pedaling squares said:Oh I don't know about that... FloJo made massive improvements at age 29 and she never tested positive!
Yeah true, same as Rijs never tested positive and Armstrongs test was manipulated by the french mafia
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
pedaling squares said:Oh I don't know about that... FloJo made massive improvements at age 29 and she never tested positive!
BanProCycling said:It would be nice if forums members were a bit more consistent on this. Blackcat and others have thrown more insults at me than I have at them. You don't see me whining though.
no, cycling in the last two decades has taught being sceptical is the sound and rational approach, not the conspiracy. The podiums of the GTs are a cavalcade of who's who of the sport. There is no one who has not been touched.BanProCycling said:Whose propaganda would that be? I've already stated that Armstrong likely doped in his early years - he wouldn't like me saying this.
You engage in propaganda by putting the worst possible spin on everything. Propaganda is all in the eye of the beholder.
I think you also confuse cynicism with intelligence - the two are not necessarily connected. Anyone can just poo poo everything and always suspect the worst - that's easy. It's not clever.
BanProCycling said:Whose propaganda would that be? I've already stated that Armstrong likely doped in his early years - he wouldn't like me saying this.
You engage in propaganda by putting the worst possible spin on everything. Propaganda is all in the eye of the beholder.
I think you also confuse cynicism with intelligence - the two are not necessarily connected. Anyone can just poo poo everything and always suspect the worst - that's easy. It's not clever.
BanProCycling said:People misunderstood the point I was making. She did too, so I left it.
BanProCycling said:People misunderstood the point I was making. She did too, so I left it.
BanProCycling said:No. This is point I was trying to make. Many people say Armstrong's victories were a myth and a con, so i was trying to get Betsy to counter this point. Her husband took EPO and rode along side Armstrong but was not viewed as a stronger rider than Armstrong, so obviously the EPO doesn't explain Armstrong's victories. That was the issue. I was not saying "you get lance just because your husband was a drugs cheat who couldn't beat him". That had nothing to do with it. And if she could admit Armstrong deserved to win, coming from someone who has fallen out with Armstrong, that would be a powerful rebute of the critics. 'Even Betsy Andreu admits Armstrong's success was not a "myth", etc' My point was not to dismiss her by saying she was bitter; my point was to highlight how EVEN someone who is naturally bitter due to the court case dispute could still validate Armstrong's achievements, thus putting the trolls in a tight spot. Do you see?
However, reading some of her other posts, I fear she has gotten too far sucked into this internet world and would probably join those who use the m word, so I needn't have bothered.
Lastly, though people misunderstood the motivation for why I brought up Frankies EPO use, I don't see what is so offensive about that. If she is going to be held up as an anti doping icon on message boards like this, and people here are always pointing the finger, it would be hypocritical to think this is out of bounds. Are you suddenly going to forgive other riders who wait until they are safely retired to admit they were doping? I doubt it.
BanProCycling said:"www.whatreallyhappened.com"
Anyone else see a pattern here?
BanProCycling said:.....
Lastly, though people misunderstood the motivation for why I brought up Frankies EPO use, I don't see what is so offensive about that. If she is going to be held up as an anti doping icon on message boards like this, and people here are always pointing the finger, it would be hypocritical to think this is out of bounds. Are you suddenly going to forgive other riders who wait until they are safely retired to admit they were doping? I doubt it.
BanProCycling said:"www.whatreallyhappened.com"
Anyone else see a pattern here?
It's not so much that she told the truth, but that she told the truth when she didn't want to, had no good reason to, and in fact had a whole lot of really good reasons for why she should just have said "I can't remember".Dr. Maserati said:Firstly - I do not hold Betsy in such high esteem because she is anti-doping, it is because she told the truth.
I don't know what Betsys stance on doping is, except that in her radio interview she says she was very angry when she suspected her husband was on EPO - and also that they argued when she heard Lance confess to taking PED's.
You seem to come back to the same point in your comments. While I acknowledge Lance is an extraordinary athlete who if it wasn't for cancer would have become a great Classics rider - but there is no way he was ever going to get to the top step in a GT without a very good 'medical programme'.
BanProCycling said:No. This is point I was trying to make. Many people say Armstrong's victories were a myth and a con, so i was trying to get Betsy to counter this point. Her husband took EPO and rode along side Armstrong but was not viewed as a stronger rider than Armstrong, so obviously the EPO doesn't explain Armstrong's victories. That was the issue. I was not saying "you go after lance just because your husband was a drugs cheat who couldn't beat him". That had nothing to do with it. And if she could admit Armstrong deserved to win, coming from someone who has fallen out with Armstrong, that would be a powerful rebute of the critics. 'Even Betsy Andreu admits Armstrong's success was not a "myth", etc' My point was not to dismiss her by saying she was bitter; my point was to highlight how EVEN someone who is naturally bitter due to the court case dispute could still validate Armstrong's achievements, thus putting the trolls in a tight spot. Do you see?
However, reading some of her other posts, I fear she has gotten too far sucked into this internet world and would probably join those who use the m word, so I needn't have bothered.
Lastly, though people misunderstood the motivation for why I brought up Frankies EPO use, I don't see what is so offensive about that. If she is going to be held up as an anti doping icon on message boards like this, and people here are always pointing the finger, it would be hypocritical to think this is out of bounds. Are you suddenly going to forgive other riders who wait until they are safely retired to admit they were doping? I doubt it.
Frankie had two top 10 results in Roubaix clean. I think the last clean winner in the Queen of the Classics was Vanderaerden. This puts Frankie's two top ten results in context. He only got on the gear late in his career in 1999, then Betsy castrated him with a blunt pocket knife.Ozzie2 said:Sort of
There is a big difference between admitting LA was a better rider than her husband- I am sure she would accept that.
But deserving? Hmm. I think if her husband WERE lance Armstrong would she still say he was deserving? I doubt she could.
Why do you assume that she was naturally bitter? Many people hold no resentment or enmity, something I try to do. I can’t say she doesn’t- I don’t know her. But I do not see that her case implies she would be bitter. Could she not be disappointed, sad?
But who can say anyone in a murky sport “deserves” to win. Worked hard yes, struggled yes, fastest rider probably, best rider possibly, deserved? Only god knows that one
Also…which trolls put in a tight spot?
You were the one saying watch out Betsy they’re all trying an agenda on you, and here you say “I was trying to get her to say”
Look, sorry, I don’t find your posts convincing in sincerity. I really enjoy you being here even though I find your style distasteful, I think you offer good dialogue as a wicked protagonist.
The whatreallyhappened dig is a classic example of where you do not present yourself in the best light. Are you mocking me, saying this voids my comments, implying something? It just isn’t necessary. You would possibly have more feedback and positive dialogue if you avoided the hit’n’run approach with things like that.
blackcat said:Frankie had two top 10 results in Roubaix clean. I think the last clean winner in the Queen of the Classics was Vanderaerden. This puts Frankie's two top ten results in context. He only got on the gear late in his career in 1999, then Betsy castrated him with a blunt pocket knife.
BanProCycling said:No. This is point I was trying to make. Many people say Armstrong's victories were a myth and a con, so i was trying to get Betsy to counter this point. Her husband took EPO and rode along side Armstrong but was not viewed as a stronger rider than Armstrong, so obviously the EPO doesn't explain Armstrong's victories. That was the issue. I was not saying "you go after lance just because your husband was a drugs cheat who couldn't beat him". That had nothing to do with it. And if she could admit Armstrong deserved to win, coming from someone who has fallen out with Armstrong, that would be a powerful rebute of the critics. 'Even Betsy Andreu admits Armstrong's success was not a "myth", etc' My point was not to dismiss her by saying she was bitter; my point was to highlight how EVEN someone who is naturally bitter due to the court case dispute could still validate Armstrong's achievements, thus putting the trolls in a tight spot. Do you see?
However, reading some of her other posts, I fear she has gotten too far sucked into this internet world and would probably join those who use the m word, so I needn't have bothered.
No Chain said:Love cycling. Good one though.
Hugh Januss said:It's not so much that she told the truth, but that she told the truth when she didn't want to, had no good reason to, and in fact had a whole lot of really good reasons for why she should just have said "I can't remember".
There are not a lot of people anymore who have a real problem with telling "little lies" and that is a lot of what is wrong with the world today.
BanProCycling said:No. This is point I was trying to make. Many people say Armstrong's victories were a myth and a con, so i was trying to get Betsy to counter this point. Her husband took EPO and rode along side Armstrong but was not viewed as a stronger rider than Armstrong, so obviously the EPO doesn't explain Armstrong's victories. That was the issue. I was not saying "you go after lance just because your husband was a drugs cheat who couldn't beat him". That had nothing to do with it. And if she could admit Armstrong deserved to win, coming from someone who has fallen out with Armstrong, that would be a powerful rebute of the critics. 'Even Betsy Andreu admits Armstrong's success was not a "myth", etc' My point was not to dismiss her by saying she was bitter; my point was to highlight how EVEN someone who is naturally bitter due to the court case dispute could still validate Armstrong's achievements, thus putting the trolls in a tight spot. Do you see?
However, reading some of her other posts, I fear she has gotten too far sucked into this internet world and would probably join those who use the m word, so I needn't have bothered.
Lastly, though people misunderstood the motivation for why I brought up Frankies EPO use, I don't see what is so offensive about that. If she is going to be held up as an anti doping icon on message boards like this, and people here are always pointing the finger, it would be hypocritical to think this is out of bounds. Are you suddenly going to forgive other riders who wait until they are safely retired to admit they were doping? I doubt it.