Armstrong Lies

[Race Radio]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG4odJP-Zuw


I beg to differ with the poster refering to Lance as a liar. Lance tells it like it is in the you tube interview.

Look at the cycling mags from 95 on. Almost all the big name cyclists have either been suspect or have received 2yr. or lifetime bans.


Pro baseball and football overlook the drugging.

What did Manny Rodriguez get; 3 month suspension? The dodger fans will forget that in 6 months.

For the newbies: Cycling a rich tradition of doping!

I see. Because other sports dope, and cycling has doped in the past, then it is OK.

 

[Escarabajo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG4odJP-Zuw


I beg to differ with the poster refering to Lance as a liar. Lance tells it like it is in the you tube interview.

Look at the cycling mags from 95 on. Almost all the big name cyclists have either been suspect or have received 2yr. or lifetime bans.

I love the way Armstrong goes around in circles every time he is asked about doping. That should tell you something from a phycological point of view.

Pro baseball and football overlook the drugging.

What did Manny Rodriguez get; 3 month suspension? The dodger fans will forget that in 6 months.

For the newbies: Cycling a rich tradition of doping!

So what's your point? That's their problem. Just because they suck at testing for doping I should be happy with doping in cycling?

 

[flicker]

rr get a grip

I ausume you have raced or ridden fast in packs. Perhaps you have ridden a stage race over 3 days.

In case you have not the difference between riding 24 MPH and 29MPH is exponentially harder. The air drag factor concentration level wattage etc.

The only way cycling is going to completely clean up is to make stage races shorter, less hilly more rest days etc. Classic races shorter. Slower times on the velodrome.

Furthermore add lifetime bans first offense compounded by felony criminal convictions and jail time.

If you rr are serious about ending the rich tradition of doping in cycling those measures or a compromise of those measures need to be implemented.

Of course rr you realize that cycling and horse racing invented doping.

 

[Polish]

Even though the original post was TROLLISH and submitted by a SOCKPUPPET, I will add another lie. (Sorry if someone else already mentioned it or if it was deleted by a mod earlier):

"EPO transformed Lance into a 7-Time TdF winner"

That's a whopper!

 

[Awolpe]

he would work for Contador if he proved the strongest

thats unfair he lied but contador wasnt exactly innocent

 

[Escarabajo]

... I will add another lie...:

"EPO transformed Lance into a 7-Time TdF winner"

That's a whopper!

You are probably right. It was the EPO+Blood Transfusions+HGH+Cortisone shots+ etc.

That's probably more complete.

 

[Race Radio]

Even though the original post was TROLLISH and submitted by a SOCKPUPPET, I will add another lie. (Sorry if someone else already mentioned it or if it was deleted by a mod earlier):

"EPO transformed Lance into a 7-Time TdF winner"

That's a whopper!

How did he do it? High cadence and the great coaching guidance of Chris Carmichel?

EPO, HGH, Testoterone, and Dr. Ferrari

 

[Bronstein]

I ausume you have raced or ridden fast in packs. Perhaps you have ridden a stage race over 3 days.

In case you have not the difference between riding 24 MPH and 29MPH is exponentially harder. The air drag factor concentration level wattage etc.

The only way cycling is going to completely clean up is to make stage races shorter, less hilly more rest days etc. Classic races shorter. Slower times on the velodrome.

Furthermore add lifetime bans first offense compounded by felony criminal convictions and jail time.

If you rr are serious about ending the rich tradition of doping in cycling those measures or a compromise of those measures need to be implemented.

Of course rr you realize that cycling and horse racing invented doping.

I think you're missing the point. Professional cyclists dope because it is in their self interest to do so. Doping enhances performance, which in turn increases their chances of success. More success equals greater career security and possibly more money.

As long as there is substantial money to be made from the sport, it wouldn't matter how long or difficult races are. Look at athletics for example. I don't think many people would consider the 100m and 200m sprint events to be particularly gruelling. This clearly hasn't deterred many athletes from doping.

 

[Race Radio]

I ausume you have raced or ridden fast in packs. Perhaps you have ridden a stage race over 3 days.

In case you have not the difference between riding 24 MPH and 29MPH is exponentially harder. The air drag factor concentration level wattage etc.

The only way cycling is going to completely clean up is to make stage races shorter, less hilly more rest days etc. Classic races shorter. Slower times on the velodrome.

Furthermore add lifetime bans first offense compounded by felony criminal convictions and jail time.

If you rr are serious about ending the rich tradition of doping in cycling those measures or a compromise of those measures need to be implemented.

Of course rr you realize that cycling and horse racing invented doping.

Get a grip?

You do realize that there will be doping regardless of the length of the race. Ben Johnson doped to win the 100 meters, Armstrong doped to win the Tour.

I do not believe in lifetime bans. To make a real change in the sport the culture of doping has to be addressed. The DS's that enable it need to be held accountable. Some fans need to stop pretending that it does not exist and that it did not distort the sport.

 

[flicker]

Get a grip?

Yeah, yeah. If Armstrong doped, which I do not believe he has in Tours 2ooo-2005 most of the other riders of his caliber whom Ballsolo raced with were also doped, therefore it was fair between them.

Obviously Ballsolos domestiques were doped and as they dragged Ballsolos' skinny **** all over France that was unfair, for sure, that was fraud.

My question is, in the Giro,Tour,Vuelta as run at present, can one be truly competitive without doping?

 

[Ripper]

Get a grip?

You do realize that there will be doping regardless of the length of the race. Ben Johnson doped to win the 100 meters, Armstrong doped to win the Tour.

I do not believe in lifetime bans. To make a real change in the sport the culture of doping has to be addressed. The DS's that enable it need to be held accountable. Some fans need to stop pretending that it does not exist and that it did not distort the sport.

Someone else (sorry, I forget who) suggested instead of getting longer bans, the bans should be made shorter but should be better enforced. I think this might be a paradoxical solution worth investigating. Currently, people become too big to fail, and they will fight with all their finances and resources. 3 week or 3 month bans would be less costly to pursue, but would still likely have a strong impact if they re-occurred.

There are no doubt weaknesses to this idea, but what are others thoughts on this?

 

[Ripper]

most of the other riders of his caliber whom Ballsolo raced with were also doped, therefore it was fair between them.

This is an incorrect assumption. It is like saying riding all 100 mile rides are the same ... doping is a science and there are a few docs who have perfected it. Annnnd, these docs have exclusive arrangements with riders, so as someone does gain a competitive advantage.

 

[Escarabajo]

My question is, in the Giro,Tour,Vuelta as run at present, can one be truly competitive without doping?

You just said it. Are you contradicting yourself?

Yeah, yeah. If Armstrong doped, which I do not believe he has in Tours 2ooo-2005 most of the other riders of his caliber whom Ballsolo raced with were also doped, therefore it was fair between them.

 

[Race Radio]

This is an incorrect assumption. It is like saying riding all 100 mile rides are the same ... doping is a science and there are a few docs who have perfected it. Annnnd, these docs have exclusive arrangements with riders, so as someone does gain a competitive advantage.

True.

Even more important is that each human responds differently to pharmaceuticals. This has been proven over and over in multiple clinical trials. Every trial has responders, non-responders, and super responders, why would doping be any different?

The "They were all doping" Level playing field does not exist. When you have oxygen vector drugs were the improvements are so extreme this is even more evident.

 

[flicker]

thats what I'm talkin about,Willis

there are a few docs who have perfected it. Annnnd, these docs have exclusive arrangements with riders, so as someone does gain a competitive advantage.

To ride an insane distance like the tour, the cyclists dope.

Some choose doctors to help them and get by controls with the enhancements and negative doping tests and hopefully no long term or short term(like dying) side effects.

Others like Pantani and Frank Vandrbrouke doped themselves, it seems even Tyler and Zirbel and were caught.

 

[Hugh Januss]

You just said it. Are you contradicting yourself?

No, you don't understand, Lance is different, he's special.

 

[Ripper]

there are a few docs who have perfected it. Annnnd, these docs have exclusive arrangements with riders, so as someone does gain a competitive advantage.

To ride an insane distance like the tour, the cyclists dope.

Some choose doctors to help them and get by controls with the enhancements and negative doping tests and hopefully no long term or short term(like dying) side effects.

Others like Pantani and Frank Vandrbrouke doped themselves, it seems even Tyler and Zirbel and were caught.

OK, so you agree that some riders, like Pharmstrong, chose particular docs to work with and dope and get by testers while maximizing their results. Meanwhile others were not able to access this expertise, which sounds like Pharmstrong had exclusive access to the best doping and cheating methods around.

Hmmmmm

 

[Race Radio]

there are a few docs who have perfected it. Annnnd, these docs have exclusive arrangements with riders, so as someone does gain a competitive advantage.

To ride an insane distance like the tour, the cyclists dope.

Some choose doctors to help them and get by controls with the enhancements and negative doping tests and hopefully no long term or short term(like dying) side effects.

Others like Pantani and Frank Vandrbrouke doped themselves, it seems even Tyler and Zirbel and were caught.

Pantani was a Ferrari client. Tyler worked with Fuentes and Checcini.

Ferrari, Checcini, Conconi, et al got there start in the doping world by preparing a rider, Moser, for an hour long race. Shorting the race will do nothing.

 

[flicker]

thats what I'm talkin about,Willis

deleted by mod at flicker's request

 

[Cozy Beehive]

Armstrong's 2009 earning

I will not take payment for riding, then taking $1,000,000 for the TDU and $2,000,000 for the Giro.

Told Primier Rann's office that the $1,000,000 was all going to LAF...when none of it was.

Can someone confirm this? Is there a link for these figures. Just curious how you knew this.

 

[Race Radio]

Can someone confirm this? Is there a link for these figures. Just curious how you knew this.

Initially Premier Rann Press person told the media that the money was all going to the Livestrong foundation.

South Australia Premier Mike Rann refused to discuss any negotiations, and other than saying that any money paid “will go to his charity,” Rann’s spokesman, Lachlan Parker, declined to discuss the matter further with reporters.

This made a few people angry and it was leaked that it was all going to Lance.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/12/lance-armstrong-3-million-and-the-silence-of-the-rann/

After a week a dodging the question Armstrong admitted that he was getting paid.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/19/sports/othersports/19armstrong.html?_r=1&source=cmailer

he was not donating the fee to his foundation but treating it as income, the same way he has his other speaking and appearance fees since retirement.

As for the Giro. Tuttosport reported that Armstrong was getting paid. 2 million EUROS to race the Giro. Tuttosport is La Gazzetta/RCS (Organizer of the Giro) main competition and it appears they have a mole at RCS. 10 days prior to the 2009 Giro course was announce Tuttosport scoped La Gazzetta by putting a detailed map of the Giro course, with start/finish towns, dates, and all the climbs on the front page of it's weekend edition.

Armstrong confirmed that he was getting paid but would not say how much.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...fident-of-finding-new-sponsor-for-astana.html

 

[Cozy Beehive]

Armstrong confirmed that he was getting paid but would not say how much.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...fident-of-finding-new-sponsor-for-astana.html

Thanks Race Radio. What a pity. I remember reading an article similar to Crickey's (I think it was Australian) where comments were of people just complaining at the kind of secret money he was commanding to just appear and say 'cancer'. I take it that Australians don't generally accept the kind of BS that is seen across the pond here. Well, so that was a myth and myth busted. He was making money the whole time.

 

[Polish]

I take it that Australians don't generally accept the kind of BS that is seen across the pond here. Well, so that was a myth and myth busted. He was making money the whole time.

Cozy, one million USD to Lance is not the same as one million bucks to you or me lol. He is on a WHOLE different level.

Lance is a big business with many employees and expenses. It cost money to publish blood values btw. He has coaches, pr people, a bike shop, accountants/tax peolple, etc etc etc. One million bucks gets sucked up pretty fast.

BTW, do you have a link to back up the myth that Lance said the appearance fee was going to charity? And if he did say that and then changed his mind - big deal, we all know Lance is a ****

 

[Race Radio]

Cozy, one million USD to Lance is not the same as one million bucks to you or me lol. He is on a WHOLE different level.

Lance is a big business with many employees and expenses. It cost money to publish blood values btw. He has coaches, pr people, a bike shop, accountants/tax peolple, etc etc etc. One million bucks gets sucked up pretty fast.

BTW, do you have a link to back up the myth that Lance said the appearance fee was going to charity? And if he did say that and then changed his mind - big deal, we all know Lance is a ****

I gave the link with the statement from Rann's office that it was going to charity.

When Armstrong announced his return he made a big show about how he was riding for free, how it was all about cancer, how he had enough money. Millions in race start fees, crap beer endorsements, spank books for the groupies, and Radioschack $$$ show that the return was about ca$h, for Lance.

Gotta pay for that jet fuel.

 

[Polish]

I gave the link with the statement from Rann's office that it was going to charity

Thanks for proving my point.

It was not another "Armstrong Lie".

Lance never said the TdU appearance fee was going to go charity.