Armstrong - 5 Types of Forum Posters

[Nearly]

.....

Universal Sports are covering this weeks Tirreno-Adriatico, and 'you know who' is not riding, so it could well be argued that LAs participation in races actually prices out getting coverage to the races he participates in.

If you are right perhaps we will get the Giro after all! Somehow I don't think it is about the price though.

 

[pmcg76]

Actually you asked a good question in your first paragraph - but unfortunately you answered it and unwittingly raised an interesting outcome.

CyclingTV covered the Giro in 2008 - as well as a heap of other good races.
At the time they had very good coverage - but since last year they have lost out on some of the big races and it appears to have crumbled.

Universal Sports are covering this weeks Tirreno-Adriatico, and 'you know who' is not riding, so it could well be argued that LAs participation in races actually prices out getting coverage to the races he participates in.

Remember back in the day when Irish television showed the classics, some live. 20 years ago!!!

 

[luckyboy]

As far as I know, there are only two types of evidence what count if talking about doping: positive test or confession. Both favor LA. Everything else is just rumour, third and fourth hand gossip, opinions pretending to be facts etc.

Except for the seven positive tests he had..

 

[red_flanders]

As far as I know, there are only two types of evidence what count if talking about doping: positive test or confession. Both favor LA. Everything else is just rumour, third and fourth hand gossip, opinions pretending to be facts etc.

It is interesting, as he's been given opportunities to defend himself against accusations of doping in court, and yet has avoided them, even after threatening to take people to court. Curious.

Sort of a pattern there. Threaten to take people to court in press conference, never follows through. Announce transparent dope testing regime, never follows through. Oh yeah, and those 7 positive tests.

 

[Hugh Januss]

It is interesting, as he's been given opportunities to defend himself against accusations of doping in court, and yet has avoided them, even after threatening to take people to court. Curious.

Sort of a pattern there. Threaten to take people to court in press conference, never follows through. Announce transparent dope testing regime, never follows through. Oh yeah, and those 7 positive tests.

Not to mention the people who swore to hearing him admit that he doped in his hospital room.
So by my count that is both positive tests and confession.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

I thought about this a fair bit, before responding, just to make sure I audited the evidence of non-doping.
Other than: "The Science of Lance Armstrong", based upon Dr Ed's now universially acclaimed work of science fiction, the only evidence of non doping, is Lance's own mouth.

So, I assume what your are actually saying is that there is no evidence, whatsoever, that Armstrong has doped.

Good luck with that.

Please please provide us with your evidence for this. Lance's own mouth as has been said already.
Tests - failed.

There is NO actual evidence to support an argument that he did not dope except him saying he didn't. There is lots and lots of hard evidence that he did and more annecdotal evidence that he did. If you have read more than 50% of the links that people have provided to evidence that LA doped and you still don't believe that he did then you just really really really want to believe that he didn't and you are willing to abandon all logical thought to hold on to that idea.

Must I direct your attention to my response to BroDeal:

I don't want to get into another "did he/didn't he" debate.

Until there is admission of guilt or a positive test (without the suspicion of spiking), I remain unconvinced. That's the way I am with every rider. Innocent until proven guilty. You can save yourselves the time and effort. I've read Dr. Ashenden's claims as many times as all of you and am well aware of the cortisone, so spare me the formulaic responses and appeals to authority. I don't care about his relationship with Ferrari or what some former teammates may have said; it's based on speculation and rumor. Until he says otherwise, or there are positive A and B samples, he didn't cheat.

 

[Laszlo]

There is NO actual evidence to support an argument that he did not dope except him saying he didn't. QUOTE]

How do you prove a negative ? there is NO actual evidence that magic does not cause an apple to fall from a tree either.

 

[BroDeal]

Until there is admission of guilt or a positive test (without the suspicion of spiking), I remain unconvinced.

There is no suspicion of spiking with Armstrong's positive samples. The samples were anonymous. The testing was blind. There was no way to know which samples to spike.

 

[VeloCity]

Do any of you actually ride a bike or have had cancer? Did any of you race on a bike for longer than one race? Bike racing is hard and cancer is both life threatening and frightening to those who have had it and have survived. Get real. Armstrong may or not have doped but he is still innocent until proved guilty which is the basis of law. He is also a person who is doing what he can to support the fight against cancer. Yes modern medicine helped him but what would you do when faced with this problem?

A cancer survivor doping - ie misusing substances that may or may not have long-term health effects, some of which may even eventually prove to be carcinogenic (testosterone, for eg, is suspected to increase the risk of prostate cancer) - to win bike races and then presenting himself as a role model for other cancer patients is just about the most hypocritical thing I can think of.

I tend to think that a cancer survivor who dopes is not really someone to be admired or held up as a role model or an inspiration.

 

[VeloCity]

Until there is admission of guilt or a positive test (without the suspicion of spiking), I remain unconvinced. That's the way I am with every rider. Innocent until proven guilty. You can save yourselves the time and effort. I've read Dr. Ashenden's claims as many times as all of you and am well aware of the cortisone, so spare me the formulaic responses and appeals to authority. I don't care about his relationship with Ferrari or what some former teammates may have said; it's based on speculation and rumor. Until he says otherwise, or there are positive A and B samples, he didn't cheat.

You guys throw this need for "proof" thing around a lot. There's no such thing as "proof" - go ahead and "prove" to me that the sun will rise tomorrow. All there is, is evidence, and reaching a point where there is so much evidence that no other explanation suffices.

And then again, as we saw with Hamilton and Landis, even a positive test isn't "proof" enough. So if no positive test = not doping, but positive test = possibly but not necessarily doping, then what is there left? Confession? And besides, how are you going to be certain, without a doubt, that there is no "suspicion of spiking" with any sample, anyway?

All seems just a very convenient way of avoiding having to admit that all of the evidence points to the bleedin' obvious.

 

[VeloCity]

As far as I know, there are only two types of evidence what count if talking about doping: positive test or confession. Both favor LA. Everything else is just rumour, third and fourth hand gossip, opinions pretending to be facts etc.

Say what? Everything is "evidence", and all of it counts. The only thing that sets a positive or a confession apart is that they are sanctionable, whereas the others are not. But to dismiss everything else out of hand as "not evidence" is BS.

 

[Escarabajo]

If you are right perhaps we will get the Giro after all! Somehow I don't think it is about the price though.

Last year's Giro was about the price. I have always watched the Giro on Versus or OLN even if it is short versions on weekends. Last year was gone.

 

[elapid]

Until there is admission of guilt or a positive test (without the suspicion of spiking), I remain unconvinced. That's the way I am with every rider. Innocent until proven guilty. You can save yourselves the time and effort. I've read Dr. Ashenden's claims as many times as all of you and am well aware of the cortisone, so spare me the formulaic responses and appeals to authority. I don't care about his relationship with Ferrari or what some former teammates may have said; it's based on speculation and rumor. Until he says otherwise, or there are positive A and B samples, he didn't cheat.

I like to take the corollary to this argument. In 1996, when LA was diagnosed with testicular cancer, his hCG levels were very, very high. According to Lance in his book, his hCG levels were 109,000 when normal is <0.5. hCG is a banned substance because it increases endogenous testosterone production. So, in 1996, when Lance was tested multiple times, why did he never test positive to hCG? His hCG levels would have been increased for months prior to his actual diagnosis. Other athletes have been diagnosed with testicular cancer because of positive tests to hCG. Why not LA when his hCG levels were astronomically higher than these other athletes? So all this proves is a negative test does not necessarily mean you're not a doper. Courts of law, and of public opinion, rely on a preponderance of evidence to decide whether a person is guilty or not. There is SO much evidence that Lance is and was a doper that most rational people can only conclude that he is a doper, including:
- Positive to cortisone, not guilty because of a magical retrospective TUE
- Six positives to EPO in the 1999 TdF, exposed because of good investigative journalism (and not because of Ashenden because he did not know which samples belonged to which riders)
- Evidence of blood doping at the 2009 TdF with abnormal hematocrit and reticulocyte counts for week 3 of a GT
- Betty and Frankie Andreu hearing LA's bedside confession to his doctor regarding the use of banned substances
- Emma O'Reilly's confession of LA's use of doping products
- Subpoened text message conversation between Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu

You can continue to bury your head in the sand, but you are just continuing to ignore the obvious and fool yourself.

 

[rata de sentina]

#1.
Lance was lucky in that he was in the 3-5% group that survive stage IV testicular cancer.

Just to clarify, there is no stage IV testicular cancer. The worst stage of testicular cancer stage III with highly disseminated disease has at least a 50-60% cure rate. This is current but rates have not jumped hugely since LA had his cancer.

 

[Escarabajo]

Just to clarify, there is no stage IV testicular cancer. The worst stage of testicular cancer stage III with highly disseminated disease has at least a 50-60% cure rate. This is current but rates have not jumped hugely since LA had his cancer.

He already corrected some of his post. Read the rest of the posts.

 

[9000ft]

I put myself as someone who doesn't know how clean or not clean LA is/was and isn't too worked up about it one way or another and would be surprised one way or another. This is pretty much how I look at all professional cyclists. I have never met the man and certainly do not know him so I do not pretend to know what kind of a person he is, whether a saint of the cancer world or the biggest a$$hole that ever lived. Don't really consider it my business since I look at him as a bke racer and not a personal friend. I do admire his athletic achievements. Clean or not, the man owned what is probably the hardest test of endurance, will, and guts in the world for 7 years against a field of the worlds most elite -clean or not - cyclists.

What really amuses me though is how worked up so many people get about the guy. How many people who think they know him, what he does, who he sleeps with, etc. The reaction, more so from the haters than from the fanboys is facinating.

 

[Digger]

These third and fourth hand rumours that people are referring to, are actually direct witness statements of him admitting to doping. They were in the room. Witness statements have been admissable in court cases, but for some reason, when it comes to Lance, they are just rumour and innuendo.

 

[Cerberus]

I like to take the corollary to this argument. In 1996, when LA was diagnosed with testicular cancer, his hCG levels were very, very high. According to Lance in his book, his hCG levels were 109,000 when normal is <0.5. hCG is a banned substance because it increases endogenous testosterone production. So, in 1996, when Lance was tested multiple times, why did he never test positive to hCG? His hCG levels would have been increased for months prior to his actual diagnosis. Other athletes have been diagnosed with testicular cancer because of positive tests to hCG. Why not LA when his hCG levels were astronomically higher than these other athletes? So all this proves is a negative test does not necessarily mean you're not a doper. Courts of law, and of public opinion, rely on a preponderance of evidence to decide whether a person is guilty or not. There is SO much evidence that Lance is and was a doper that most rational people can only conclude that he is a doper, including:
- Positive to cortisone, not guilty because of a magical retrospective TUE
- Six positives to EPO in the 1999 TdF, exposed because of good investigative journalism (and not because of Ashenden because he did not know which samples belonged to which riders)
- Evidence of blood doping at the 2009 TdF with abnormal hematocrit and reticulocyte counts for week 3 of a GT
- Betty and Frankie Andreu hearing LA's bedside confession to his doctor regarding the use of banned substances
- Emma O'Reilly's confession of LA's use of doping products
- Subpoened text message conversation between Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu

You can continue to bury your head in the sand, but you are just continuing to ignore the obvious and fool yourself.

Add to that the likely impossibility of anyone winning the Tour clean and the fact that Armstrong made a transformation from number 100 to Winning the Tour, a transformation that has been paralleled by only 3 other people since WW2( Riis, Landis and Indurain). Sll of whom won after blood doping was commonly used and both Riis and Landis are know for a fact to have doped during their win.

 

[Ripper]

Remember back in the day when Irish television showed the classics, some live. 20 years ago!!!

You lucky bast*rds! Thank goodness we now have the WWW, so I can finally see cycling live. In Canada, it really tends to be all about hockey. In fact, at some universities there is a 'history of sports in Canada' course, and all it is, is hockey!

 

[SpeedWay]

I put myself as someone who doesn't know how clean or not clean LA is/was and isn't too worked up about it one way or another and would be surprised one way or another. This is pretty much how I look at all professional cyclists. I have never met the man and certainly do not know him so I do not pretend to know what kind of a person he is, whether a saint of the cancer world or the biggest a$$hole that ever lived. Don't really consider it my business since I look at him as a bke racer and not a personal friend. I do admire his athletic achievements. Clean or not, the man owned what is probably the hardest test of endurance, will, and guts in the world for 7 years against a field of the worlds most elite -clean or not - cyclists.

What really amuses me though is how worked up so many people get about the guy. How many people who think they know him, what he does, who he sleeps with, etc. The reaction, more so from the haters than from the fanboys is facinating.

Hang around for a while it only gets better. It's LCD gold with the biggest collection of drama queens every assembled on a sporting site. One long time poster just recently committed seppuku and his tormentors showed up to the funeral mocking and belittling him. There is a Venusian solution for these girls but they just can't wrap their head around it. You know what they say about scorned women. I'm in total agreement with you on one point - it is fascinating to watch.

 

[Race Radio]

Hang around for a while it only gets better. It's LCD gold with the biggest collection of drama queens every assembled on a sporting site. One long time poster just recently committed seppuku and his tormentors showed up to the funeral mocking and belittling him. There is a Venusian solution for these girls but they just can't wrap their head around it. You know what they say about scorned women. I'm in total agreement with you on one point - it is fascinating to watch.

160 posts....all the same thing.

Let us know if you ever choose to contribute something to the forum.

 

[Von Mises]

Say what? Everything is "evidence", and all of it counts. The only thing that sets a positive or a confession apart is that they are sanctionable, whereas the others are not. But to dismiss everything else out of hand as "not evidence" is BS.

Except for the seven positive tests he had..

sorry, Frankie and Betsy Andreu is not rumour, third or fourth hand gossip, but direct evidence. The tests from 99 were evidence. The cortico positive. Evidence. The Astana trash medical waste evidence. The USPS trash medical waste evidence. Cant explain it all away, and twitter the French conspiracies.

My post was a response to poster who said „There is NO actual evidence to support an argument that he did not dope“. I can only repeat that only evidence what counts is positive test and conession. And these favor LA.

A part from cortico, he has not tested positive. L'Équipe article can generate clicks and forum discussions, but thats it, it does not count as positive test.

 

[Race Radio]

My post was a response to poster who said „There is NO actual evidence to support an argument that he did not dope“. I can only repeat that only evidence what counts is positive test and conession. And these favor LA.

A part from cortico, he has not tested positive. L'Équipe article can generate clicks and forum discussions, but thats it, it does not count as positive test.

You may want to change from "Never tested positive" to "Never sanction"

The fact is these days riders are suspended with a much lower barrier.

 

[pmcg76]

I put myself as someone who doesn't know how clean or not clean LA is/was and isn't too worked up about it one way or another and would be surprised one way or another. This is pretty much how I look at all professional cyclists. I have never met the man and certainly do not know him so I do not pretend to know what kind of a person he is, whether a saint of the cancer world or the biggest a$$hole that ever lived. Don't really consider it my business since I look at him as a bke racer and not a personal friend. I do admire his athletic achievements. Clean or not, the man owned what is probably the hardest test of endurance, will, and guts in the world for 7 years against a field of the worlds most elite -clean or not - cyclists.

What really amuses me though is how worked up so many people get about the guy. How many people who think they know him, what he does, who he sleeps with, etc. The reaction, more so from the haters than from the fanboys is facinating.

Its not really about whether Armstrong doped or nots, its the fact that he holds himself up as a clean winner and people believe this without fail.

Its his actions like his treatment of people like Simeoni, Bassons and the BS with Astana last year that we dont like him. I have yet to hear any Lance defender give a proper defence of what he done on Simeoni.

As I said on another thread, you find me another pro cyclist who has done as many low things as Armstong and I will change my opinion on him. Hinaultt was the only one who comes close and he was not very popular with fans or riders.

So I will wait whilst you find me a bigger **** than Armstrong. Good luck.

 

[Anonymous]

I think the problem is the lance lovers have been outnumbered and out written by the lance haters....and the problem on this form is it is all one giant titty screw...and now, the lance haters, who are right I think and agree with are acting like a gang screw on anyone who tries to speak about any other issue via doping...they always swing it back to lance...to me, they have all been lance screwed in the fact that it is the only thing they really react to, think of...and it is sad and friggin pathetic...the hell with lance...and doping...get a friggin life and have a differ opinion about stuff...