in this sport in your opinion is not a fraud and if they are all frauds why do you even follow it?

Kevin

the only frauds are the ones who publicly deny
its existence or blame their pets atmo. we follow
it because it's entertainment. it's all christians/lions,
etcetera, and of course, what grammy hall would
call one real jew too.

Fat Robert
07-21-2006, 02:02 PM
and of course, what grammy hall would
call one real jew too.

ham on thanksgiving?

Marcusaurelius
07-21-2006, 02:45 PM
Seriously... I don't really care what Lance has to say about it. What Floyd did speaks for itself.

atmo,

William


Seriously....do I really care what you say? I don't see how you are so much greater than Lance that you can make snide comments about him.

fiamme red
07-21-2006, 02:50 PM
.

Marcusaurelius
07-21-2006, 02:51 PM
I have seen nothing--zip--nada--anywhere today as far as quotes from Lance or reaction to Floyd's win. I watched the OLN expanded coverage this evening and there was nothing. I can find nothing on VeloNews, or Cyclingnews.com. Lance's own website doesn't seem to have been updated since June 27.

Coincidence? Quotes from what seems like just about everyone who is anyone today in cycling, but not a word from Lance. Meanwhile, Discovery Channel was non-existent in the final standing of today's stage.

Has anyone else seen any comment from Lance? Anywhere?

Maybe he was out riding with Matt and Jake and doesn't even know about it yet? . . . :rolleyes:

BBD


Hmm, so why is it important for Lance to comment on Floyd? Does it serve some great and noble purpose? Is Lance now a cycling commentator or intimately involved in Floyd's life? Lance is just a spectator at the the tour for one or two days. You would think all the Lance bashers and haters could just shut up for awhile. If you don't like him--so what. It's just possible you're not mother Theresa and a few people don't like you.

Climb01742
07-21-2006, 03:00 PM
anybody ridden any good handlebars lately?












:rolleyes:

SoCalSteve
07-21-2006, 03:05 PM
Hmm, so why is it important for Lance to comment on Floyd? Does it serve some great and noble purpose? Is Lance now a cycling commentator or intimately involved in Floyd's life? Lance is just a spectator at the the tour for one or two days. You would think all the Lance bashers and haters could just shut up for awhile. If you don't like him--so what. It's just possible you're not mother Theresa and a few people don't like you.

I resemble that remark!

Thank you for putting it in persepctive...

Truly appeciated,

Steve

Birddog
07-21-2006, 03:12 PM
Some things/names are just lightning rods on this and other forums. I actually thought more folks would take the bait and turn that Cliff Bar vs Powerbar thread into one of those Campy/Shimano type wars. It's tough to figure sometimes.

Birddog

atmo
07-21-2006, 03:14 PM
Some things/names are just lightning rods on this and other forums. I actually thought more folks would take the bait and turn that Cliff Bar vs Powerbar thread into one of those Campy/Shimano type wars. It's tough to figure sometimes.

Birddog
fig newmans atmo

BumbleBeeDave
07-21-2006, 03:30 PM
. . . I did get some new handlebars--Ritchey Biomax with the ANATOMIC bend!

Let's talk about handlebars--there couldn't POSSIBLY be anything controversial about THOSE, could there? :confused: ;) :rolleyes:

BBD

Big Dan
07-21-2006, 03:53 PM
Lance would never do anything to hurt the peloton....

How can Landis win the Tour with those bars? and how about the stem.?

:confused:

Serpico
07-21-2006, 04:17 PM
fig newmans atmo
potm
.
.

Archibald
07-21-2006, 05:23 PM
Nobody argues that genetics is not important, but one cannot overlook environmental factors that trigger the genetic program.

The point is that he was tested positive with EPO* in his blood samples. EPO is one environmental factor that cannot be taken out of this gestalt thang.

* The EPO* made in the Chinese hamster cells.
Armstrong has never tested positive for EPO in his blood samples. Ever. Try again. It would help if you would actually try to understand the facts and the issues at hand rather than just parroting something you may have read on an internet forum. :banana:

obtuse
07-21-2006, 05:27 PM
Armstrong has never tested positive for EPO in his blood samples. Ever. Try again. It would help if you would actually try to understand the facts and the issues at hand rather than just parroting something you may have read on an internet forum. :banana:


and roy munson and i have never tested positive for miller high life either. doesn't make their or my consumption of it any less of a fact.

obtuse

atmo
07-21-2006, 05:29 PM
Armstrong has never tested positive for EPO in his blood samples. Ever. Try again. It would help if you would actually try to understand the facts and the issues at hand rather than just parroting something you may have read on an internet forum. :banana:
do you think he was lucky to never test positive
(for anything) or do you think he never took
anything that was ever on a banned list atmo?

Big Dan
07-21-2006, 05:32 PM
Archibald....... a.k.a. Lance................................

:eek:

chrisroph
07-21-2006, 06:19 PM
i have a hard time with the pc part of this atmo.

I was being facetious.

atmo
07-21-2006, 06:27 PM
I was being facetious.
cool -
facetiousness is under-rated here.
i dig it atmo.

Kevan
07-21-2006, 06:33 PM
Careful! People will start talking! ;) :rolleyes: :crap:

BBD

miss something going on at the nationals?

Ray
07-21-2006, 08:54 PM
Armstrong has never tested positive for EPO in his blood samples. Ever. Try again. It would help if you would actually try to understand the facts and the issues at hand rather than just parroting something you may have read on an internet forum. :banana:
The Puerta guys didn't test positive either, and they too were tested extensively. It's not to hard to imagine that the docs have figured out ways to avoid detection, use stuff that the regulators haven't figured out yet, etc. Regulators in any field tend to be a couple of steps behind the cutting edge. The Puerta guys got caught because their doc got caught - not because anything was ever detected in their systems. Do you believe they're the only ones who might be doping and haven't tested positive? Do you believe Lance's positive EPO tests have any credence even though they were only one set of samples and, therefore, not enough to technically convict him? Do you believe Lance doped or not? Everyone in this thread probably has an opinion on this, even if its just "I don't know". You have yours - you might be right. You might not be too.

-Ray

BumbleBeeDave
07-21-2006, 09:35 PM
. . . you took the words right out of my mouth.

These guys caught in Operation Puerto didn't just start doing this yesterday--they had been doing it for quite some time and handily managed to not test positive. so it should seem pretty obvious by now that it's not THAT hard to beat the doping controls. Maybe not as easy as it was 20 years ago to keep a water balloon full or urine in your armpit, but it CAN be done and it seems that it can be done fairly easily.

The implications for being suspicious of Armstrong would seem obvious. Lance has shown that he is obsessive about all the details of his training--pre-riding stages, weighing his food, getting sponsors to spend hundreds of thousands refining equipment to enforce his advantage on the road, etc. . . . It's not that hard to believe that IF he was doping that he would apply that same degree of attention to detail to making sure it stayed hidden.

BBD

atmo
07-21-2006, 09:45 PM
It's not that hard to believe that IF he was doping that he would apply that same degree of attention to detail to making sure it stayed hidden.

BBD


ya gotts know that if he goes down, half of the folks
at the springs go down too. it's a web of cronyism
and brothers marrying cousins all to keep the inc
thing going until the next boy from brazil can be
tapped atmo. someday it will all unravel.

manet
07-21-2006, 09:56 PM
ya gotts know that if he goes down, half of the folks
at the springs go down too. it's a web of cronyism
and brothers marrying cousins all to keep the inc
thing going until the next boy from brazil can be
tapped atmo. someday it will all unravel.

i'm prepared for when that poo hits the fan.
i've several sets of oakleys, not vented like GH's _ he's
had a head start.

fstrthnu
07-21-2006, 10:18 PM
I don't understand all the Lance bashing I see here from a bunch of guys who on their best day couldn't keep Lance in sight on his worst day. Maybe one has to bash Lance to be cool here...I dunno...atmo...whatever that means.

I thank Lance for his contributions to the sport I love. We should all be thanking Lance for helping to create an interest within America (read OLN) for cycling where little existed before he came along...say nothing for all his efforts toward fighting cancer. I applaud him...atmo...whatever that means.

Kevin

So I can bash him. Lance is MP.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/results/2001/aug01/burgos015.shtml

Final general classification

1 Juan Miguel Mercado (Spa) iBanesto.com 18.50.04
2 José Luis Rubiera (Spa) US Postal Service 0.17
3 Eladio Jimenez (Spa) iBanesto.com 0.18
4 Oscar Sevilla (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 0.25
5 Fernando Escartin (Spa) Team Coast 0.50
6 Levi Leipheimer (USA) US Postal Service 0.57
7 Rafael Cardenas (Col) Kelme-Costa Blanca 1.07
8 Félix Garcia Casas (Spa) Festina 1.17
9 Carlos Sastre (Spa) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 1.22
10 Gerhard Trampusch (Aut) Team Deutsche Telekom 1.29
11 Peter Luttenberger (Aut) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola
12 Tomas Konecny (Cze) Domo-Farm Frites 1.30
13 Paolo Lanfranchi (Ita) Mapei-Quick Step 1.39
14 Mario Aerts (Bel) Lotto-Adecco 1.41
15 Tom Stremersch (Bel) Vlaanderen-T Interim 2.02
16 Jorge Capitan (Spa) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada 2.11
17 David George (RSA) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola
18 Andrei Mizourov (Kaz) Team Deutsche Telekom 2.15
19 Hernan Dario Muñoz (Col) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada 2.20
20 Manuel Beltran (Spa) Mapei-Quick Step 2.24
21 Guennadi Michailov (Rus) Lotto-Adecco 2.36
22 Roberto Sgambelluri (Ita) Team Deutsche Telekom 2.37
23 Aitor Garmendia (Spa) Team Coast
24 Steven Kleynen (Bel) Domo-Farm Frites 2.55
25 Richard Virenque (Fra) Domo-Farm Frites 2.56
26 Justin Spinelli (USA) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 2.59
27 Juan José De Los Angeles (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 3.03
28 Christophe Brandt (Bel) Lotto-Adecco 3.04
29 David Cañada (Spa) Mapei-Quick Step 3.13
30 Haimar Zubeldia (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi
31 Paolo Savoldelli (Ita) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 3.44
32 Dave Bruylandts (Bel) Domo-Farm Frites 3.45
33 Unai Osa (Spa) iBanesto.com 3.48
34 Santos Gonzalez (Spa) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 3.57
35 Luis Perez (Spa) Festina 3.59
36 Steve Vermaut (Bel) Lotto-Adecco 4.03
37 Eduardo Hernandez (Spa) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada
38 Andrea Tafi (Ita) Mapei-Quick Step 4.12
39 Carlos Golbano (Spa) Jazztel-Costa del Almeria 4.13
40 Joaquin Rodriguez (Spa) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 4.25
41 David Clinger (USA) Festina 4.53
42 Jörg Jaksche (Ger) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 5.12
43 Roberto Heras (Spa) US Postal Service 5.18
44 José Gutierrez (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 5.30
45 Bekim Chantyr (Rus) Team Coast 5.40
46 Francisco Cabello (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 6.03
47 Angel Castresana (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi 6.23
48 J. Antonio Pecharroman (Spa) Jazztel-Costa del Almeria 6.40
49 Diego Ferrari (Ita) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola 7.21
50 Gianpaolo Mondini (Ita) Mercatone Uno-Stream TV 7.29
51 Udo Bölts (Ger) Team Deutsche Telekom 7.37
52 Dimitri Gaynitdinov (Rus) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola 7.38
53 Angel Casero (Spa) Festina 7.40
54 Marius Sabaliauskas (Ltu) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 7.57
55 David Fernandez (Spa) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada 8.17
56 Rolf Huser (Swi) Team Coast 8.39
57 Pavel Padrnos (Cze) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 8.49
58 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal Service 8.57

:p

Avispa
07-21-2006, 10:19 PM
ya gotts know that if he goes down, half of the folks
at the springs go down too. it's a web of cronyism
and brothers marrying cousins all to keep the inc
thing going until the next boy from brazil can be
tapped atmo. someday it will all unravel.

I'd wish we could all see it this way, atmoissimo! Well said, well put....

Wonder who our next Brazil Boy will be. I surely hope the crap shakes the fan before we find one.

Do you think Floyd's hip is as solid a cause to make him our next man?

Avispa
07-21-2006, 10:23 PM
....Maybe not as easy as it was 20 years ago to keep a water balloon full or urine in your armpit....

LOL!!!

Dave,

Maybe that was my mistake!!! :eek: :eek:

The freaking balloon kept bursting everytime I tried to sprint!!!

LOL!!!!

obtuse
07-21-2006, 10:25 PM
So I can bash him. Lance is MP.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/results/2001/aug01/burgos015.shtml

Final general classification

1 Juan Miguel Mercado (Spa) iBanesto.com 18.50.04
2 José Luis Rubiera (Spa) US Postal Service 0.17
3 Eladio Jimenez (Spa) iBanesto.com 0.18
4 Oscar Sevilla (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 0.25
5 Fernando Escartin (Spa) Team Coast 0.50
6 Levi Leipheimer (USA) US Postal Service 0.57
7 Rafael Cardenas (Col) Kelme-Costa Blanca 1.07
8 Félix Garcia Casas (Spa) Festina 1.17
9 Carlos Sastre (Spa) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 1.22
10 Gerhard Trampusch (Aut) Team Deutsche Telekom 1.29
11 Peter Luttenberger (Aut) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola
12 Tomas Konecny (Cze) Domo-Farm Frites 1.30
13 Paolo Lanfranchi (Ita) Mapei-Quick Step 1.39
14 Mario Aerts (Bel) Lotto-Adecco 1.41
15 Tom Stremersch (Bel) Vlaanderen-T Interim 2.02
16 Jorge Capitan (Spa) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada 2.11
17 David George (RSA) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola
18 Andrei Mizourov (Kaz) Team Deutsche Telekom 2.15
19 Hernan Dario Muñoz (Col) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada 2.20
20 Manuel Beltran (Spa) Mapei-Quick Step 2.24
21 Guennadi Michailov (Rus) Lotto-Adecco 2.36
22 Roberto Sgambelluri (Ita) Team Deutsche Telekom 2.37
23 Aitor Garmendia (Spa) Team Coast
24 Steven Kleynen (Bel) Domo-Farm Frites 2.55
25 Richard Virenque (Fra) Domo-Farm Frites 2.56
26 Justin Spinelli (USA) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 2.59
27 Juan José De Los Angeles (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 3.03
28 Christophe Brandt (Bel) Lotto-Adecco 3.04
29 David Cañada (Spa) Mapei-Quick Step 3.13
30 Haimar Zubeldia (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi
31 Paolo Savoldelli (Ita) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 3.44
32 Dave Bruylandts (Bel) Domo-Farm Frites 3.45
33 Unai Osa (Spa) iBanesto.com 3.48
34 Santos Gonzalez (Spa) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 3.57
35 Luis Perez (Spa) Festina 3.59
36 Steve Vermaut (Bel) Lotto-Adecco 4.03
37 Eduardo Hernandez (Spa) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada
38 Andrea Tafi (Ita) Mapei-Quick Step 4.12
39 Carlos Golbano (Spa) Jazztel-Costa del Almeria 4.13
40 Joaquin Rodriguez (Spa) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 4.25
41 David Clinger (USA) Festina 4.53
42 Jörg Jaksche (Ger) O.N.C.E.-Eroski 5.12
43 Roberto Heras (Spa) US Postal Service 5.18
44 José Gutierrez (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 5.30
45 Bekim Chantyr (Rus) Team Coast 5.40
46 Francisco Cabello (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca 6.03
47 Angel Castresana (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi 6.23
48 J. Antonio Pecharroman (Spa) Jazztel-Costa del Almeria 6.40
49 Diego Ferrari (Ita) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola 7.21
50 Gianpaolo Mondini (Ita) Mercatone Uno-Stream TV 7.29
51 Udo Bölts (Ger) Team Deutsche Telekom 7.37
52 Dimitri Gaynitdinov (Rus) Tacconi Sport-Vini Caldirola 7.38
53 Angel Casero (Spa) Festina 7.40
54 Marius Sabaliauskas (Ltu) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 7.57
55 David Fernandez (Spa) Colchon Relax-Fuenlabrada 8.17
56 Rolf Huser (Swi) Team Coast 8.39
57 Pavel Padrnos (Cze) Saeco Macchine Per Caffe' 8.49
58 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal Service 8.57

:p

i almost posted that yesterday but i didn't think the ego grope would do you any good going into the tour de tuna fish. be more proud of the fact that you beat dr. davey. there's a model specimen and while not a healthcare provider per se; is worth the check up.

as for lanc armstrong; i finished a race once that he was suppossed to be in; does that give me permission to like; have no real strong opinion on the guy?

obtuse
obtuse

fstrthnu
07-21-2006, 10:32 PM
"I am not a Doctor!"

obtuse
07-21-2006, 10:35 PM
"I am not a Doctor!"

listen i could kick that guy's *** before he got on the program and as you know; i suck.

obtuse

swoop
07-21-2006, 10:41 PM
26>58.

Avispa
07-21-2006, 10:48 PM
I don't understand all the Lance bashing I see here from a bunch of guys who on their best day couldn't keep Lance in sight on his worst day.

I wonder why, because he is/was off the back?

I've got words for you: Barcelona 1992! ;)

Archibald
07-21-2006, 11:17 PM
The Puerta guys didn't test positive either, and they too were tested extensively. It's not to hard to imagine that the docs have figured out ways to avoid detection, use stuff that the regulators haven't figured out yet, etc. Regulators in any field tend to be a couple of steps behind the cutting edge. The Puerta guys got caught because their doc got caught - not because anything was ever detected in their systems. Do you believe they're the only ones who might be doping and haven't tested positive? Do you believe Lance's positive EPO tests have any credence even though they were only one set of samples and, therefore, not enough to technically convict him? Do you believe Lance doped or not? Everyone in this thread probably has an opinion on this, even if its just "I don't know". You have yours - you might be right. You might not be too.

-Ray
You're missing the point. Some of you guys are making stuff up as you go along to suit your preconceived notions. "Johnny" is claiming Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 6 blood samples. That is untrue and it never happened. Further, nobody has ever testified that they witnessed Armstrong take performance enhancing drugs. While you good people don't hesitate to slander anybody and everybody at the first hint of somebody being "accused" of taking drugs, especially Lance, you are falling all over yourselves to be first in line to be drink the water that has dripped through Floyd's shorts. Lets not forget that Floyd trained with Armstrong or his other Phonak team members like Botero, Hamilton, and Gutierrez. I understand that it is now popular to "hate" Armstrong but frankly, I find the hypocrisy appalling.

The LA Times has the best unbiased summary of the latest round of accusations concerning Armstrong. It can be found here. (http://www.latimes.com/sports/cycling/la-sp-armstrong9jul09,0,5275381.story?coll=la-home-headlines) Draw your own conclusions. :banana:

GoJavs
07-21-2006, 11:29 PM
Almost everyone did - at the very least since I've been following cycling intensely since @1992. It seemed to get really, really bad from 1994 onward when the Gewiss boys just went out and rode people off their wheel for fun.

Can anyone argue that Evgeni Berzin wasn't loaded up on something? He never tested positive for anything, but....How about Piotr Ugrumov? That's another clean cyclist, I'm sure. :rolleyes:...

Back then, I remember I was a HUGE Armstrong fan but I used to get very frustrated that he wasn't winning more often. I bet you he was too...

BTW - I hope Landis is 100% clean. I always hoped Tyler was too.

coylifut
07-21-2006, 11:44 PM
You're missing Some of you guys are making stuff up as you go along to suit your preconceived notions. ...but frankly, I find the hypocrisy appalling.

:banana:

C'mon man, it's a chat room and 99% of it's BS. That's what we do here. Oh, you don't know anyone that goes by Litespeeder to you?

Johny
07-21-2006, 11:54 PM
"Johnny" is claiming Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 6 blood samples. That is untrue and it never happened.

No. I just said "I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs."
:banana: :banana: :banana: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Archibald
07-22-2006, 12:06 AM
C'mon man, it's a chat room and 99% of it's BS. That's what we do here. Oh, you don't know anyone that goes by Litespeeder to you?How much character does it take to defame another based on gossip and innuendo? If you believe 99% of it is BS and you persist, what kind of person does that make you?

"Gossip is always a personal confession either of malice or imbecility." - Josiah Gilbert Holland

shinomaster
07-22-2006, 12:37 AM
One thing I don't understand is that ATMO and friends, seem to think every top pro is hiding something or a doper/dog blamer. Why are so many so quick to jump on the Mennonite Hip Wagon? After all, he was ON the Postal Bus, and worse, is ON Phonak. Doesn't that mean he is likely to be crooked as well?
My friend D'Donald, the other Jerk, raced with Floyd in Pennsylvania as an amature....I'll ask him.

erty65
07-22-2006, 01:19 AM
Why are there so many people bashing Armstrong, everyone in TdF uses PEDs and they all deny it. The difference between Armstrong and the others is that he`s a little bit better at all aspects of competitive cycling, so he was able to win seven in a row without getting caught!

Give him some credit for being a better doper than the rest of the peloton!

coylifut
07-22-2006, 01:22 AM
How much character does it take to defame another based on gossip and innuendo? If you believe 99% of it is BS and you persist, what kind of person does that make you?

"Gossip is always a personal confession either of malice or imbecility." - Josiah Gilbert Holland

are you not playing it both ways here. didn't you write

Some of you people never cease to amaze me. Floyd isn't a doper because of his "heroic" efforts, yet Lance is a doper for that very reason. Floyd was on Lance's team. Floyd IS on Tyler's team. Yet somehow all others are guilty by association and Floyd is given the pass. What hypocrisy!

Almost forgot about Botero and Gutierrez (2nd in the Giro) both also benched from Phonak because of "Operacion Puerto."


by participating in the conversation, are you not engaging in gossip. and, isn't the obove quote (your words) quite heavy on the innuendo as well? I really like the Josiah Gilbert Holland quote. however; it applies to you as well.

xcandrew
07-22-2006, 01:47 AM
- The EPO test is a urine test, not a blood test.

- With no chain-of-custody procedures in place for those samples, you cannot conclude a thing about the samples. You can't say for sure if it is actually Lance's urine. You can't tell if they have been tampered with, maliciously or not. There are certainly malicious reasons for possible tampering, just look at people like D1ck Pound who often goes off prematurely on various people and sports without seeing the first bit of evidence... there are others like him, and others who would like to see Lance go down.

There are non-malicious reasons for the samples to have EPO in them. Laboratories often spike samples with known quanitities of the analyte in question for calibration and quality control reasons. This is called a matrix spike. When we get lab results back in my work, we also get matrix spike results and matrix spike duplicate results, etc. Without chain-of-custody procedures in place, you can have one lab tech spiking the samples and putting them alway, and another person coming by a few months or years later and testing it without knowledge of what has previously been done to the samples. For goodness sake, these samples are from 1999! No documentation = COMPLETELY useless junk! I read on another forum that there were in fact some spike procedures done on the samples. Who knows how they were done, when they were done, what might have been mixed up? No one... the lab documention was lax because they were intended for study purposes, not doping control. One drug expert was quick to condemn Armstrong when he learned of the lab results because he was defending the urine test, but when he found out about the chain-of-custody issues, he changed positions 180 degrees, saying emphatically that you can can't conclude a thing.

Without chain-of-custody procedures, you don't know how the samples were held and in what condition over the years. Samples have a definite lifespan. For the things we test in my work, there are different hold times for different analyses, and strict rules for the temperatures that the samples must be preserved/held at. The hold times vary from test to test from test ASAP (for pH for example), to test within 24 hours, 48 hours, 7 days, 14 days, and 28 days. The samples must be held at 4 +/-2 degrees C and are damaged/invalid if they are frozen or let to warm. Beyond the hold times, the results are junk. What are the hold times for the EPO test? How were the samples held? Was that information documented?

Everyone knows that doping is a problem in cycling, as it is in almost all sport. I have a problem with calling people dopers who have not tested positive or been otherwise conclusively linked via doping schedules turning up or similar. Just because he openly worked with Ferrari, someone who is widely acknowledged to be an expert in sports science, doesn't cut it for me. It would not surprise me a bit if he did in fact dope, but it is wrong to label him a doper at this point. You might as well say that 100% of pro cyclists are dopers, and if you have a good ride you are a doper. That's a bit too pessimistic for me, even with the scandals rolling in constantly. Armstrong seems to be an easy target, but why label him a doper when there are real proven dopers all over... hold your fire! If they do all dope, why call Armstrong a doper and give others a pass? I also believe that there is no equality of talent. Undoped cyclists can beat doped cyclists at all levels of the sport (and vice versa). Speculating on who has the most natural talent is a poor science. For instance, it always bothered me that Jan was considered the MOST talented. I saw it as Lance and media propaganda to label and build up his opponent, make the story seem better, etc. I've been following the sport since about '82.

Ray
07-22-2006, 06:09 AM
You're missing the point. Some of you guys are making stuff up as you go along to suit your preconceived notions. "Johnny" is claiming Armstrong tested positive for EPO in 6 blood samples. That is untrue and it never happened. Further, nobody has ever testified that they witnessed Armstrong take performance enhancing drugs. While you good people don't hesitate to slander anybody and everybody at the first hint of somebody being "accused" of taking drugs, especially Lance, you are falling all over yourselves to be first in line to be drink the water that has dripped through Floyd's shorts. Lets not forget that Floyd trained with Armstrong or his other Phonak team members like Botero, Hamilton, and Gutierrez. I understand that it is now popular to "hate" Armstrong but frankly, I find the hypocrisy appalling.

The LA Times has the best unbiased summary of the latest round of accusations concerning Armstrong. It can be found here. (http://www.latimes.com/sports/cycling/la-sp-armstrong9jul09,0,5275381.story?coll=la-home-headlines) Draw your own conclusions. :banana:
I agree - very good article. I've drawn my own conclusions. So have you. Either of us could be wrong or there may be so many shades of grey that both of us are. BTW, I don't HATE Armstrong. I cheered for him in each of his 7 TdF wins, even thought I got tired of how boring the event was getting. I think he was a phenominal cyclist and a great champion, with the heart of a lion. The only reason he never did was Floyd did on Thursday was that he never had to - I sort of wish he'd had a blow out terrible day like Floyd did on Wednesday so he could have shown us something like Floyd did on Thursday. I kind of feel about him the way I do about Bill Clinton - undeniably incredibly great at what he does, but not someone I'd want my daughter to date.

But that doesn't mean he didn't dope (or inhale, or whatever). And I never suggested that Floyd is clean. On one level, I hope he is, but I think all of them dope to some extent and it's a fine line between 'doping' and oxygen tents and 'recovery' supplements and what is legal and what's not legal. I just find that I don't care so much about that stuff and I still manage to love the sport. To the extent Lance doped, so did his competitors and he still crushed them - so his greatness is not in question to me. To the extent that Floyd may dope, so do HIS competitors and his greatness is in the process of being proven right now. What he did on Thursday was as beautiful and inspirational as any sporting performance I've seen in years. Regardless of whether he's clean or doped.

-Ray

MikeM
07-22-2006, 06:17 AM
I find this thread quite interesting, but I also find it odd. Has Lance not retired? I know that he goes to the Tour to inspire the Disco boys, but as a retired individual, there is no PR onus on him to make comments about Floyd's exploits - the only time that is the case is if someone, such as OLN, actually pays him to appear on their show and make comment about the Tour. Other than that, he's free to do as he pleases, which includes not talking to the press (something which I can well believe he wouldn't want to do any more), why is there feeling that it is a necessity for him to talk about the Tour (especially if he's not there).

Mike

Ray
07-22-2006, 06:22 AM
I find this thread quite interesting, but I also find it odd. Has Lance not retired? I know that he goes to the Tour to inspire the Disco boys, but as a retired individual, there is no PR onus on him to make comments about Floyd's exploits - the only time that is the case is if someone, such as OLN, actually pays him to appear on their show and make comment about the Tour. Other than that, he's free to do as he pleases, which includes not talking to the press (something which I can well believe he wouldn't want to do any more), why is there feeling that it is a necessity for him to talk about the Tour (especially if he's not there).

Mike
No obligation on his part, but he did comment on Tuesday that his money was on Floyd to win and on Wednesday he commented on the terrible day that Floyd had and how bad he felt for him. So it's understandable that people would see some significance in his lack of comment after Floyd's amazing performance on Thursday. Me, I don't care one way or another. I saw what Floyd did. Enough for me.

-Ray

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 06:25 AM
I think that AT THE VERY LEAST the amount of allegations that have come out against LA allow for folks to justify the existence of a "Lance doped camp". Otherwise, you are calling everyone that's ever alleged something against LA a liar. I haven't quite figured out why Betsy Andreu would lie.

I made up my own mind because I've spent 14 years reading about and watching Lance as closely as I've been able to and the man I've seen is very likely to have done ANYTHING possible to get an extra edge on his competitors. Whether I'm right or wrong doesn't matter to me (or to him for that matter) but it's still, IMHO, a reasonable opinion.

Floyd? Well, I've been driving the point home about Phonak's checkered past for 3 days already. I am a salesman. My reputation in my trade and the reputation of my company can make me or break me. If I were Floyd I wouldn't ride for a team with at least 5 disgraced stars.

Great Tour - doping or not.

BTW - the lack of a HGH test in the NFL doesn't keep me from watching that sport...I guess IMHO doping is just part of sports.

Johny
07-22-2006, 06:50 AM
- The EPO test is a urine test, not a blood test.

- With no chain-of-custody procedures in place for those samples, you cannot conclude a thing about the samples. You can't say for sure if it is actually Lance's urine. You can't tell if they have been tampered with, maliciously or not. There are certainly malicious reasons for possible tampering, just look at people like D1ck Pound who often goes off prematurely on various people and sports without seeing the first bit of evidence... there are others like him, and others who would like to see Lance go down.

There are non-malicious reasons for the samples to have EPO in them. Laboratories often spike samples with known quanitities of the analyte in question for calibration and quality control reasons. This is called a matrix spike. When we get lab results back in my work, we also get matrix spike results and matrix spike duplicate results, etc. Without chain-of-custody procedures in place, you can have one lab tech spiking the samples and putting them alway, and another person coming by a few months or years later and testing it without knowledge of what has previously been done to the samples. For goodness sake, these samples are from 1999! No documentation = COMPLETELY useless junk! I read on another forum that there were in fact some spike procedures done on the samples. Who knows how they were done, when they were done, what might have been mixed up? No one... the lab documention was lax because they were intended for study purposes, not doping control. One drug expert was quick to condemn Armstrong when he learned of the lab results because he was defending the urine test, but when he found out about the chain-of-custody issues, he changed positions 180 degrees, saying emphatically that you can can't conclude a thing.

Without chain-of-custody procedures, you don't know how the samples were held and in what condition over the years. Samples have a definite lifespan. For the things we test in my work, there are different hold times for different analyses, and strict rules for the temperatures that the samples must be preserved/held at. The hold times vary from test to test from test ASAP (for pH for example), to test within 24 hours, 48 hours, 7 days, 14 days, and 28 days. The samples must be held at 4 +/-2 degrees C and are damaged/invalid if they are frozen or let to warm. Beyond the hold times, the results are junk. What are the hold times for the EPO test? How were the samples held? Was that information documented?


My bad that EPO is a urine test (was too much occupied with blood recently :) ).

1. These samples are documented with codes.

2. The lab doesn't know the indentity of the samples.

3. 6 differnt Lance's samples taken at different time and location during the 1999 TDF are positive.

4. Recombinant EPO doesn't pop out because the samples are not stored properly.

harlond
07-22-2006, 07:24 AM
My bad that EPO is a urine test (was too much occupied with blood recently :) ).

1. These samples are documented with codes.

2. The lab doesn't know the indentity of the samples.

3. 6 differnt Lance's samples taken at different time and location during the 1999 TDF are positive.

4. Recombinant EPO doesn't pop out because the samples are not stored properly.None of that addresses the chain of custody issue, and you're third point is, of course, not inconsistent with someone spiking the samples.

Not that I believe that, and I don't believe in Lance's innocence. Neither do I believe that the results of tests on 7-year old samples for which chain of custody is not established prove anything about his guilt.

Then again, I also don't much care if he (or anyone else) was or is doping.

atmo
07-22-2006, 07:27 AM
One thing I don't understand is that ATMO and friends, seem to think every top pro is hiding something or a doper/dog blamer. Why are so many so quick to jump on the Mennonite Hip Wagon? After all, he was ON the Postal Bus, and worse, is ON Phonak. Doesn't that mean he is likely to be crooked as well?
My friend D'Donald, the other Jerk, raced with Floyd in Pennsylvania as an amature....I'll ask him.
are you reading any of my posts here since 2002?
who cares if he or others are crooked? i watch cycling
because i watch cycling, and i'll continue to do so.
my only beef in all of this is the patent denial by
not yet caught that it doesn't exist at all. all those who
have been caught have admitted it (publically, that is),
and some have admitted it upon retirement. but to sit
there and claim that since you haven't got caught it proves
you have never used a banned substance and/or a ped only
means that you haven't been caught. aflac, they can take
as much or as little as they want - i do not care. i will follow
it anyway. but history has shown that drug/dope/ped use
is part and parcel of professional sport and you be dilluded
to think that these guys perform of stuff that you and i could
buy at the local market atmo.

they shoot horses, don't they?

William
07-22-2006, 08:53 AM
Seriously....do I really care what you say? I don't see how you are so much greater than Lance that you can make snide comments about him.

Snide?? No, it's fact. Pure and simple. What Lance has to say about Floyd doesn't interest me.

Now, the fact that you would get your panties all in a bunch because Lance doesn't interest me would indicate to me that:

1.) Your blackberry went off.
or
2.) You're a card carrying member of the Lance lover camp.

Either way, more power to you. I'm more interested in what Floyd's comments are.

...So it's understandable that people would see some significance in his lack of comment after Floyd's amazing performance on Thursday.Me, I don't care one way or another. I saw what Floyd did. Enough for me.

WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT YOU ARE SO MUCH BETTER THEN LANCE!!!! :rolleyes:

Better watch it Ray, Not caring about Lance might get you tared & feathered. :argue:


GO FLOYD GO!! :banana:


William

Johny
07-22-2006, 09:23 AM
None of that addresses the chain of custody issue, and you're third point is, of course, not inconsistent with someone spiking the samples.



Only if one thinks the chain of custody issue explains everything.

Archibald
07-22-2006, 09:55 AM
are you not playing it both ways here. didn't you write



by participating in the conversation, are you not engaging in gossip. and, isn't the obove quote (your words) quite heavy on the innuendo as well? I really like the Josiah Gilbert Holland quote. however; it applies to you as well.
I am, but, unless you're being intentionally dense you must know I was using Floyd to illustrate the unseemly behavior towards Armstrong and others. I do not believe Floyd is doping, I have no evidence to consider otherwise. I also have no evidence to believe Armstrong is doping. We only have innuendo, gossip, and hate. You can call that naive and feel smug being part of this hateful little group, but you have to ask yourself how you would wish to be treated if you were subjected to the same biased scrutiny and scorn.

Big Dan
07-22-2006, 10:08 AM
One thing I know for a fact, the guy is a bonifide jacka$$......... :D

atmo
07-22-2006, 10:14 AM
I am, but, unless you're being intentionally dense you must know I was using Floyd to illustrate the unseemly behavior towards Armstrong and others. I do not believe Floyd is doping, I have no evidence to consider otherwise. I also have no evidence to believe Armstrong is doping. We only have innuendo, gossip, and hate. You can call that naive and feel smug being part of this hateful little group, but you have to ask yourself how you would wish to be treated if you were subjected to the same biased scrutiny and scorn.



there's no hate here. all (most of us?) are fans, and have followed
the sport and know its history. are you well versed on its history going
back past the 90s? i'm not trying to be smug, but it's very telling that
newer fans believe one thing and life-ers know another thing. think
about the sport and the profession. think about the schedule. do you
really think it's possible to do this on pasta and gu? do you think they
simply are beating the testers or do you think that these guys (the ones
that are not testing positive) are winning because they are superior
athletes using better training methods?
oh - and how do you feel about the use of peds that are not yet on
the banned list but might be in a month (think pedro delgado (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Delgado)).

Chad Engle
07-22-2006, 10:27 AM
How does every post with Lance's name in it get back to this foolish arguement about ped's and banned substances? What does that have to with the OP?

Floyd is the dealio.

atmo
07-22-2006, 10:31 AM
How does every post with Lance's name in it get back to this foolish arguement about ped's and banned substances? What does that have to with the OP?

Floyd is the dealio.
did the drift start here (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=233794&postcount=15) atmo?

Fat Robert
07-22-2006, 10:37 AM
he won a lot of tours and now he's retired

end of story yo

catulle
07-22-2006, 10:43 AM
I am, but, unless you're being intentionally dense you must know I was using Floyd to illustrate the unseemly behavior towards Armstrong and others. I do not believe Floyd is doping, I have no evidence to consider otherwise. I also have no evidence to believe Armstrong is doping. We only have innuendo, gossip, and hate. You can call that naive and feel smug being part of this hateful little group, but you have to ask yourself how you would wish to be treated if you were subjected to the same biased scrutiny and scorn.

Hey, slow down, bubba, the only hate I see here is coming from you, dude. As a matter of fact, you must be shaking as you write. This "hateful little group" that you're insulting has been deep in the sport of cycling at all levels and in ways you only get to see on TV. You're falling on the sword for a bunch of dyed-in-the-wool guys who have done everything in the world that you can possibly imagine to win races; and that most certainly includes ped. We're not talking about your mom here, so chill, breath deeply, and think you're on a date with Scarlett Johansson.

Big Dan
07-22-2006, 10:50 AM
Hey, slow down, bubba, the only hate I see here is coming from you, dude. As a matter of fact, you must be shaking as you write. This "hateful little group" that you're insulting has been deep in the sport of cycling at all levels and in ways you only get to see on TV. You're falling on the sword for a bunch of dyed-in-the-wool guys who have done everything in the world that you can possibly imagine to win races; and that most certainly includes ped. We're not talking about your mom here, so chill, breath deeply, and think you're on a date with Scarlett Johansson.


post of the day....huevo......... :D

gone
07-22-2006, 10:54 AM
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. It seems to me that an athlete in any era competing with others in the same area are pretty much competing "fairly", doping or not. If you assume Ullrich, Armstrong, Basso, et. al, caught or not, are all doping then they are competing fairly and the best cyclist won. If you could somehow miraculously make them all compete absolutely dope free, the results would probably be the same.

Ditto in MLB. Someone competing for the batting title is up against others who are all doing steroids, HGH, etc. so the competition is "fair". The only time it breaks down is when competing against history e.g., the home run record, height in pole vault, Woods smashing 360 yard drives, etc. That's where technology and (yes) pharmacology give an "unfair" advantage.

Even if they are all doping, what cyclists do and the amount of suffering they go through is amazing so I'll continue to be a fan.

my only beef in all of this is the patent denial by
not yet caught that it doesn't exist at all.
I will add the the "oh, we're shocked, you're fired" responses of the teams. The notion that someone could carry on an illegal performance enhancement program without the knowledge of anyone on the team is simply ludicrous.

Elefantino
07-22-2006, 10:59 AM
Lance who?

Hey, I just saw Eddy on the podium. Did he ever do that for LA?

atmo
07-22-2006, 11:00 AM
If you could somehow miraculously make them all compete absolutely dope free, the results would probably be the same.


i don't agree. we start with our gene pool.
thank parents yo. after that, the money thrown
of equipment and other help is not spent equally
among all the teams that compete in cycle sport
atmo. therein lies a key advantage.

gone
07-22-2006, 11:06 AM
i don't agree. we start with our gene pool.
thank parents yo. after that, the money thrown
of equipment and other help is not spent equally
among all the teams that compete in cycle sport
atmo. therein lies a key advantage.
I think we're in agreement. As I said elsewhere, a rider on a big money team has lots of advantages over the others. However, at the very tippy top level, they've all got good trainers, sports psychologists, masseuses, teammates, juju, etc., so if you could somehow remove PEDs from the equation, the results would be the same. In other words, Armstrong would probably still have won seven tours due to genetics, work ethic, ability to suffer, etc., EVEN IF they ALL competed dope free.

Big Dan
07-22-2006, 11:13 AM
It's not a level playing field because whatever they are taking is kept secret.
One rider doesn't know what the heck the other one is taking.
If they all took the same stuff then........... :p

onekgguy
07-22-2006, 11:14 AM
So I can bash him. Lance is MP.

By all mean...continue bashing. ;)

atmo
07-22-2006, 11:14 AM
I think we're in agreement. As I said elsewhere, a rider on a big money team has lots of advantages over the others. However, at the very tippy top level, they've all got good trainers, sports psychologists, masseuses, teammates, juju, etc., so if you could somehow remove PEDs from the equation, the results would be the same. In other words, Armstrong would probably still have won seven tours due to genetics, work ethic, ability to suffer, etc., EVEN IF they ALL competed dope free.
well, hoping not to get hung by the thread drift police,
i'll just pose that i doubt he could have done as much
racing on euskatel euskadi atmo. these are team events
and team sports; speculating on w/c/s oughta' take that
into account atmo.

Johny
07-22-2006, 11:27 AM
I expect Floyd to win 8 Tours and lance to attack him out of jealousy. Landis then threatens Lance and asks Trek to shut down the production of Armstrong bikes.

harlond
07-22-2006, 11:29 AM
Only if one thinks the chain of custody issue explains everything.Well, I'm not sure I understand your point, but I believe you may have it backward. I'm not trying to explain anything with the chain of custody issue, i.e., I am not arguing that the absence of chain of custody evidence (if there is such an absence) proves or suggests that the samples were spiked. Instead, my view is that those who seek to rely on the results of the test bear the burden of demonstrating the integrity of the samples tested. Chain of custody is a method of demonstrating, in part, that integrity. That's why I think it's important, if you are going to rely on the results of those tests, as you have, for you to address chain of custody.

As I said, I don't much care if they're doping, so I'm commenting mostly because of my interest in proof and evidence issues.

Tailwinds
07-22-2006, 11:37 AM
Hey, I just saw Eddy on the podium. Did he ever do that for LA?

Yes, wasn't that cool?! I don't recall seeing him do that for Lance.

It's cool to share this history in the making... I just had to call my best riding buddy so we could watch the last part of the TT unfold... watch Floyd put his stamp on the Tour. This is something we'll never forget.

Congrats, Floyd!

shinomaster
07-22-2006, 11:48 AM
i don't agree. we start with our gene pool.
thank parents yo. after that, the money thrown
of equipment and other help is not spent equally
among all the teams that compete in cycle sport
atmo. therein lies a key advantage.

Do you think Bikes and wheels make a big difference in the mountains Atmo? Atmo. I mean don't they all use 16lb bikes? I could see an advantage for a big team in the TT with wind tunnel testing and all.

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 11:49 AM
I think the Americans benefit greatly from the funding and support of the Billionaire Bike Club.

Archibald
07-22-2006, 11:50 AM
Hey, slow down, bubba, the only hate I see here is coming from you, dude. As a matter of fact, you must be shaking as you write. This "hateful little group" that you're insulting has been deep in the sport of cycling at all levels and in ways you only get to see on TV. You're falling on the sword for a bunch of dyed-in-the-wool guys who have done everything in the world that you can possibly imagine to win races; and that most certainly includes ped. We're not talking about your mom here, so chill, breath deeply, and think you're on a date with Scarlett Johansson.
Project much?

I must have struck a nerve. If a mirror held in front of you reflects behavior you don't appreciate, then change your behavior.

I find your comments interesting if a little unclear. Are you saying that the "hateful little group" I refered to on this forum include members that have race professionally and have taken PEDs?

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 11:55 AM
Are Archibald and Frustration the same man? :eek:

They both have a creative way of structuring sentences.

BTW - Archibald - you fabricated the phrase "hateful little group". Why don't YOU tell us who you think it includes?

shinomaster
07-22-2006, 11:55 AM
http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2006/tour06/?id=/riders/2006/interviews/allenlim_landis2

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 11:59 AM
Landis won because T-Mobile and CSC left the chase to too late and did not commit their guns to it. They also failed to create the coalitions that someone like Big Mig used to create when he needed help.

Johny
07-22-2006, 12:05 PM
No, Landis wins because Ulrich and Basso are absent.

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 12:17 PM
That too.

catulle
07-22-2006, 12:18 PM
Project much?

I must have struck a nerve. If a mirror held in front of you reflects behavior you don't appreciate, then change your behavior.

I find your comments interesting if a little unclear. Are you saying that the "hateful little group" I refered to on this forum include members that have race professionally and have taken PEDs?

Hey, Freud, go get yourself a cigar, would ya? I gotta go watch some Andy Griffith Show re-runs, atmo.

Marcusaurelius
07-22-2006, 12:55 PM
I have seen nothing--zip--nada--anywhere today as far as quotes from Lance or reaction to Floyd's win. I watched the OLN expanded coverage this evening and there was nothing. I can find nothing on VeloNews, or Cyclingnews.com. Lance's own website doesn't seem to have been updated since June 27.

Coincidence? Quotes from what seems like just about everyone who is anyone today in cycling, but not a word from Lance. Meanwhile, Discovery Channel was non-existent in the final standing of today's stage.

Has anyone else seen any comment from Lance? Anywhere?

Maybe he was out riding with Matt and Jake and doesn't even know about it yet? . . . :rolleyes:

BBD


There's a lengthy interview with Lance on cycling tv.

Archibald
07-22-2006, 12:55 PM
Hey, Freud, go get yourself a cigar, would ya? I gotta go watch some Andy Griffith Show re-runs, atmo.
What a house of cards.

Fat Robert
07-22-2006, 12:57 PM
yo

like

group phronesis and eudaimonia break

dig?

now...catulle...that should be bove's new Fat Cat logo....

catulle
07-22-2006, 01:01 PM
i love ya' man atmo.
i was stung the first time we met at northampton,
and a perfect town it was to get stung by a fellow of
my own gender atmo.

:cool:

catulle
07-22-2006, 01:08 PM
yo

like

group phronesis and eudaimonia break

dig?

now...catulle...that should be bove's new Fat Cat logo....

Oh yeah, baby..!! Wisdom and happiness. And sex and Scarlett. Peace and love, bubba.

atmo
07-22-2006, 01:36 PM
Originally Posted by atmo
i don't agree. we start with our gene pool.
thank parents yo. after that, the money thrown
of equipment and other help is not spent equally
among all the teams that compete in cycle sport
atmo. therein lies a key advantage.
Do you think Bikes and wheels make a big difference in the mountains Atmo? Atmo. I mean don't they all use 16lb bikes? I could see an advantage for a big team in the TT with wind tunnel testing and all.

i meant other help, as in, doctors atmo...

Archibald
07-22-2006, 01:59 PM
there's no hate here. all (most of us?) are fans, and have followed
the sport and know its history. are you well versed on its history going
back past the 90s? i'm not trying to be smug, but it's very telling that
newer fans believe one thing and life-ers know another thing. think
about the sport and the profession. think about the schedule. do you
really think it's possible to do this on pasta and gu? do you think they
simply are beating the testers or do you think that these guys (the ones
that are not testing positive) are winning because they are superior
athletes using better training methods?
oh - and how do you feel about the use of peds that are not yet on
the banned list but might be in a month (think pedro delgado (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Delgado)).
I've been following the sport since the 70's. I'm well aware of its history and its history of drug abuse. Yes, I think it's possible to compete at the top levels of the sport with only rigorous training and appropriate nutrition. Given today's increased knowledge in body sciences and nutrition, it is easily believable.

Today's racer's schedule is more relaxed. The top riders pick and choose their events. Merckx did all they do today and much, much, more without PEDs. Amphetamines, which Meckx tested positive for on two occassions, have long been shown to offer no significant physical performance advantage. Their effect is psychological. So on those two occassions Merckx may have been less aware of his fatigue, or felt more bold or confident, but what he accomplished was within his natural ability.

It is easy to understand a cyclist's desire to grasp for any advantage or any substance that may increase his comfort, but the lure of temptation does not automatically equal succumbing to it. I can't help but wonder if for many people their quickness to assume or believe in the unproven guilt in others is based on their own weakness or lack of character.

atmo
07-22-2006, 02:09 PM
I've been following the sport since the 70's. I'm well aware of its history and its history of drug abuse. Yes, I think it's possible to compete at the top levels of the sport with only rigorous training and appropriate nutrition. Given today's increased knowledge in body sciences and nutrition, it is easily believable.

Today's racer's schedule is more relaxed. The top riders pick and choose their events. Merckx did all they do today and much, much, more without PEDs. Amphetamines, which Meckx tested positive for on two occassions, have long been shown to offer no significant physical performance advantage. Their effect is psychological. So on those two occassions Merckx may have been less aware of his fatigue, or felt more bold or confident, but what he accomplished was within his natural ability.

It is easy to understand a cyclist's desire to grasp for any advantage or any substance that may increase his comfort, but the lure of temptation does not automatically equal succumbing to it. I can't help but wonder if for many people their quickness to assume or believe in the unproven guilt in others is based on their own weakness or lack of character.



i think we are watching two different sports atmo.

Ray
07-22-2006, 02:12 PM
There's a lengthy interview with Lance on cycling tv.
I couldn't find it - was it after stage 17? If so, what'd he say?

Don't much care, but I'm sort of curious anyway.

-Ray

shinomaster
07-22-2006, 02:14 PM
Do you all think Lance is ruing the fact that he is no longer the last American to win the Tour? Do you think he is upset that Floyd will have to make a huge comeback after his hip gets worked on, thus taking the spotlight away from him?

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 02:26 PM
...I can't help but wonder if for many people their quickness to assume or believe in the unproven guilt in others is based on their own weakness or lack of character...

----

Holy Cow! This guy is something else. Archi - you don't know at least 90% of us. How do you know who/what we are?

catulle
07-22-2006, 02:29 PM
It is easy to understand a cyclist's desire to grasp for any advantage or any substance that may increase his comfort, but the lure of temptation does not automatically equal succumbing to it. I can't help but wonder if for many people their quickness to assume or believe in the unproven guilt in others is based on their own weakness or lack of character.


Weakness? Lack of character? Oh, jezzz, you crack me up. You love to spit these little insults, don't you? You must be in the dopestrong payroll or something, atmo. Just talk to the hand, bubba.

Elefantino
07-22-2006, 02:34 PM
No, Landis wins because Ulrich and Basso are absent.

No, Landis wins because Ullrich and Basso doped.

Archibald
07-22-2006, 02:46 PM
i think we are watching two different sports atmo.
Another house of cards? You asked serious questions. I offered you serious answers. You seem to hold the position that all pro riders are guilty of doping; that it is impossible to do what they do without illegal supplements. I hold that this is a fallacy of composition.

Another who holds your view offered that there are members of this forum who are or were professional cyclists. Perhaps you're one. Do you know these members personally? Have you yourself, or do any of them use, or have used, PEDs to compete? Based on your assumptions, they must have cheated, right? Or, in your view, is it possible that some cheat and some don't? Or maybe you see yourself as the lone clean rider? Do we cast aspersions on all cyclists for the actions of those who've been caught cheating? The more successful a competitor is, the more we attribute their accomplishments to cheating? Do we assume that it is impossible to win without cheating? Is that what you've reduced yourself to, being a victim? If so, you've now got a ready excuse for any loss you experience for the rest of your life.

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 02:56 PM
:crap:

Uh-oh. Mr. Bald - you don't have a single clue who you are talking to, do ya?

Archibald
07-22-2006, 02:59 PM
Weakness? Lack of character? Oh, jezzz, you crack me up. You love to spit these little insults, don't you? You must be in the dopestrong payroll or something, atmo. Just talk to the hand, bubba.
I wasn't addressing you directly, but if my comment, "I can't help but wonder if for many people their quickness to assume or believe in the unproven guilt in others is based on their own weakness or lack of character" resonates with you Catulle, then perhaps you should change your name to Cinderella because that shoe definitely fits.
:banana:

Archibald
07-22-2006, 03:06 PM
:crap:

Uh-oh. Mr. Bald - you don't have a single clue who you are talking to, do ya?
Let me guess, Francesco Moser?

Seriously, who he is makes to difference to my statements and why should it?
:banana:

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 03:11 PM
Let me be honest with you, here. You have twenty-something posts. You obviously haven't been around this board. There are some very-well respected framebuilders, pro cyclists and other luminaries that regularly post on this board.

Many of them have INSIDE knowledge that guys like you and me NEVER will.

Therefore, sometimes it's better to lurk around quite a bit and learn who everyone is before you pick a fight with a very well-respected, virtuoso frame-builder. That's all. :)

Archibald
07-22-2006, 03:14 PM
I can't help but wonder if for many people their quickness to assume or believe in the unproven guilt in others is based on their own weakness or lack of character.

---
Holy Cow! This guy is something else. Archi - you don't know at least 90% of us. How do you know who/what we are?
I don't claim to, but if you feel it applies to you, then be my guest; if not, then you are welcome to exclude yourself from it. It is not an all inclusive statement or indictment of the members of this forum. I only said it in reference to those who, well, read the statement again, it should be clear.

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 03:16 PM
I'm beginning to think it applies to you, Archibald.

Good luck working your issues out. See ya! :cool:

shinomaster
07-22-2006, 03:30 PM
are you reading any of my posts here since 2002?
who cares if he or others are crooked? i watch cycling
because i watch cycling, and i'll continue to do so.
my only beef in all of this is the patent denial by
not yet caught that it doesn't exist at all. all those who
have been caught have admitted it (publically, that is),
and some have admitted it upon retirement. but to sit
there and claim that since you haven't got caught it proves
you have never used a banned substance and/or a ped only
means that you haven't been caught. aflac, they can take
as much or as little as they want - i do not care. i will follow
it anyway. but history has shown that drug/dope/ped use
is part and parcel of professional sport and you be dilluded
to think that these guys perform of stuff that you and i could
buy at the local market atmo.

they shoot horses, don't they?

Why do people care more about this now than in the past? Is it just the media?

Archibald
07-22-2006, 03:33 PM
Let me be honest with you, here. You have twenty-something posts. You obviously haven't been around this board. There are some very-well respected framebuilders, pro cyclists and other luminaries that regularly post on this board.

Many of them have INSIDE knowledge that guys like you and me NEVER will.

Therefore, sometimes it's better to lurk around quite a bit and learn who everyone is before you pick a fight with a very well-respected, virtuoso frame-builder. That's all. :)
Why do you assume I'm picking a fight? It's an argument of ideas and positions. You understand this, right? Maybe he will make a point that makes me think deeper or reconsider my position, maybe I'll do the same for him. Who any poster is or was or may be makes no difference, and I assume that whomever he was or is, he's still capable communicating his own ideas.

It's an open exchange of ideas. We are not talking about the concrete here, I am not arguing with him about whether he placed first or second at some race. What is really at the core of my arguement, is simple decency and intellectual honesty. It's not a matter of whether or not I'm a fan of Armstrong or Ulrich or Landis or anyone else. It's a distaste for the dogpile mentality. People who are more than ready to accuse but never quite find the time look openly and honestly and delay judgement until the facts are in and the evidence is proven. My heroes are not athletes. I have no idea whether Armstrong doped or not, and since that is a FACT for me, why would I assume the worst of him?

Lifelover
07-22-2006, 03:38 PM
Why do people care more about this now than in the past? Is it just the media?


I don;t think people do care anymore. The common theme in a thread like this is "I don't really care is just that....".

It's a combo of media hype and people wanting to here themselves talk.

Tom
07-22-2006, 03:50 PM
I can't help but wonder if Archibald is being a little inconsistent. He wonders about the character of people here but does not wonder about Armstrong.

I'm not saying, mind you. No, no, not that. I'm just wondering about the subject of intellectual honesty.

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 04:02 PM
Sure, Archibald, I understand what you are expressing.

Still, my point is that given that you do NOT know the identity of the ATMO, you have NO clue as to what he may or may not have firsthand knowledge of.

So....in this case, when we are talking about an issue like doping inside the peloton, who any poster is DOES make a HUGE difference.

In any event, it's all good. Enjoy the rest of the tour...

Javier

____________________________________________

Why do you assume I'm picking a fight? It's an argument of ideas and positions. You understand this, right? Maybe he will make a point that makes me think deeper or reconsider my position, maybe I'll do the same for him. Who any poster is or was or may be makes no difference, and I assume that whomever he was or is, he's still capable communicating his own ideas.

It's an open exchange of ideas. We are not talking about the concrete here, I am not arguing with him about whether he placed first or second at some race. What is really at the core of my arguement, is simple decency and intellectual honesty. It's not a matter of whether or not I'm a fan of Armstrong or Ulrich or Landis or anyone else. It's a distaste for the dogpile mentality. People who are more than ready to accuse but never quite find the time look openly and honestly and delay judgement until the facts are in and the evidence is proven. My heroes are not athletes. I have no idea whether Armstrong doped or not, and since that is a FACT for me, why would I assume the worst of him?

catulle
07-22-2006, 04:04 PM
Why do you assume I'm picking a fight? It's an argument of ideas and positions. You understand this, right? Maybe he will make a point that makes me think deeper or reconsider my position, maybe I'll do the same for him. Who any poster is or was or may be makes no difference, and I assume that whomever he was or is, he's still capable communicating his own ideas.

It's an open exchange of ideas. We are not talking about the concrete here, I am not arguing with him about whether he placed first or second at some race. What is really at the core of my arguement, is simple decency and intellectual honesty. It's not a matter of whether or not I'm a fan of Armstrong or Ulrich or Landis or anyone else. It's a distaste for the dogpile mentality. People who are more than ready to accuse but never quite find the time look openly and honestly and delay judgement until the facts are in and the evidence is proven. My heroes are not athletes. I have no idea whether Armstrong doped or not, and since that is a FACT for me, why would I assume the worst of him?

Hey, be a big boy and face up. You are insulting people here, and calling people names from the safety of your computer. We know what you think now so go away. This is a place where everyone is very respectful and considerate with each other. Yes, in spite of what you may think because some of us may not be LA sycophants. Of course, being so insistent and hostile we could easily assume you may work for LA or something. You made your point, so quit insulting people and go to the dopestrong forum and post there, atmo.

Big Dan
07-22-2006, 04:06 PM
possibly hit his head when he fell off the bandwagon............ :eek:

Archibald
07-22-2006, 04:07 PM
I can't help but wonder if Archibald is being a little inconsistent. He wonders about the character of people here but does not wonder about Armstrong.

I'm not saying, mind you. No, no, not that. I'm just wondering about the subject of intellectual honesty.
If you've read my posts, you'd know I do "wonder" about Armstrong. I just have no reason to get on a public forum and assume the worst of him and declare or insinuate he's a doper especially when he's not here to defend himself (that I know of). Maybe I'm not making myself clear. It is one thing to dislike him, hate him even based on his personality, his ego, whatever. That's all subjective and a matter of opinion. To call him a doper, to state it as fact as so many do on here, is something else entirely.

As far as my consistency, it's more than fair to call me out on that. I used the current admiration for Floyd as a prybar on the whole "doping in cycling" issue. It's a matter of the halo effect. People only remember the latest deed. When Armstrong won in 99 everyone was amazed. By 2005, he's nothing but a doper. The atmosphere now is so corrosive that it can only tarnish the accomplishments and reputations of all riders and in this atmosphere, it may be in Floyd's best interest to get out on top. The serious accusations are only around the corner and I fear it can only go downhill from here.

Archibald
07-22-2006, 04:17 PM
Hey, be a big boy and face up. You are insulting people here, and calling people names from the safety of your computer. We know what you think now so go away. This is a place where everyone is very respectful and considerate with each other. Yes, in spite of what you may think because some of us may not be LA sycophants. Of course, being so insistent and hostile we could easily assume you may work for LA or something. You made your point, so quit insulting people and go to the dopestrong forum and post there, atmo.
Catulle, the statement you take exception to is only an insult if you feel it applies to you.

The irony in the rest of your post is pure gold!
:banana:

catulle
07-22-2006, 04:17 PM
This Archibold character (subtitled Leach - ?), has only posted to argue the Lance and doping threads. He must be on the LA PR payroll or something. I think this is no coincidence, atmo. What gets me is the petty insulting, as if trying to scratch you with his nails.

atmo
07-22-2006, 04:19 PM
<snipped>When Armstrong won in 99 everyone was amazed. By 2005, he's nothing but a doper.<cut>

things change. stories that were once team-issue only become
mainstream. guys getting fired. guys not getting re-hired. the
ferrari thing. simeoni. activegin (sp). the 100G gift to the uci.
these are just a sample of the things that took a fairy tale like '99
and brought the subject into the tabloids. it doesn't help that the
organization that runs parallel to postal/discovery has railroaded
good people out of the springs. man - there are alot of fingers in
the jar, and they all lead back to the same guy atmo.

Archibald
07-22-2006, 04:36 PM
Sure, Archibald, I understand what you are expressing.

Still, my point is that given that you do NOT know the identity of the ATMO, you have NO clue as to what he may or may not have firsthand knowledge of.

So....in this case, when we are talking about an issue like doping inside the peloton, who any poster is DOES make a HUGE difference.

In any event, it's all good. Enjoy the rest of the tour...

Javier

____________________________________________
Thank you, Javier. I accept your position and will not belabor my own. I'll wait to see what comes up.

I hope that you too enjoy the rest of the tour and the Vuelta! Lots of good racing to come!

obtuse
07-22-2006, 04:43 PM
To call him a doper, to state it as fact as so many do on here, is something else entirely.


you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. there was no reading between the lines here bub. professional cycling is not a healthy lifestyle; it doesn't make armstrong's thuggery and dishonesty any less reprehensible. tell me one other good reason to visit dr. ferrari?

obtuse

oh and explain this too while you're at it.

atmo
07-22-2006, 04:52 PM
Originally Posted by atmo
i think we are watching two different sports atmo.

Another house of cards? You asked serious questions. I offered you serious answers. You seem to hold the position that all pro riders are guilty of doping; that it is impossible to do what they do without illegal supplements. I hold that this is a fallacy of composition.

Another who holds your view offered that there are members of this forum who are or were professional cyclists. Perhaps you're one. Do you know these members personally? Have you yourself, or do any of them use, or have used, PEDs to compete? Based on your assumptions, they must have cheated, right? Or, in your view, is it possible that some cheat and some don't? Or maybe you see yourself as the lone clean rider? Do we cast aspersions on all cyclists for the actions of those who've been caught cheating? The more successful a competitor is, the more we attribute their accomplishments to cheating? Do we assume that it is impossible to win without cheating? Is that what you've reduced yourself to, being a victim? If so, you've now got a ready excuse for any loss you experience for the rest of your life.



i missed this post so here is my reply.
i never said it the way you say it here:
You seem to hold the position that all pro riders are guilty of doping...
for me it is not a guilt thing and it not a dope thing.
again, i am saying that the sport, the lifestyle,
the effin' routine that we're discussing here,
is not possible soley on food, water, good
genes, and training. what i am saying is that
i believe all of them (!!!) use as much help from
the pharmaceutical industry as they/their team
can afford, and i am also saying that i believe
that they would use banned substances if they
thought they could dupe the tests. and, yes - i
believe the sports doctors are ahead of those
whose job it is to test. i am not saying that these
pros are a bunch of drug addicts nor are they cheats
(in my eyes); the only time i have a strong(er) opinion
is when 1) someone questions drug use in sport (not
just cycling, but across the board), or 2) when someone
is (finally) caught and pretends he has no idea what was
in his bloodstream or his dog's bloodsteam.

again - i never used the word cheating in any of my
posts (i hope i haven't; i'm sure someone will check...)
and my party line is and always has been that i don't care
what they take. heck - look at it this way: if you take
enough stuff and are up front about it, there's a chance
you can get a job (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076578/) as a politician atmo.

JohnS
07-22-2006, 05:07 PM
sycophants."Sycophant is a registered trademark of JohnS. Any further use of it will have legal repercussions. I let "obtuse" get away from me, but not again!

Roy E. Munson
07-22-2006, 05:22 PM
Geez, I was gonna lay low and train/race tomorrow, but I think I may drink a case and watch this thread unfold. Keep it coming!

Llyod did a great job today, I bet the others are cursing the day they let him ride away "hoping" he would tire.

atmo
07-22-2006, 05:27 PM
Geez, I was gonna lay low and train/race tomorrow, but I think I may drink a case and watch this thread unfold. Keep it coming!

Llyod did a great job today, I bet the others are cursing the day they let him ride away "hoping" he would tire.


grab a coke and get to the naugatuck race tomorrow atmo.
ps who's llyod?

Avispa
07-22-2006, 06:31 PM
...I've been following the sport since the 70's. I'm well aware of its history and its history of drug abuse. Yes, I think it's possible to compete at the top levels of the sport with only rigorous training and appropriate nutrition. Given today's increased knowledge in body sciences and nutrition, it is easily believable.... Today's racer's schedule is more relaxed ....The top riders pick and choose their events.....

It is believable, I see, but is it achievable? One thing is to compete at the top levels of the sport and another is to systematically beat your opponents, when you please!!!

I'd like to remember what LeMond kept saying about all this...

Funny thing is, when I was in top racing shape, my VO2 and AT/LT were pretty close to Lance's [many of my team mates were even higher].... However, we seemed to get stuck on placing in the same groups at the races. I never turned pro mainly for some of the reasons we are discussing here....

But Lance, oh my, he really went far after a few trips to Italy!!!

obtuse
07-22-2006, 06:33 PM
Geez, I was gonna lay low and train/race tomorrow, but I think I may drink a case and watch this thread unfold. Keep it coming!

Llyod did a great job today, I bet the others are cursing the day they let him ride away "hoping" he would tire.


Lloyd Flanders is a great rider. Did you guys know that he's Amish?

Obtuse

Birddog
07-22-2006, 06:52 PM
Lloyd Flanders is a great rider. Did you guys know that he's Amish? That would be Ned's brother, right? Here's a pic of him in a Phonak sweatshirt.
http://www.rob-clarkson.com/duff-brewery/nedflanders/03.jpg

Birddog

PS Sometimes thread drift is a good thing.

Archibald
07-22-2006, 07:20 PM
you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. there was no reading between the lines here bub. professional cycling is not a healthy lifestyle; it doesn't make armstrong's thuggery and dishonesty any less reprehensible. tell me one other good reason to visit dr. ferrari?

obtuse

oh and explain this too while you're at it.
I have no idea what I'm talking about and you do? OK. Lets explore that. Am I to understand you're a professional bike racer? If so, were you a doper? Did you take banned substances for training and racing? Or should I understand that you're a professional rider who rode clean and never took peds? If you rode clean, is it safe for me to assume that other pros ride clean or do you feel you were/are the only one?

As for Ferrari, the man obviously has a damaged reputation and by his own admittance condoned and perhaps aided athletes doping but your proposal is an ad hominem argument. Ferrari's knowledge of doping practices or tactics does not dissolve his knowledge of legitimate training methods. I have no idea why Armstrong stuck by him as long as he did with all the controversy surrounding Ferrari. Maybe he felt it was the right thing to do if not the wise thing to do. PR wise, he'd of been better off putting as much distance between them as possible. You seem to feel this implies Armstrongs guilt. I get a different read.

As for the picture, what's to explain? Armstrong calls Simeoni a liar. Simeoni sues Armstrong. Armstrong gives Simeoni the equivalent of a racing head butt. Not nice but not proof of doping either, is it?

Vanilla Gorilla
07-22-2006, 07:29 PM
Maybe Obtuse IS Lance Armstong?

Serpico
07-22-2006, 08:10 PM
.

Big Dan
07-22-2006, 08:52 PM
Proud moment......................

GoJavs
07-22-2006, 09:14 PM
that you didn't pay attention to our earlier exchange....

QUOTE
...I have no idea what I'm talking about and you do? OK. Lets explore that...
UNQUOTE

Now, you're messing with an ex-pro (obtuse). How in the world do YOU know what he knows or doesn't know?

At this point, the whole board is assuming you are a troll just amusing yourself. That's too bad.

Vanilla Gorilla
07-22-2006, 09:26 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/TYLER-HAMILTON-Excellent-signed-5x7-Phonak-photo_W0QQitemZ180007429633QQihZ008QQcategoryZ2855 QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

obtuse
07-22-2006, 09:33 PM
dude-
everyone who knows me knows exactly what the score is. i did the hardest 34,000bf a year job in the world for two years and i didn't make it. what are you asking me? i came home burnt out, hurt, skinny and dumb and didn't touch a road bike for four years. you figure it out.

i wouldn't trade it for the world; but you want to know what i ate and how many kms i rode on a given thursday too? leave it alone you have no clue.

obtuse

Vanilla Gorilla
07-22-2006, 09:36 PM
If you were dumb, you wouldn't write so well. You are grumpy though.

obtuse
07-22-2006, 09:39 PM
If you were dumb, you wouldn't write so well. You are grumpy though.


i meant dumb in a numb; shell-shocked-madpainful hurtin can't really talk way. i'm way too arrogant to call my self stupid.

obtuse

Vanilla Gorilla
07-22-2006, 09:42 PM
Well maybe you should have taken more vacations?

obtuse
07-22-2006, 09:44 PM
Well maybe you should have taken more vacations?


probably.

obtuse

DarrenCT
07-22-2006, 09:53 PM
Lloyd Flanders is a great rider. Did you guys know that he's Amish?

Obtuse

anyone who includes the words "bro" and "yo" has a very limited IQ.

Vanilla Gorilla
07-22-2006, 09:55 PM
Don't tell ATMO yo.

obtuse
07-22-2006, 09:57 PM
anyone who includes the words "bro" and "yo" has a very limited IQ.

what is a limited iq and how is diction related? please explain since you are obviously the resident rocket scientist here. includes the words "bro" and "yo" in what? could you try to communicate in complete sentences for the sake of us morons?

obtuse

Vanilla Gorilla
07-22-2006, 09:59 PM
Oh no, here we go again.

fstrthnu
07-22-2006, 10:13 PM
anyone who includes the words "bro" and "yo" has a very limited IQ.

Yo Bro's *** is this MP guy Yo?

Hey, Shouldn't You be on the Velonews forum or something Bro. Maybe Myspacing or something? Dunno...

Fstrthnu

BumbleBeeDave
07-22-2006, 10:37 PM
. . . I go to spend some quality time with my daughter visiting a museum and look what happens! I certainly didn't mean to start anything like THIS! . . . :crap:

But i guess the mere fact that this keeps going like the Energizer Bunny just confirms that there are plenty of other people who also find Lance fascinating . . .

Now if anyone did, by chance, actually see the CyclingTV interview with Lance I'd love to know what he said. Was he gracious? Complimentary? Or otherwise?

Now if anyone has any new handlebars they like and would like to talk about, I'm all ears! . . . ;)

BBD

Vanilla Gorilla
07-22-2006, 10:37 PM
"if you take
enough stuff and are up front about it, there's a chance
you can get a job as a politician atmo." (SNIPPED)


Don't you mean this guy?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/

Archibald
07-22-2006, 11:08 PM
dude-
everyone who knows me knows exactly what the score is. i did the hardest 34,000bf a year job in the world for two years and i didn't make it. what are you asking me? i came home burnt out, hurt, skinny and dumb and didn't touch a road bike for four years. you figure it out.

i wouldn't trade it for the world; but you want to know what i ate and how many kms i rode on a given thursday too? leave it alone you have no clue.

obtuse
No offense Obtuse, but you're deflecting. What I'm asking you is a very simple question: did you, or did you not, take PEDs to race or train?

Archibald
07-22-2006, 11:22 PM
that you didn't pay attention to our earlier exchange....

QUOTE
...I have no idea what I'm talking about and you do? OK. Lets explore that...
UNQUOTE

Now, you're messing with an ex-pro (obtuse). How in the world do YOU know what he knows or doesn't know?

At this point, the whole board is assuming you are a troll just amusing yourself. That's too bad.
GoJavs, you're reading more into that than you need to. I don't "know" what Obtuse knows or doesn't know and that is why I'm asking about his personal experience with PEDs as a pro cyclist. How does that make me a troll? I accept that he was a pro at some level so the question remains, did he ride clean or did he dope? Obtuse along with others has inferred that it is not possible to be a pro and win without doping. If he rode clean then that leaves the prospect that other riders are riding clean at at least his level. A legitimate question, don't you think?

Johny
07-22-2006, 11:33 PM
GoJavs, you're reading more into that than you need to. I don't "know" what Obtuse knows or doesn't know and that is why I'm asking about his personal experience with PEDs as a pro cyclist. How does that make me a troll? I accept that he was a pro at some level so the question remains, did he ride clean or did he dope? Obtuse along with others has inferred that it is not possible to be a pro and win without doping. If he rode clean then that leaves the prospect that other riders are riding clean at at least his level. A legitimate question, don't you think?

I rather believe Lance --- "I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs." A legitimate answer, don't you think?

Vanilla Gorilla
07-23-2006, 01:29 AM
I rather believe Lance --- "I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs." A legitimate answer, don't you think?

It is quite legit, unless he is lying through his teeth.

Fat Robert
07-23-2006, 06:09 AM
anyone who includes the words "bro" and "yo" has a very limited IQ.

yo bro imho mp*




* it is my sincere conviction that such a statement shows inadequate application of the combination of dike and arete that one might characterize, in our vocabulary, as the "justice of excellence," and a similarly inadequate understanding of the discursive practices and virtues of our little community -- read the big A's posts to Nichomachus, yo.


hey.


i need more PE coffee. i gotta ride at the mp time of 7:30AM to get everything in today...mrs. fat is having a dinner party. i will eat more prosciutto-wrapped shrimp than anyone tonight. i am the mouth of the south, yo. kosher be damned.

Fat Robert
07-23-2006, 06:09 AM
It is quite legit, unless he is lying through his teeth.

i love the gorrilla

Serpico
07-23-2006, 09:14 AM
.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/23/D8J1NQ6G7.html
.
.
QUOTE

"I look forward to seeing him up on the podium in Paris," Armstrong said in a statement Sunday. "If it couldn't be one of my guys from Discovery Channel then I am thrilled to see Floyd continue the success of American cycling."

QUOTE



okay, can we let this thread die?
.

Vanilla Gorilla
07-23-2006, 12:53 PM
i love the gorrilla

I lova the fatboy! Burgers are MP yo- Try a wilber next time. IMHO. Get one to go!

Elefantino
07-23-2006, 01:58 PM
Eight more posts until 200!

Vanilla Gorilla
07-23-2006, 03:43 PM
There was a similar quote in the New York Times today. Lance seemed pleased to know Flosy Floyd would win.

djg
07-23-2006, 04:19 PM
The A samples were not tested for epo because they didn't exist. The test did not also exist in 99.

The lab was not aware of who the samples belonged to, they were working on improving the tests.

To be declared positive all samples must be tested and protocol followed. It is no longer possible to sanction LA because the protocols can't be followed 7 years later. It does not address how epo got in those samples though. It's like OJ, he is "not guilty", but also not innocent atmo.

What I want to know is what beer Floyd drinks to get that performance.

JG

Look, this is not a defense of Lance or the purity of his blood or any such thing, but the above statements are part of what never made sense about the "testing." Following a research protocol (which, by the way, should include specifications for origin and handling of materials) is not the same thing as following a treatment or diagnostic protocol. Calibrating or qualifying a test is not the same as applying it. They cannot be done simultaneously on the same materials. What the lab was doing, and with what, and for whom are not just lawyer's questions, they are questions about what the heck was, supposedly, going on scientifically. I think the Dutch lawyer was right: it's not just that Armstrong wasn't proved to be doping, it's that the WADA business was entirely worthless as evidence of doping. To answer ATMO's question: that's my belief about who found what, not about his "innocence" or lack of medical assistance.

Johny
07-23-2006, 05:20 PM
Look, this is not a defense of Lance or the purity of his blood or any such thing, but the above statements are part of what never made sense about the "testing." Following a research protocol (which, by the way, should include specifications for origin and handling of materials) is not the same thing as following a treatment or diagnostic protocol. Calibrating or qualifying a test is not the same as applying it. They cannot be done simultaneously on the same materials. What the lab was doing, and with what, and for whom are not just lawyer's questions, they are questions about what the heck was, supposedly, going on scientifically. I think the Dutch lawyer was right: it's not just that Armstrong wasn't proved to be doping, it's that the WADA business was entirely worthless as evidence of doping. To answer ATMO's question: that's my belief about who found what, not about his "innocence" or lack of medical assistance.

In 2002, they already got a better established protocol that further purifies urines and also improves sensitivity of the test compared to their first EPO test protocol (Lasne F, de Ceaurriz J. Recombinant erythropoietin in urine.
Nature. 2000 Jun 8;405(6787):635.) --- Lasne F, Martin L, Crepin N, de Ceaurriz J. Detection of isoelectric profiles of erythropoietin in urine: differentiation of natural and administered recombinant hormones. Anal Biochem. 2002 Dec 15;311(2):119-26.

Therefore, I don't think the science part is flawed. The question is how you interpret the results from the B samples alone, which can not make an official doping case anyway.

Ray
07-23-2006, 05:27 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/tdf2006/news/story?id=2527718

-Ray

Vanilla Gorilla
07-23-2006, 05:33 PM
Well maybe Basso will find an EPO prescription for his pet dog, and be cleared of all charges. He will be a good leader for Discovery if Floyd stays on Phonak.

Frustration
07-23-2006, 05:39 PM
I say we get Basso's Dog to mate with Frank Vandenbrouke's Dog (he had a script for testotserone, cortisone, insulin and EPO).

Take the pupies to Miami and make a fortune at the dog track.

djg
07-23-2006, 06:57 PM
In 2002, they already got a better established protocol that further purifies urines and also improves sensitivity of the test compared to their first EPO test protocol (Lasne F, de Ceaurriz J. Recombinant erythropoietin in urine.
Nature. 2000 Jun 8;405(6787):635.) --- Lasne F, Martin L, Crepin N, de Ceaurriz J. Detection of isoelectric profiles of erythropoietin in urine: differentiation of natural and administered recombinant hormones. Anal Biochem. 2002 Dec 15;311(2):119-26.

Therefore, I don't think the science part is flawed. The question is how you interpret the results from the B samples alone, which can not make an official doping case anyway.

I'm aware of the citations and stand by what I said. It's just not worth beating to death. You know, more. Peace.

Serpico
07-23-2006, 07:04 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/tdf2006/news/story?id=2527718

-Ray

Lance says Team Discovery wants to sign Landis


just Lance trying to keep himself in the headlines and the story on him ("Landis won the Tour? Well 7-time winner Lance Armstrong wants to sign him.")

anyone with enough dough wants him

see the piece from Outside (http://outside.away.com/outside/features/200607/tour-de-france-2006-floyd-landis-1.html) (and I'm sure it's been reported elsewhere)--Discovery already wanted him
.

Ray
07-23-2006, 07:11 PM
just Lance trying to keep himself in the headlines and the story on him ("Landis won the Tour? Well 7-time winner Lance Armstrong wants to sign him.")

anyone with enough dough wants him

see the piece from Outside (http://outside.away.com/outside/features/200607/tour-de-france-2006-floyd-landis-1.html) (and I'm sure it's been reported elsewhere)--Discovery already wanted him
.
I know Disco tried to sign him already and I'm not even gonna BEGIN to cogitate on Lance's motivations. But it's a very direct way of saying very publicly that he's impressed with what Floyd just pulled off.

If I was Floyd, I wouldn't go anywhere near that team again. But it should certainly help him negotiate his own contract and to be able to insist on stronger team support. Heras ought to be available in a couple of years :cool:

-Ray

Serpico
07-23-2006, 07:16 PM
I originally had a disclaimer on that post, my comments weren't directed at you Ray--I was just responding to the article

:o

Big Dan
07-23-2006, 07:17 PM
I think Tyler, his twin and Basso's dog are available for next season too.......

:bike:

atmo
07-23-2006, 07:21 PM
just Lance trying to keep himself in the headlines and the story on him ("Landis won the Tour? Well 7-time winner Lance Armstrong wants to sign him.")

anyone with enough dough wants him

see the piece from Outside (http://outside.away.com/outside/features/200607/tour-de-france-2006-floyd-landis-1.html) (and I'm sure it's been reported elsewhere)--Discovery already wanted him
.


i was gonna say the exact same thing earlier when i saw
the newslink. lance wants to co-opt landis' success atmo.

Ray
07-23-2006, 07:39 PM
I'm not a Lance defender by a long shot, but the OP was about what Lance's reaction was, and he's getting it out there. Another MSNBC article with this money section:

================================================== ===

"Armstrong and Belgian Eddy Merckx, two of the greatest champions the sport has ever known, were huddled in a back booth at the Hotel Costes, awaiting the largely ceremonial last-stage run-in to the Champs-Elysées.

“How crazy was that?” Armstrong said finally.

Rather than answer, Merckx, a five-time champion himself and a competitor so fierce he was nicknamed “The Cannibal,” shook his head slowly in disbelief. A moment later, though, he lifted the right sleeve of his polo shirt and flexed his biceps.

“Strong,” Merckx said, shaking his head again. “Just incredibly ... unbelievably ... strong.”

Both men could have vouched for Landis long before that. Armstrong because he plucked the then 26-year-old rider off a failing team and made him a key member of the winning U.S. Postal Service teams from 2002-04; Merckx because his son, Axel, is part of the Swiss Phonak squad that Landis willed to victory after he left USPS determined to become the leader of his own team.

“Floyd won this race,” Armstrong said Sunday afternoon from a Paris hotel room where he watched the finish. “His strength was not his team, his strength was his mind and his will.”

-Ray

William
07-23-2006, 07:40 PM
It's over and done. Floyd's the man. :cool:

Now, let him get his hip replacement in peace.

http://kevinremde.members.winisp.net/images/beating_2Da_2Ddead_2Dhorse.gif



William ;)

Johny
07-23-2006, 07:45 PM
... lance wants to co-opt landis' success atmo.

OLN (VERSUS) too. How many "8 consecutive wins...by Americans" did they say today? Hey it's already an American tradition.

BumbleBeeDave
07-23-2006, 09:16 PM
. . . and it seemed to me from his comments that Lance's only interest in Floyd's success was in how he could use it to benefit his own team.

Given what I have seen and read about how the personal relationship between Floyd and Lance deteriorated, I would be very, VERY surprised to see Floyd return to that team.

BBD

Ginger
07-23-2006, 09:55 PM
. . . and it seemed to me from his comments that Lance's only interest in Floyd's success was in how he could use it to benefit his own team.


And what is so wrong with that? Teams are businesses aren't they? Floyd did a great job, of *course* they would like to sign him...

Although I understand you're looking for a personal, heartfelt support of Floyd's win...

quaintjh
07-23-2006, 10:20 PM
four make this board worth a *****: atmo, obtuse, fat robert, catulle, and all their past names. Forget the trolls. What is is yo. I think I might after buster's sister, yo.

Lifelover
07-23-2006, 10:49 PM
four make this board worth a *****: atmo, obtuse, fat robert, catulle, and all their past names...

For better or worse they certainly were key to this thread

atbroYOmo

William
07-24-2006, 05:47 AM
four make this board worth a *****: atmo, obtuse, fat robert, catulle, and all their past names. Forget the trolls. What is is yo. I think I might after buster's sister, yo.

Yeah! The rest of us suck eggs!!


ALL HAIL THE FANTASTIC FOUR!!!
http://www.fantastic-four.nl/ffroman.gif


William (aka: Mr. Sunny side up) ;)

BumbleBeeDave
07-24-2006, 06:12 AM
Now we have to figure out who is who in that picture! :eek:

BBD

stevep
07-24-2006, 07:21 AM
dude-
everyone who knows me knows exactly what the score is. i did the hardest 34,000bf a year job in the world for two years and i didn't make it. what are you asking me? i came home burnt out, hurt, skinny and dumb and didn't touch a road bike for four years. you figure it out.

i wouldn't trade it for the world; but you want to know what i ate and how many kms i rode on a given thursday too? leave it alone you have no clue.

obtuse

obtuse,
what did you do with all that money anyway?
i think you still owe me 88bf on a bet when you said for sure you would won paris roubaix when they shortened the course to 66 k and took out the cobbles. i found out afterward that they weren't going to do that. you screwed me.
what did you eat anyway? frites 3 times a day? sausage?