Armstrong in the mire again. LeMonde reports

[progressor]

People drop in here and they think all we talk about is Lance. Not true, guys like BroDeal, Big Boat, TFF and many, many more will and have called out many guys, even those with no connections to doping whatsoever. Put this into context, which cyclist receives more attention than any other cyclist, Lance. If there was no Lance, I can assure you these guys would be crucifying Contaodr, Schlecks etc just as much but we have listen to so much BS surrounding Lance that it annoys people no end and always ends up about him.

And as I never tire of pointing out, when another pro cyclist pulls an act like Lance did chasing down Simeoni, the vitriol will be hurled at that guy just as much. That little incident is why most on here reserve their disdain for Lance more than any other cyclist. People accuse us of being selective about this incident or we know about it because of the media profile of Lance. Not true, simply there has never been a similar incident played out in public, period.

The vast majority of 'haters' on here will discuss any subject concerning cycling, any rider, race, anything whilst the average Lance defender seems to comment only on Lance threads. Spot the difference.

I don't have a problem with people hating him as a public figure. They have good reasons for their perspective. but many of them are extreme and to me persistently and heavily biased in their posting because of their hate.

 

[progressor]

Misrepresenting what I've posted again. Atempting to diminish and demean the poster rather than deal with the post... again.

What, like this one you mean?

LOL. You didn't actually write that in all seriousness did you??
Some of you dudes have seriously lost all perspective

Seems you are quite accomplished, too.

Spelling mistakes?? C'mon man thats pathetic.

Nice swipe out of another thread.

I didn't tell you what you think, call you a fanboy, tell you didn't know you're history etc. There is a difference.

But you're not completely without a point. so apologies for how I worded that. Let me try again.

LOL. You didn't actually write that in all seriousness did you??
If so I think you've lost all perspective on anything related to armstrong. It seems to me a lot of people around here seem to have done that.

 

[pmcg76]

I don't have a problem with people hating him as a public figure. They have good reasons for their perspective. but many of them are extreme and to me persistently and heavily biased in their posting because of their hate.

I agree there are a few extremists here but dont underestimate the power of Lance. I would argue that your average hardcore fan was not very pleased to see Lance return to the sport but lots of people (magazines, bike manufacturers etc) who stood to make money by the fact that he interests the fringe dollar were only too happy to see his return.

He announced his return with a promise of transparency with the appointment of Don Catlin to provide independent testing.

Al ot of people felt it wouldnt last or was just PR, they were called conspiracy theorists.

When a lot of people suggested that Lance and Bruyneel would try to screw Contador at the Tour, they were called conspiracy theorists.

Lance declared that he wasnt taking a wage this year.

When people suggested he was collecting huge appearence fees instead, they were called conspiracy theorists.

People have been calling the doubters conspiracy theorists since the start of the forum yet with the benefit of hindsight, nearly all the conspiracy theorists proved to be pretty accurate. I know some ideas seem extreme but in cycling, never doubt the conspiracy theorists. They usually end up not far from the truth.

 

[Race Radio]

This whole thread is pretty much theories on conspiracy. Everyone who theorised on a conspiracy is therefore a conspiracy theorist. How many people who did that I wonder use the term'conspiracy theorist' as a term of derision and dismissal?
I wasn't staying completely on topic with that one.

Arbiter/BanProcycling/British Pro Cycling/Progressor.

 

[Race Radio]

I agree there are a few extremists here but dont underestimate the power of Lance. I would argue that your average hardcore fan was not very pleased to see Lance return to the sport but lots of people (magazines, bike manufacturers etc) who stood to make money by the fact that he interests the fringe dollar were only too happy to see his return.

He announced his return with a promise of transparency with the appointment of Don Catlin to provide independent testing.

Al ot of people felt it wouldnt last or was just PR, they were called conspiracy theorists.

When a lot of people suggested that Lance and Bruyneel would try to screw Contador at the Tour, they were called conspiracy theorists.

Lance declared that he wasnt taking a wage this year.

When people suggested he was collecting huge appearence fees instead, they were called conspiracy theorists.

People have been calling the doubters conspiracy theorists since the start of the forum yet with the benefit of hindsight, nearly all the conspiracy theorists proved to be pretty accurate. I know some ideas seem extreme but in cycling, never doubt the conspiracy theorists. They usually end up not far from the truth.

Of course the longest lasting conspiracy theory is everlasting "French Conspiracy" ......EPO in Armstrong's samples? French Conspiracy Armstrong hides from testers? French Conspiracy. Armstrong staff caught dumping bags of dope and syringes? French Conspiracy.

It is the universal excuse for anyone that questions the myth

 

[Race Radio]

This whole thread is pretty much theories on conspiracy. Everyone who theorised on a conspiracy is therefore a conspiracy theorist. How many people who did that I wonder use the term'conspiracy theorist' as a term of derision and dismissal?
I wasn't staying completely on topic with that one.

Nice try, but the report is not a theory.

It is a fact that Astana kept the testers waiting for 55 minutes while they had coffee. Both Astana and the UCI have admitted this. It is also fact that chaperone's were kept waiting for 45 minutes outside the bus after the TTT.

It is entertaining to see how the fanboys try minimize anyone that questions the myth.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I don't have a problem with people hating him as a public figure. They have good reasons for their perspective. but many of them are extreme and to me persistently and heavily biased in their posting because of their hate.

My viewpoint is that the "persistance" of the haters arises from the fact that Lance keeps doing the stuff that they hate and fanboys keep ignoring it or explaining it away with *** arguements.So it keeps coming up. But maybe that's just what I see.

 

[Ripper]

My viewpoint is that the "persistance" of the haters arises from the fact that Lance keeps doing the stuff that they hate and fanboys keep ignoring it or explaining it away with *** arguements.So it keeps coming up. But maybe that's just what I see.

I think you pretty much have the vibe.

I think the posters Progressor is talking about are wondering why other people cannot see what is some pretty obvious stuff. I mean there is some serious hipocrasy out there. Rasmussen is pretty much hated by many (going off of this and numerous other sites), even though he did not test positive. Meanwhile, Armstrong gets tagged for some old samples, is linked to some pretty harsh stuff, and people go out of their way to come up with their own conspiracies to explain it (the French are out to get him ... bad, bad French). It is hard to shut up when confronted with a completely stupid statement.

And one other thing (and this is not directed at you Hugh), this use of the word Haters is pretty silly. I mean, grouping people into sets like this is a classic way of trying not to address people as people. It is BS. I think the same for grouping people as fanboys, although at least it has a funnier ring to it (hater makes me think of Kanye West, which makes me think of retards, and then I want a drink )

 

[Epicycle]

It's really simple...the same guy has been running cycling for nearly 20 years. And while his abuses of power have to be more subtle nowadays he's still up to the same tricks he was when he let Brochard off the hook at the World Championships 12 years ago. If you curry favor with the boss you give yourself the chance to gain an advantage.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I think you pretty much have the vibe.

I think the posters Progressor is talking about are wondering why other people cannot see what is some pretty obvious stuff. I mean there is some serious hipocrasy out there. Rasmussen is pretty much hated by many (going off of this and numerous other sites), even though he did not test positive. Meanwhile, Armstrong gets tagged for some old samples, is linked to some pretty harsh stuff, and people go out of their way to come up with their own conspiracies to explain it (the French are out to get him ... bad, bad French). It is hard to shut up when confronted with a completely stupid statement.

And one other thing (and this is not directed at you Hugh), this use of the word Haters is pretty silly. I mean, grouping people into sets like this is a classic way of trying not to address people as people. It is BS. I think the same for grouping people as fanboys, although at least it has a funnier ring to it (hater makes me think of Kanye West, which makes me think of retards, and then I want a drink )

I used either word simply for expediency as it takes more words to describe either group in another way. Truly each group could be divided into infinite subsets, but everyone wants to be able to lump anyone on the "other side" into a convenient label. We do it and they do it, and it doesn't even matter which "we" I belong to when I say that.

 

[Ripper]

I used either word simply for expediency as it takes more words to describe either group in another way. Truly each group could be divided into infinite subsets, but everyone wants to be able to lump anyone on the "other side" into a convenient label. We do it and they do it, and it doesn't even matter which "we" I belong to when I say that.

I understand, and that is why I said it was not directed at you. I think I read too many posts lately that said "hater".

So I had to have a little rant

 

[rata de sentina]

I used either word simply for expediency as it takes more words to describe either group in another way. Truly each group could be divided into infinite subsets, but everyone wants to be able to lump anyone on the "other side" into a convenient label. We do it and they do it, and it doesn't even matter which "we" I belong to when I say that.

Well it's a pity that more posters don't accept that there is this spectrum of opinion that you allude to rather than opting for the intellectually lazy option. Unfortunately this very dissapointing thread has the wrong title and the inevitable polarisation has ensued. The childish debating tricks are pretty dissapointing.

As a general comment I'm a bit bemused by this UCI as the evil empire and AFLD as lily white knights attitude that is going on. This seems to be to be equally naive to the opposite viewpoint. From my perspective it is almost impossible to tease out exactly what is going on between the AFLD and the UCI over this issue given the amount of information available. Whenever you have two organisations doing the same job you are going to have issues, they could be real or they could be bluster. I would hazard a guess that there is an extremely small number of people on this planet who actually know what is going on here and none of them are posting on this forum. Could be a storm in a teacup or could be a titanic struggle between good and evil

Apologies to all for the intermission in the ranting hyperbole, please carry on.

 

[python]

?

was the complete afld report published anywhere? all ten pages?

 

[Hugh Januss]

Well it's a pity that more posters don't accept that there is this spectrum of opinion that you allude to rather than opting for the intellectually lazy option. Unfortunately this very dissapointing thread has the wrong title and the inevitable polarisation has ensued. The childish debating tricks are pretty dissapointing.

As a general comment I'm a bit bemused by this UCI as the evil empire and AFLD as lily white knights attitude that is going on. This seems to be to be equally naive to the opposite viewpoint. From my perspective it is almost impossible to tease out exactly what is going on between the AFLD and the UCI over this issue given the amount of information available. Whenever you have two organisations doing the same job you are going to have issues, they could be real or they could be bluster. I would hazard a guess that there is an extremely small number of people on this planet who actually know what is going on here and none of them are posting on this forum. Could be a storm in a teacup or could be a titanic struggle between good and evil

Apologies to all for the intermission in the ranting hyperbole, please carry on.

I have to believe that it is closer to the later than the former. That is I think the AFLD is trying to make cycling cleaner while the UCI has been caught already with their hands in the cookie jar so who knows how many others there have been.
Maybe it would be easier if we thought of the UCI in the same light as the MLB or NFL player organizations, that is essentially a rider organization trying to protect the riders from exploitation or loss of income or whatever. I realize this analogy might only work for US fans. I also realize that the UCI is by far the worst of the three when it comes to sticking up for the athletes, but then that is not their job, really.
I think we may be heading towards the biggest shit storm in the history of pro cycling and I can only hope it will come out stronger on the other side. Either way we'll still have bicycles to ride.

 

[Cobblestones]

Summarizing the entire thread, the first thing that i'm surprised is that "le monde" broke the article, instead of the old-nemesis-Lance-hating "l'equipe", which makes evident how some politics/sponsors behind close doors can find a truce when is required..
What wasn't mentioned in the French article was the co-relation between the Testing delays in key stages & the team's results, the suspicious "amicable" treatment between UCI delegation to the Bruyneel/LA's crew- which it was caught & red flagged by many reporters & mostly in depth, the disappearance of LA in the 2nd rest day which coincides exactly with the jump on his publicized blood values... but I guess it's just another "conspiracy theory"....

Very astute observations.
+1

 

[rata de sentina]

I have to believe that it is closer to the later than the former. That is I think the AFLD is trying to make cycling cleaner while the UCI has been caught already with their hands in the cookie jar so who knows how many others there have been.
Maybe it would be easier if we thought of the UCI in the same light as the MLB or NFL player organizations, that is essentially a rider organization trying to protect the riders from exploitation or loss of income or whatever. I realize this analogy might only work for US fans. I also realize that the UCI is by far the worst of the three when it comes to sticking up for the athletes, but then that is not their job, really.
I think we may be heading towards the biggest shit storm in the history of pro cycling and I can only hope it will come out stronger on the other side. Either way we'll still have bicycles to ride.

Well, maybe you're right but only time will tell. People talk about the UCI (and AFLD) as if they were monolithic organisations but they're not. Personally, I think that when considering them you also need to consider their origins and functions when interpreting their actions.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Spelling mistakes?? C'mon man thats pathetic.

Nice swipe out of another thread.
I didn't tell you what you think, call you a fanboy, tell you didn't know you're history etc. There is a difference.
But you're not completely without a point. so apologies for how I worded that. Let me try again.

It was a golfing analogy. So, who better than Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods to represent Armstrong and Contador?
As far as I'm aware, Woods hasn't retired, yet and is the current world number 1.

OK, there's an issue with age, but it's golf. Find me a better player than Nicklaus and I'll use him.
Equating Big Tex to Big Jack should be considred a compliment around here.

 

[RhodriM]

was the complete afld report published anywhere? all ten pages?

Anyone know?

 

[progressor]

Nice try, but the report is not a theory.

It is a fact that Astana kept the testers waiting for 55 minutes while they had coffee. Both Astana and the UCI have admitted this. It is also fact that chaperone's were kept waiting for 45 minutes outside the bus after the TTT.

It is entertaining to see how the fanboys try minimize anyone that questions the myth.

And many posts on the original report were theories of conspiracies. Which is my point. But like I said I wasn't really sticking to subject too well on that one, it ain't that relevant to the thread.

 

[progressor]

My viewpoint is that the "persistance" of the haters arises from the fact that Lance keeps doing the stuff that they hate and fanboys keep ignoring it or explaining it away with *** arguements.So it keeps coming up. But maybe that's just what I see.

Honestly, what I've seen is people getting slammed for not buying whole heartedly into the hate. Maybe the 'ignorant fanboy's' were here in the past, but I can't see many of them now. Combine that with what seems to be some pretty ridiculous and consistent slamming of armstrongs ability as a cyclist by so many 'haters' and it all seems to get too warped for reasonable discussion on anything that gets near to relating to him. Which is a lot of subject matter.

 

[progressor]

It was a golfing analogy. So, who better than Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods to represent Armstrong and Contador?
As far as I'm aware, Woods hasn't retired, yet and is the current world number 1.

OK, there's an issue with age, but it's golf. Find me a better player than Nicklaus and I'll use him.
Equating Big Tex to Big Jack should be considered a compliment around here.

I don't think it's a great analogy, because the things that LA achieved in cycling and the influence he has had on it's profile are similar to woods. Although he's later in his career than woods, he's nowhere near the stage nicklaus is at.
Contador isn't even close to a woods or armstrong within the sport yet - and may never be, outside of it he is virtually nothing.

 

[High Cotton]

It was a golfing analogy. So, who better than Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods to represent Armstrong and Contador?
As far as I'm aware, Woods hasn't retired, yet and is the current world number 1.

OK, there's an issue with age, but it's golf. Find me a better player than Nicklaus and I'll use him.
Equating Big Tex to Big Jack should be considred a compliment around here.

I know where you're trying to go, but that's a terrible analogy, and while it may be considered a compliment for the fans of Lance around here, it is extremely disrespectful to the fans of the Golden Bear.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I know where you're trying to go, but that's a terrible analogy, and while it may be considered a compliment for the fans of Lance around here, it is extremely disrespectful to the fans of the Golden Bear.

Well, I think so, too.
Lance fans: One man, one sport, nothing else counts.
JN is an unsurpassed legend in the golfing world.

Unfortunately for me, the golfing analogy was from a pro Tex poster, referring to Lance as Tiger Woods.
In the average fanboy's eyes, Contador is more akin to Tiger Lily.
4 GT wins in 2 years? Ordinary, in their eyes.
Lance finishes 3rd in one? Extraordinary!

Just read progessor's tripe, one post up.
If they have no respect for Contador, what chance poor Jack?

 

[RTMcFadden]

effectively makes the test redundant[/B].

Perhaps you mean "renders the results invalid."

 

[Big Doopie]

My viewpoint is that the "persistance" of the haters arises from the fact that Lance keeps doing the stuff that they hate and fanboys keep ignoring it or explaining it away with *** arguements.So it keeps coming up. But maybe that's just what I see.

yes. uh-huh. agreed.

i wanted to say just "yes" but it wouldn't let me.

i take it brevity is not condoned here.