How certain are you LA doped? Your money on the line

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 13, 2010
185
0
0
Mambo95 said:
I'd bet $10,000, mainly because for $100,000 I can get a better, very low risk return on my investment from the banks.
That depends how quick the bet pays off...
 
Dec 21, 2010
149
0
0
BroDeal said:
To make that bet I would take all of the cash and securities that I have, sell everything that I own down to one pair jockey shorts and a pair of sandals, borrow as much as I could, pimp my girlfriend, and spend every free moment pan handling for a few dollars more, so I could put it all on the "Armstrong doped" side of the table.
+ 1, echo's my sentiments nicely.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
0
0
Barrus said:
I would choose number 1. Firstly the EPO, secondly the backdated TUE both are already proof that he used doping,k and that is technical proof, not even taking into account eye witness testimony. Perhaps it cannot be proven in the Novitsky trial (if it even comes up there), but really there is a lot of evidence already
I am of opposite in nature to this assessment. Shocking, no? I don't trust any of those things outlined by Barrus as proof.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
I'd start a hedge fund, visit Sand Hill Road, form a megachurch, Go on TV's "The Shark Tank" and spend 4 weeks on the road visiting as many high-net-worth individuals as possible in exchange for a 5% cut of option #1. And to show my own good faith, I'd sell a kidney in India, mortgage my house, cash-in the 401K and IRAs and empty my kid's piggy banks.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Not only that, but I'll go one further and parlay on Schlecklet having doped too.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
Cloxxki said:
Would there be one fanboy left with an IQ over 100, betting as much as their next meal on Lance to be clean?
I had no idea there was even ONE fanboy with an IQ over 100. I'm calling bullsh*t on that...
 
May 5, 2009
696
1
0
epo1999 said:
I would bet a testicle.
So would I. 1 ball + $1m top up.

not the slightest doubt. but of course, whether it can be provend or he gets convicted, that's written on another paper... only God knows. and that's really only important. it's not up to us to judge.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
la.margna said:
So would I. 1 ball + $1m top up.

not the slightest doubt. but of course, whether it can be provend or he gets convicted, that's written on another paper... only God knows. and that's really only important. it's not up to us to judge.
Hmmm... That might actually be considered 'theologically banal'. You might have a first for the clinic!
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
0
0
Who's paying out the money? Because if the loot is being distributed by Armstrong and Bruyneel I don't like my chances of getting my just rewards. If they aren't holding the loot, I'll double down. $1 million from me and I'll cover the other half with Scribe's a$$.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
A lot of imaginary money is on the table.
But before I place my bet, a couple of questions:

First - how do TUEs affect the payoff?

Second - how is the outcome determined....

Merckx index said:
A confession by LA would serve as proof that he doped. So possibly would certain tests on old samples. I'm not sure at this point what would constitute proof that he didn't, but let's suppose that some such proof could emerge.
But would a statement by Lance saying he did NOT dope be proof of not doping?

Would a Hung Jury in a future Doping Trial be proof of doping or proof of not doping?

Third - Is Lance allowed to bet too? How about Livestrong.org?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rhubroma said:
I'd put my girlfriend up for grabs before a prison of rapists.:eek:
don't push it.

there are some females (me) on the forum.
 
Oct 22, 2009
66
0
0
Merckx index said:
I'm assuming, of course, that there is some way the truth, one way or the other, comes out in a fashion that makes it undeniably the truth. A confession by LA would serve as proof that he doped. So possibly would certain tests on old samples.
We have six such tests. You are therefore essentially asking us to bet on whether all six of the test samples were spiked, were all false positives, or really belonged to someone else. I think the odds of that are vanishingly small. And that's before considering anything else.
 
Nov 24, 2010
263
1
0
Easy money

A certain "beyond any reasonable doubt" answer. $1,000,000 on the line, talk about easy money

Imagine how many $$'s Greg LeMond would put on the line!

lots of cheers here
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY