Doping inspector backs Armstrong

[Anonymous]

WOW, lucky for me I'm the only one who needs to believe it.

Then why did you bother telling us? Did you need to convince yourself by posting?

 

[Mellow Velo]

Why is everyone suddenly discussing Lance's height?

Because his career is a tall tale?

 

[Rupert]

Height???

Why is everyone suddenly discussing Lance's height?

Good point. Here's where it came up:

One issue I had with the Ashenden article is the claim that LA is 5'5" maybe 5'6". ...

Not sure it's relevant to anything at all, it was only peripherally mentioned in the Ashenden article, by the interviewer. The only posible relevance I could see would be that height affected the perception of his weight..../ debated weight change. I think this line of discussion is what we would call a "rathole." Weight is important in a couple of different contexts but why height???

 

[CentralCaliBike]

Why is everyone suddenly discussing Lance's height?

Because the article that was posted earlier in this thread made the claim he is 5'5" or 5'6" and 175 plus pounds. The writer was using this claim, based on statements from LA's teammates, to indicate it was another falsehood promoted by LA. I just took issue with the claim and wondered how accurate the rest of the article might be with this claim as an example.

 

[Rupert]

Weight

Because the article that was posted earlier in this thread made the claim he is 5'5" or 5'6" and 175 plus pounds. The writer was using this claim, based on statements from LA's teammates, to indicate it was another falsehood promoted by LA. I just took issue with the claim and wondered how accurate the rest of the article might be with this claim as an example.

I must say the Ashenden analysis of Armstrongs weight seems to be more speculative than based on any hard data... Not that Coyle's is any more definitive. If there is hard data anywhere it is buried somewhere (medical records?). All this goes with the uncertainties (based on lack of real data) required to accurately compute weight/power output numbers, which has been discussed in great length on other threads. The formulas are accurate but the output is only as good as the data and assumptions that are input... GIGO.

 

[Rupert]

Jurisdiction

Basso was suspended because his blood was found in a fridge in Madrid. That blood bag was transfered from the GC, to the Spanish Judiciary, to the Italian Judiciary, to CONI. Armstrong's samples were stored correctly in a WADA accredited lab and tested by the same lab that helped invent the test for EPO and CERA.
I think we can all agree that Armstrong is allowed a higher level of evidence and chain of custody then Basso

I think this post points out the problems with enforcement, aggravated by the weird tangle of jurisdictions involved. Between the UCI, WADA, and all the different national authorities, the whole thing is a mess. The bungling of Puerto, the Valverde situation, etc all illustrate this pretty well. The current dispute betwen UCI and the French is just another example. It's a wonder anything works at all given the tangled enforcement structure(s). Very little consistency anywhere.

 

[BikeCentric]

I think this post points out the problems with enforcement, aggravated by the weird tangle of jurisdictions involved. Between the UCI, WADA, and all the different national authorities, the whole thing is a mess. The bungling of Puerto, the Valverde situation, etc all illustrate this pretty well. The current dispute betwen UCI and the French is just another example. It's a wonder anything works at all given the tangled enforcement structure(s). Very little consistency anywhere.

Exactly. Which is why Pro Cycling continues to be a nutty circus of insanity. Compounded by the fact that the teams are not franchises but instead a constant flux of sponsor-based start-ups that come and go every year.

 

[RTMcFadden]

Mr. Ashenden did a far better job of addressing these questions in his interview. You should read it some time as it covers most of the questions you brought up
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden
Make sure you also read the follow up questions and comments.

OK, I read it. Didn't find anything he said compelling. I'll explain in detail tomorrow. As my wife is home, and no offence, but I'd rather spend my time with her.

 

[Anonymous]

OK, I read it. Didn't find anything he said compelling. I'll explain in detail tomorrow. As my wife is home, and no offence, but I'd rather spend my time with her.

Wow. Just wow.

There is no further basis to debate with you.

 

[scribe]

Wow. Just wow.

There is no further basis to debate with you.

I'll need evidence on what his wife looks like before agreeing with you.

 

[progressor]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

 

[Race Radio]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

I will simplify it for you

There is one group that believes in vast French Conspiracies (Aided by Space Aliens, Nazi Frogmen, and miracles) and another side that believes in Occam's razorand rational thought

 

[Race Radio]

I'll need evidence on what his wife looks like before agreeing with you.

This thread is useless without pics.

 

[Anonymous]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

The thing is, these issues are only part of the evidence. What is interesting is that Armstrong fanboys always want to discuss any particular issue as though that is the only evidence. See, I have studied propaganda, and know that trick. The fact is that most of you know he doped, you just cannot admit it.

And if it is so sad, just don't post in this part of the forum. You really are not required.

As for the suggestion that Ashenden isn't compelling. I am pretty sure he is incredibly well respected in his field, and that RMT is just some yahoo with enough knowledge to sound important. Because this is not anywhere near my base of knowledge, I can only hope that elapid will show up and do what he has done to every pseudo scientist who has reared his head. I am getting the feeling that we have seen this one before though. His obfuscation may look impressive, but I have smelled this bull in the past.

 

[Anonymous]

I will simplify it for you

There is one group that believes in vast French Conspiracies (Aided by Space Aliens, Nazi Frogmen, and miracles) and another side that believes in Occam's razorand rational thought

Damn I love that Occam!

 

[Ferminal]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

Absolute proof is relative, if you're unable to make decisions yourself based upon the evidence before you, in any facet of life, you must spend a lot of time sitting on the fence! Do the religious need absolute proof of their beliefs? Do humans need absolute proof on whether or not information gathered by their senses is in fact true?

Where does one stop in the search for absolute proof? Humans don't need absolute proof to formulate their own conclusions, our minds don't work on the laws of a criminal case. You can keep on thinking that "it might be true or it might not" but don't try and argue it as a point, your indecision has no bearing here, obviously the human collective doesn't have such unattainable values of "absolute proof" as yourself.

Fence-sitters are so much worse than devil's advocates...

 

[HoustonHammer]

The results weren't deliberately leaked. A reporter requested the results from the lab in the still anonymous format, then obtained Armstrongs UCI ID number from the UCI after obtaining Armstrong's permission, then matched the samples to Amrstrong that way.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about and you aren't up on the facts.

You know, that was the one thing that Ashenden said that really leaped out at me - that LA gave the UCI permission to release his '99 Tour doping control records to a reporter from L'Equipe. Presumably that statement can be verified elsewhere, but it's surprising to say the least. I just can't see LA giving permission for those records to go to, of all people, a L'Equipe reporter. Maybe he did, but it doesn't smell right. The other piece of Ressiot's puzzle, don't forget, was a leak by somebody within LNDD of the sample numbers to match against the UCI codes. Again, evidence to the contrary might exist, but it looks like maybe the data on both sides of the match were released via unauthorized leaks.

For the record, I think LA doped throughout his Tour winning streak, and I really don't go for conspiracy theories at all. But I also think there was/is an enormous animus on the parts of LNDD/ASO/L'Equipe and the French nation in general toward LA. So, while the story is generally pretty persuasive, you also have what appears to be some sketchy behavior on the part of several of the key actors and a very strong motive to find exactly what was found.

 

[progressor]

You all need to re read my post. You've missed or ignored my point.

Consider also my opinion on Armstrong is neither relative to my point, or known.

 

[WonderLance]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

You are very smart, there are very biggy headed people in this forum who clearly do not understand proffeshonal cycling like you and I do. All they want do do is insult people and bring them down.

P.S I take Loxapine and Stelazine for the voices what do you take?

Love Wonderlance

 

[CentralCaliBike]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

I appreciate the points you have made above but I think you might have included that people will post an attacked if it appears you support one side (LA) or fail to give the impression you find him personally offensive. I do see people on the LA side of the argument rabidly gloating when they believe an article favors their opinion and acting like kids on a playground playing "your mother is so ..." - but I do not see the same animosity towards neutral posting by the LA crowd.

 

[Bag_O_Wallet]

You all need to re read my post. You've missed or ignored my point.

Consider also my opinion on Armstrong is neither relative to my point, or known.

Yes, I agree. Name calling does not further the arguement, but neither does making points where there isn't any evidence to suggest that they actually happend.

An example of this is arguing that the lab which re-tested Armstrong's '99 samples tampered with the samples. Is there any evidence of this? Not that I've seen, or have seen discussed. About the only thing I've seen discussed is whether or not it is possible.

 

[Ferminal]

You all need to re read my post. You've missed or ignored my point.

Consider also my opinion on Armstrong is neither relative to my point, or known.

Your post is not relevant to this forum, if you wish to highlight drawbacks of certain persons you can PM them to discuss your grievances.

If you aren't positioning yourself, or seeking/providing information, why do you continue to post in Armstrong threads in the clinic? Just to troll?

 

[Digger]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

How many more times are you going to say the above? It's a generic response to forums in general. You rarely come up with anything substantive to offer the debate. Just this inane drivel, post after post. You start off with, 'I'm neither a fan boy or a hater, I'm not sure whether he doped, etc etc'. Yet you invariably go on and dismiss people like myself.
And do you not realise how 'condescending' you are, when you come out with the above? Please offer something of relevance, some detail to the particular thread, if you are capable.

 

[Digger]

OK, I read it. Didn't find anything he said compelling. I'll explain in detail tomorrow. As my wife is home, and no offence, but I'd rather spend my time with her.

Stevie Wonder?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

This thread, while very interesting at times, typifies some of the issues surrounding LA, in this forum. Theres a group of posters who interpret the various information as absolute proof, he dopes - that's their right, the problem is that whenever someone doesn't form the the same strong opinion and choose to question that belief they are subjected to abuse, insult, condescension, and most consistently told they have sub-par intelligence by a the a small group of posters who post very heavily around these issues. It doesn't make their argument any stronger - maybe they just get of on abusing others in a way they could never get away with in real life, maybe they're just all warped out of shape because of what has gone on in cycling. I don't know why they carry on like that, or why they allowed to get away with it, but it sure does reduce the quality of a forum that has a lot of strengths. Its sad and pretty shameful.

Quite an interesting viewpoint since you wrote this earlier...

I thought the rule was attack the post not the poster.

If you wish to take the high moral ground it is probably in your interest to display your dismay at 'both' sides.

But if not perhaps this 'friendly' advice might help:

Given what some posters are getting away with, they won't. If the parties one side of an argument don't have to abide by the same rules as others, it's not exactly going to be a first time on an internet forum. You're probably best to just harden up, or move on. It's not worth getting upset over it.