Cadel Evans is a Clean Champion

[Benotti69]

It is?

10char

Merckx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_Merckx#Doping

Coppi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fausto_Coppi#Drugs

Hinault

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Callac-violations/

Anquetil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Anquetil#Doping

Kelly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Kelly_(cyclist)#Doping


Nothing to see here bigMac, 'ey

If Robbie believes those riders did not dope than he is trolling the clinic.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

You are talking utter rubbish.

Merckx? doped. Pantani? Doped. Ullrich? Doped. Contador? Doped. Cipollini? Doped. Zabel? Doped. Museeuw? Doped. Coppi? Doped (wasn't against the rules then). Anquetil? Doped.

Answer this - why did they dope? Especially Merckx and Ulrich. Why did Merckx need to dope if he was so great and so in shape?

Ulrich doped because he was usually out of shape and form from the off season. He got lazy, because he could not get himself into form to compete with LA on dope. So he doped.

Pantini doped because he didn't have the goods except maybe on climbs. The media make him out to be this romantic character who was hard done by. He was a lazy cheater, no more, no less. He got what he deserved when stripped of his titles as did Armstrong.

Contador's only "doping" other than all the Clinic speculation was 50 picograms of clen on July 21, 2010, that had NO performance enhancing effect on his performance in the 2010 TDF. His tests from the beginning of that tour showed no traces of clen up to and including July 20, 2010.

The banality of your simplistic comment is that it fails to take into account context. The metaphor is this. A kills B therefore "A is a killer." But you overlook he did it in self defence, so he is not a killer even though he killed B. But the simple headline is A is a killer without context. That is your argument in a nutshell.

Just simplistically saying something is rubbish, without explaining why means nothing. It is being - well - lazy.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

The cat's boiler room.

 

[King Boonen]

Answer this - why did they dope? Especially Merckx and Ulrich. Why did Merckx need to dope if he was so great and so in shape?

Ulrich doped because he was usually out of shape and form from the off season. He got lazy, because he could not get himself into form to compete with LA on dope. So he doped.

Contador's only "doping" other than all the Clinic speculation was 50 picograms of clen on July 21, 2010, that had NO performance enhancing effect on his performance and his tests from the beginning of that tour showed no traces of clen up to and including July 21, 2010.

The banality of your simplistic comment is that it fails to take into account context.

Why did they dope? Ask them, only they know. Most successful sports stars are egotistical nightmares so it is likely they dope to try and be the greatest ever. Lemond claims Ullrich was the best cyclist of his generation. Are you saying you know better than he does?

But why did you only pick those two? Are you saying all of those riders were lazy and rubbish without dope? Or are you going to admit your comment was completely wrong?

Contadors doping positive was most likely caused by clenbuterol in a blood bag.

Your naivety pretty much makes this discussion worthless, as it is clear you are looking for an answer to already confirm your bias.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Merckx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_Merckx#Doping

Coppi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fausto_Coppi#Drugs

Hinault

http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Callac-violations/

Anquetil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Anquetil#Doping

Kelly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Kelly_(cyclist)#Doping


Nothing to see here bigMac, 'ey

If Robbie believes those riders did not dope than he is trolling the clinic.

Where anywhere did I say these riders did not dope? Don't mouth off unless you have read my posts. It is being - lazy.

 

[King Boonen]

Err... Who's deleted my posts?

 

[Netserk]

Where anywhere did I say these riders did not dope? Don't mouth off unless you have read my posts. It is being - lazy.

How about you stop being lazy, and actually read who B69 responded to.

 

[King Boonen]

How about you stop being lazy, and actually read who B69 responded to.

He can't, someone is deleting posts.

 

[Netserk]

He can't, someone is deleting posts.

He names him in the quote...

 

[roundabout]

Boo, bad mod, bad mod. That was teh interwebz winning post about Ullrich being too lazy to get himself into shape to compete with Armstrong clean

 

[King Boonen]

He names him in the quote...

Didn't see that.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

It's common knowledge those five riders doped...

Its common knowledge Jesus turned water into wine. LOL

 

[Benotti69]

Where anywhere did I say these riders did not dope? Don't mouth off unless you have read my posts. It is being - lazy.

How about confirming whether you believe most riders dope?

How about confirming whether you believe those 5 riders dopeD?

How about confirming whether you believe most riders dope now even though the testing is a joke?

Dont be lazy and answer the questions

 

[Benotti69]

Its common knowledge Jesus turned water into wine. LOL

A comment like that is trolling.

It is hearsay.

 

[stutue]

LOL People acquire knowledge and understanding through their education, experience in life and the credible literature they read. When people are transparent about these things, then what they say either gives them credibility or not. The basis for their opinions can be assessed. In your case your anonymity as like many posters in the Clinic only assures you should not be treated seriously. Unlike you I am upfront about who I am so anyone can assess my cred and say you are full of $hit or not.

In your case you are this absent enigma with a gazillion posts which in your mind somehow thinks that gives you credibility about what you say. By all means remain anonymous, I don't care. Just don't expect reasonable people to give any credit to what you say.

Ah come off it. Give the Hitch a break, Robbie.

I don't agree with everything he says, and he sometimes relies on very shaky premises, but I have seen lots of cogent arguments from him.

He also does his homework, and has a very good knowledge of recent racing history. I don't think he has any racing background which is a pity but on the whole I'd say he's a pretty good quality poster. Its clear he thinks before he speaks.

 

[BigMac]

A comment like that is trolling.

It is hearsay.

Lul wut?


....

 

[King Boonen]

Lul wut?


....

Sorry, it's blatant trolling. Someone has responded with a list of some of the greatest cyclist ever who are known dopers (you can even look it up on wikipedia) to counter his point that only inferior, lazy cyclists dope, and he makes a flippant comment designed to insult the poster.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Ah come off it. Give the Hitch a break, Robbie.

I don't agree with everything he says, and he sometimes relies on very shaky premises, but I have seen lots of cogent arguments from him.

He also does his homework, and has a very good knowledge of recent racing history. I don't think he has any racing background which is a pity but on the whole I'd say he's a pretty good quality poster. Its clear he thinks before he speaks.

You are quite the fanboy! Let's hear your response to my comment #969?

 

[BigMac]

Sorry, it's blatant trolling. Someone has responded with a list of some of the greatest cyclist ever who are known dopers (you can even look it up on wikipedia) to counter his point that only inferior, lazy cyclists dope, and he makes a flippant comment designed to insult the poster.

If anything, he made fun of the POST, not the poster.

 

[King Boonen]

If anything, he made fun of the POST, not the poster.

I didn't say he made fun of the poster, I said a flippant reply is used to insult the poster.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/flippant

 

[RobbieCanuck]

A comment like that is trolling.

It is hearsay.

So is the comment Contador or Evans or whoever you claim is doping. Everything you say about every one of your favorite dopers in here is hearsay, other than those who have admitted doping.

And by your definition is trolling. Go look at my argument in post #969 that started this string of absurd comments by you and others. Debate me on that and not your phoney sense of indignation.

 

[BigMac]

I didn't say he made fun of the poster, I said a flippant reply is used to insult the poster.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/flippant

Okay, still I don't see how that was trolling. Can we not just see it as a joke?

Anyway, I'm going off topic.

 

[Benotti69]

So is the comment Contador or Evans or whoever you claim is doping. Everything you say about every one of your favorite dopers in here is hearsay, other than those who have admitted doping.

sorry Roberto, i dont have favourite dopers.

And by your definition is trolling. Go look at my argument in post #969 that started this string of absurd comments by you and others. Debate me on that and not your phoney sense of indignation.

I asked you some questions, you have yet to answer.

 

[The Hitch]

In your case you are this absent enigma with a gazillion posts which in your mind somehow thinks that gives you credibility about what you say.

How can you know what goes on in my mind?

 

[RobbieCanuck]

How can you know what goes on in my mind?

By what you say in your posts and how you present your arguments.

Look I am sorry if I have offended you. I am planning to get off this forum for awhile. The negativity, cynicism, speculation and BS just wears me out. There is literally no constructive discussion about doping. Just sneering, mockery and insults. Have fun.