Recent content by FKLance

Well, you don't understand me and vice versa... I guess my point was lost at some point, might be my poor articulation. I'm gonna go and try harder to keep myself out of these discussions. There are many in this thread whose opinions I share..

Well, it would be silly to say they were not likely clean. So I say dirty, by default, based on history of cycling and their performances. To me there's no real evidence, and they could be clean, too. Also, it's not that simple since there are always grey areas + small-scale doping by...

Now I think I understand our differences better. You seem to think only in numbers and statistics. Traditionally cycling winners have been found doping = Sky is doping. You don't even need this 'evidence', but they are nice confirming factors. I refrain from giving numbers because I don't use...

My line in the sand. If there are good arguments that can be made against the evidence, then it's no proof. If we talk about Froome/Wiggins, there are good, at least decent arguments against all the 'evidence'. I can still admit it's very possible they are doping, but I hold back until I get...

What if someone gives you a 8.001? 30.001? What about 7.999 or a 29.599? Are you really saying these should be defined?

Ok, I have not been clear enough but this thread has not changed my views. About context: I know cycling historically has not had many clean top performances but I believe they are still possible and I like to give people a chance when I have no proof... With Froome/Wiggins I see the...

If by transparency you mean making them public(weight, ftp etc.) all that would do is give people like you more fuel.

So how do you define the maximum speed of athletic development? What are the actual physical limits on human potential? How do things like individual talent and psychology affect it? Not even the best experts on sports physiology can claim they know the absolute numbers. Add to that all the...

Going from grupetto to top step of the podium can happen in clean sports. It's not all linear and mathematical. I'm against measuring things like vo2max, weight and FTP in anti-doping testing because of this.

I think hiring Leinders was suspicious. Then again, you could argue that good cycling doctors with a clean reputation are few and far between. You could argue that Brailsford was an idiot at that moment and made an honest mistake when he quickly hired a capable doctor after the sudden death...

Fair enough. I know it's the internet and I don't know why I even bother. Everyone forms their own opinions. People find the facts they like the most anyway.

I am not convinced of your "evidence". Had to look up the word: I would say those 8 pieces of evidence are pretty weak evidence. Certainly not even close to proof. Yet you seem to act like they are proof. I sense I'm not the only one irritated by it.

Come on. And I'm talking to everyone, not just you. This is what's wrong with all internet forums, it's just people fighting. Moderators are here to keep this a clean, nice enjoyable place, which is next to impossible with all these crazy people. Why not have some respect for what they are...

I Did not find anything on the search about this and did not feel like going through the huge LA thread.. So has anyone read it already? Is there anything new? I'm considering getting it just for the entertainment value, hoping it's a nice recap of this whole US postal mess.

I remember reading about Sweeney a few years back. The quotes are old, there's nothing new in this article, but this subject is worthy of talk. Scary stuff