Recent content by krinaman

While I would of loved to see Martin in yellow Cavendish isn't on the team to get other people yellow Jerseys. He's there for one reason and one reason only, to win sprint stages. Everybody knows that going in.

I really hope the poster doesn't realize Neil Armstrong died today. Because that is completely inappropriate.

Sorry, I'm not following how that equals evidence against Lance.

and 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th........

From the comments I read today, it seems that this really didn't change anything in the public's view about Armstrong. Obviously, I didn't read them all but I jumped around through a bunch of news stories skimming them and the comments. "fanbois" seem to outweigh "haters" buy a fairly large...

As I recall SCA lost the first time because the contract didn't have stipulations about doping. I'm not sure how they could sue now. Googled a link, here you go: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12122/SCA-Promotions-will-monitor-USADA-case-against-ArmstrongUS-Postal-Service.aspx...

Just tossing it out there: did anyone consider the possibility that LA made a deal with the USADA?

Which is what I figured from the get go. If you are going to use some illegal tech the last thing you are going to do is draw attention to it.

They stopped?

/sigh this is getting tiring This whole discussion started when I stated that the judge dismissed the case because "it had to many pages of pointless stuff that seemed to be there for PR and not legal reasons." To which you claimed I was "Wrong." Now after several posts insulting me...

Nope, I not telling you that at all. What I am saying is the conversation at the time I made my post seemed to be ignoring the facts of the case. I simply reintroduced those facts into the discussion.

The judge specifically stated the reason it didn't meet Iqbal/Twombly. Read the sentences right after the part you quoted. The final one being "Ultimately, what Rule 8 demands is a short and plain statement of detailed facts, not a mechanical recital of boilerplate allegations, nor as is more...

Again, I am certainly not claiming to be a legal expert. It just seemed to me that alot of the discussion in this thread was missing the actual facts of the case. I'm just trying to point out those facts so they get included in the discussion. IDK, it just seemed to me that actually...

Again, I'm no legal expert but since the motion to dismiss didn't address that issue why would they include it in the reply?

It was deficient in relation to Iqbal/Twombly standard because it wasn't short and plain (which is what I just said). http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/sports/lance-armstrong-files-suit-to-block-doping-charges.html And...