If you believe Lance raced clean this is your thread. Livestrong here.

Jul 20, 2010
247
0
0
Possible reasons that point to Lance racing clean. Livestrong here.

This thread is for people who think Lance raced clean. So if you support Lance you can voice your opinion here. I don't have an opinion of his innocence or guilt but I will point out the reasons why we can believe Lance raced clean:

1. Over 500 tests and Lance never tested positive. It's tough to cheat 500 tests you can't argue with that...so logically it can seem unlikely that Lance cheated taking this into consideration.
2. No video, sound recordings, recorded phone conversations, or pictures of Lance doping throughout his long career. This lack of evidence is a bit disturbing since he has been racing so long.
3. Most of the witnesses seem to be ex dopers who might be making deals to stay in the cycling game so long as they lie and confess to Lance...even if it's not true.
4. His peers seemed to have tested positive but Lance has not. Did his teammates not follow Lance's doping guide book? If they tested positive and Lance didn't...maybe they were the ones that were cheating and Lance wasn't.
5. USADA review board has a questionable judge who was charged with indecent exposure. Say all you want but if you wanted a judge in your case you probably wouldn't ask this guy to be on the review board deciding your life's work was one big cheat.
6. 7 Tour De France titles are the cause of cheating. In all likelihood this is very doubtful. For one, you still have to get your body over Mount Ventoux. All the cheats in the world won't get you up that mountain in first place...not unless you strap a motorcycle motor on that bike lol.
7. Lance's Character throughout race and life doesn't seem like one that would cheat:
a) Had and fought through cancer
b) Started Livestrong and made a comeback tour for Livestrong
c) Good gestures throughout the tour like waiting for Ulrich when he crashed.

I have no opinion in this matter. But there are a lot of compelling reasons to believe Lance raced clean. So it's important to look at both sides of the argument. I prefer to believe Lance raced clean but I don't really know. It's just a good thing to look at both sides of the argument, and you really can't do that in the other thread.
 
Aug 1, 2010
78
0
0
SilentAssassin said:
I have no opinion in this matter.
Be honest, I think you do.

I admire your desire to present the other side of the argument but it would help your case immensely if you didn't lead with such a hotly debated/contested point (if not outright fallacy).
 
Oct 4, 2011
905
0
0
SilentAssassin said:
This thread is for people who think Lance raced clean. So if you support Lance you can voice your opinion here. I don't have an opinion of his innocence or guilt but I will point out the reasons why we can believe Lance raced clean:

1. Over 500 tests and Lance never tested positive. It's tough to cheat 500 tests you can't argue with that...so logically it can seem unlikely that Lance cheated taking this into consideration.
2. No video, sound recordings, recorded phone conversations, or pictures of Lance doping throughout his long career. This lack of evidence is a bit disturbing since he has been racing so long.
3. Most of the witnesses seem to be ex dopers who might be making deals to stay in the cycling game so long as they lie and confess to Lance...even if it's not true.
4. His peers seemed to have tested positive but Lance has not. Did his teammates not follow Lance's doping guide book? If they tested positive and Lance didn't...maybe they were the ones that were cheating and Lance wasn't.
5. USADA review board has a questionable judge who was charged with indecent exposure. Say all you want but if you wanted a judge in your case you probably wouldn't ask this guy to be on the review board deciding your life's work was one big cheat.
6. 7 Tour De France titles are the cause of cheating. In all likelihood this is very doubtful. For one, you still have to get your body over Mount Ventoux. All the cheats in the world won't get you up that mountain in first place...not unless you strap a motorcycle motor on that bike lol.
7. Lance's Character throughout race and life doesn't seem like one that would cheat:
a) Had and fought through cancer
b) Started Livestrong and made a comeback tour for Livestrong
c) Good gestures throughout the tour like waiting for Ulrich when he crashed.

I have no opinion in this matter. But there are a lot of compelling reasons to believe Lance raced clean. So it's important to look at both sides of the argument. I prefer to believe Lance raced clean but I don't really know. It's just a good thing to look at both sides of the argument, and you really can't do that in the other thread.
1. He did fail a test so thats a bad start.
2. There are no pictures etc that I know of most people who have doped.
3. Thats not even a defence, trying to say that the only ones who would know ie those who doped, are not to be trusted. If the dopers cant testify then he gets off.
4.His peers didnt all test positive, George Hincapie being one who looks like he is going to testify.
5.Change the judge.
6.That one doesnt make sense....if your doping you get over the mountain quicker.simple.
7.A) Fighting through cancer doesnt mean you are of good character.
B) Made a comeback tour for money, yes for livestrong, but he makes a personal fortune from that as well as doing good.
C)Good gestures....what about chasing down simeoni.

There are 2 sides to every story but you will have to come up with more convincing arguments then that.
 
Jun 18, 2012
299
0
0
I believe Lance raced clean...

...but only at the tour of the Gila in 2010 when he got smashed.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
I assume this is no comedy?! :confused:

If you are serious, you fail already with No. 1:

Your buddy was tested 6 times positive for EPO and once for cortisone in the TdF 1999 alone.

Then we have the positive EPO test at the TdS which was covered up.

Son, you pray to the false god.
 
Jun 17, 2009
60
0
0
You state:
SilentAssassin said:
I have no opinion in this matter.
But you write:
SilentAssassin said:
...I will point out the reasons why we can believe Lance raced clean...
...But there are a lot of compelling reasons to believe Lance raced clean...
...I prefer to believe Lance raced clean...
(I took the liberty of bold-facing your most egregious tells)

Is that honestly your best attempt at trying to mask your agenda? Really? The mind boggles.


To stay on topic and refute your "logic": Lance has never proved your Item 1 with a comprehensive list of the alleged 500 tests he's undergone. He came up with the number; the onus is on him to prove that it's correct. Otherwise, he's a liar. Also, as above, he failed a test for corticosteroids in '99. So, point 1 is both untrue AND relies on, as far as any rational person can determine, a completely made up number.

The rest of your points are equally logically fallacious. Good luck Living Strong with that kind of acumen.
 
Oct 4, 2011
905
0
0
Just to reiterate my point on good character. Watch your man in action being a good sport. Then read his reasons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJHCGx_GZkA
http://velonews.competitor.com/2008/11/news/road/armstrong-responds-to-simeoni_84947

Now the video is in french but you see whats happening. His condescending arm on simeonis shoulder at the end. He wasnt letting him away.

Doesnt add up when he gives his written response.

Good character? Doing the yellow jersey proud ? Good for cycling ?
Or just a liar and a bully ?
 
SilentAssassin said:
This thread is for people who think Lance raced clean. So if you support Lance you can voice your opinion here. I don't have an opinion of his innocence or guilt but I will point out the reasons why we can believe Lance raced clean:

1. Over 500 tests and Lance never tested positive. It's tough to cheat 500 tests you can't argue with that...so logically it can seem unlikely that Lance cheated taking this into consideration.
2. No video, sound recordings, recorded phone conversations, or pictures of Lance doping throughout his long career. This lack of evidence is a bit disturbing since he has been racing so long.
3. Most of the witnesses seem to be ex dopers who might be making deals to stay in the cycling game so long as they lie and confess to Lance...even if it's not true.
4. His peers seemed to have tested positive but Lance has not. Did his teammates not follow Lance's doping guide book? If they tested positive and Lance didn't...maybe they were the ones that were cheating and Lance wasn't.
5. USADA review board has a questionable judge who was charged with indecent exposure. Say all you want but if you wanted a judge in your case you probably wouldn't ask this guy to be on the review board deciding your life's work was one big cheat.
6. 7 Tour De France titles are the cause of cheating. In all likelihood this is very doubtful. For one, you still have to get your body over Mount Ventoux. All the cheats in the world won't get you up that mountain in first place...not unless you strap a motorcycle motor on that bike lol.
7. Lance's Character throughout race and life doesn't seem like one that would cheat:
a) Had and fought through cancer
b) Started Livestrong and made a comeback tour for Livestrong
c) Good gestures throughout the tour like waiting for Ulrich when he crashed.

I have no opinion in this matter. But there are a lot of compelling reasons to believe Lance raced clean. So it's important to look at both sides of the argument. I prefer to believe Lance raced clean but I don't really know. It's just a good thing to look at both sides of the argument, and you really can't do that in the other thread.

 
Of course he raced clean. Biggest water user in Austin, 20 minute showers before presenting himself to doping testers. Cleanest in the peloton, by far.

Now the French, they race dirty. Aversion to showers. Stinky.
 
wrong forum,clinic has decided long time ago that armstrong wasnt racing clean

to show you a bit of persperctive how clinic works,look into sagans thread where the only reason some ppl think sagan is doping is that he doesnt look tired enough :rolleyes:


for the record,i think lance was as "clean" as indurain,pantani or ulrich...first cyclist i would consider as a clean one to win tdf was probably 2010 schleck
 
May 23, 2010
516
0
0
saganftw said:
wrong forum,clinic has decided long time ago that armstrong wasnt racing clean

for the record,i think lance was as "clean" as indurain,pantani or ulrich...first cyclist i would consider as a clean one to win tdf was probably 2010 schleck
We've 'decided' he's a doper just because yet in contrast (assumed based on your apparent disdain for the clinic) you've decided he's as 'clean' as his contemporary dopers. Therefore, a doper.

Coherent this is not.
 
I particularly like these two. If someones team-mates are cheating normal logic suggests that that person is cheating too, not that he isn't.

As for number 7 I'm not sure what you're trying to say but I think you're suggesting that drugs don't help and that he'd have won anyway?!

Both complete claptrap (thats a quaint English expression BTW).

SilentAssassin said:
4. His peers seemed to have tested positive but Lance has not. Did his teammates not follow Lance's doping guide book? If they tested positive and Lance didn't...maybe they were the ones that were cheating and Lance wasn't.
6. 7 Tour De France titles are the cause of cheating. In all likelihood this is very doubtful. For one, you still have to get your body over Mount Ventoux. All the cheats in the world won't get you up that mountain in first place...not unless you strap a motorcycle motor on that bike lol.
 
Jun 2, 2010
377
0
0
SilentAssassin said:
This thread is for people who think Lance raced clean. So if you support Lance you can voice your opinion here. I don't have an opinion of his innocence or guilt but I will point out the reasons why we can believe Lance raced clean:

1. Over 500 tests and Lance never tested positive. It's tough to cheat 500 tests you can't argue with that...so logically it can seem unlikely that Lance cheated taking this into consideration.
2. No video, sound recordings, recorded phone conversations, or pictures of Lance doping throughout his long career. This lack of evidence is a bit disturbing since he has been racing so long.
3. Most of the witnesses seem to be ex dopers who might be making deals to stay in the cycling game so long as they lie and confess to Lance...even if it's not true.
4. His peers seemed to have tested positive but Lance has not. Did his teammates not follow Lance's doping guide book? If they tested positive and Lance didn't...maybe they were the ones that were cheating and Lance wasn't.
5. USADA review board has a questionable judge who was charged with indecent exposure. Say all you want but if you wanted a judge in your case you probably wouldn't ask this guy to be on the review board deciding your life's work was one big cheat.
6. 7 Tour De France titles are the cause of cheating. In all likelihood this is very doubtful. For one, you still have to get your body over Mount Ventoux. All the cheats in the world won't get you up that mountain in first place...not unless you strap a motorcycle motor on that bike lol.
7. Lance's Character throughout race and life doesn't seem like one that would cheat:
a) Had and fought through cancer
b) Started Livestrong and made a comeback tour for Livestrong
c) Good gestures throughout the tour like waiting for Ulrich when he crashed.

I have no opinion in this matter. But there are a lot of compelling reasons to believe Lance raced clean. So it's important to look at both sides of the argument. I prefer to believe Lance raced clean but I don't really know. It's just a good thing to look at both sides of the argument, and you really can't do that in the other thread.
Wrong, untrue and/or irrelevant.
He was worst of them all.
 
Oct 30, 2011
2,642
0
0
saganftw said:
wrong forum,clinic has decided long time ago that armstrong wasnt racing clean

to show you a bit of persperctive how clinic works,look into sagans thread where the only reason some ppl think sagan is doping is that he doesnt look tired enough :rolleyes:

for the record,i think lance was as "clean" as indurain,pantani or ulrich...first cyclist i would consider as a clean one to win tdf was probably 2010 schleck
Just because it is a widely-held viewpoint doesn't mean that people here wouldn't consider the alternative, if evidence were presented that truly showed he was clean. As you can see, many here do not believe that your evidence counts - that's not some conspiracy, that's a bunch of people just thinking things through, son.

On the topic of "The Clinic has decided that Sagan is dirty"; there is still plenty of debate going over on that thread, it is far from a consensus as you wish to try and paint it. Every time anyone refers to this entire subforum thinking as one, what they say is invariably absolute bull**** and not worth reading.
 
UlleGigo said:
We've 'decided' he's a doper just because yet in contrast (assumed based on your apparent disdain for the clinic) you've decided he's as 'clean' as his contemporary dopers. Therefore, a doper.

Coherent this is not.
the difference between me and good folks in clinic is that i THINK lance wasnt clean - you KNOW it (dont know about you personaly,but there are ppl who do know) and the most ridiculous part is that you knew it couple of years ago,you dont even need an investigation to end

i dont know it,i think he was doping,but before the investigation is over i would never ridicule ones opinion with lame meme like bavarianrider did

my disdain for the clinic comes from ppl who know,you might be right (and lets face it you probably are) but untill its official i will refrain from posting troll posts to show how brilliant are ppl with different opinion
 
Jul 19, 2010
741
1
0
SilentAssassin said:
This thread is for people who think Lance raced clean. So if you support Lance you can voice your opinion here. I don't have an opinion of his innocence or guilt but I will point out the reasons why we can believe Lance raced clean:

1. Over 500 tests and Lance never tested positive. It's tough to cheat 500 tests you can't argue with that...so logically it can seem unlikely that Lance cheated taking this into consideration.
2. No video, sound recordings, recorded phone conversations, or pictures of Lance doping throughout his long career. This lack of evidence is a bit disturbing since he has been racing so long.
3. Most of the witnesses seem to be ex dopers who might be making deals to stay in the cycling game so long as they lie and confess to Lance...even if it's not true.
4. His peers seemed to have tested positive but Lance has not. Did his teammates not follow Lance's doping guide book? If they tested positive and Lance didn't...maybe they were the ones that were cheating and Lance wasn't.
5. USADA review board has a questionable judge who was charged with indecent exposure. Say all you want but if you wanted a judge in your case you probably wouldn't ask this guy to be on the review board deciding your life's work was one big cheat.
6. 7 Tour De France titles are the cause of cheating. In all likelihood this is very doubtful. For one, you still have to get your body over Mount Ventoux. All the cheats in the world won't get you up that mountain in first place...not unless you strap a motorcycle motor on that bike lol.
7. Lance's Character throughout race and life doesn't seem like one that would cheat:
a) Had and fought through cancer
b) Started Livestrong and made a comeback tour for Livestrong
c) Good gestures throughout the tour like waiting for Ulrich when he crashed.

I have no opinion in this matter. But there are a lot of compelling reasons to believe Lance raced clean. So it's important to look at both sides of the argument. I prefer to believe Lance raced clean but I don't really know. It's just a good thing to look at both sides of the argument, and you really can't do that in the other thread.
Is this a troll? These arguments are the EXACT same ones used by people who know nothing about cycling. This thread might belong to a cricket forum going off-topic, but it has no place in CN's "The Clinic".

Yeah, it's a troll.
 
Aug 1, 2010
78
0
0
saganftw said:
the difference between me and good folks in clinic is that i THINK lance wasnt clean - you KNOW it (dont know about you personaly,but there are ppl who do know)
I know what you mean....sorry, I think I know what you mean ;)

It used to bug me too when I first started reading this forum. People would state stuff with such certainty, as if they knew it to be true. They can't know (we'll, in fairness, maybe a few here do know some bits of the truth), but what they do have is a solid belief.

I have no truck with that at all, I respect it, but I did have to flip a little switch in my head that made me precede every 'Armstrong doped' statement with 'I think that' or 'I genuinely believe that' etc. I did that for me, not to correct what I was reading. It enabled me to read what was being said with an open (ish) mind and without putting up my own internal barriers to it (not suggesting you're doing that, I don't know!)
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
Muriel said:
I know what you mean....sorry, I think I know what you mean ;)

It used to bug me too when I first started reading this forum. People would state stuff with such certainty, as if they knew it to be true. They can't know (we'll, in fairness, maybe a few here do know some bits of the truth), but what they do have is a solid belief.

I have no truck with that at all, I respect it, but I did have to flip a little switch in my head that made me precede every 'Armstrong doped' statement with 'I think that' or 'I genuinely believe that' etc. I did that for me, not to correct what I was reading. It enabled me to read what was being said with an open (ish) mind and without putting up my own internal barriers to it (not suggesting you're doing that, I don't know!)
I think everyone weighs it up their head. He claims he didnt dope but unfortunately the backdrop/circumstantial evidence to the contrary is so unbelievably overwhelming. The problem I have is the following:

1. He raced in an era where most of his competitors have been found to have doped including those who never tested positive (Ullrich & Basso).
2. A number of his team mates have tested positive
3. A number of his team mates tested positive only when leaving his team (UCI possibly protecting individual(s) and/or teams).
4. The 1999 samples allegedly swept under the carpet
5. The alleged meeting with the UCI to discuss their testing protocols
6. The allaged admission to the oncologist witnessed by the Andreau's
7. Ashendens assessment of the 1999 samples

To a certain extent I made up my own mind a while ago. What bothers me more about the whole fiasco is that the UCI will carry on business as usual when really it is high time that the organisation was divided up. The commercial aspect/promotion of cycling divided from its day to day administration. We saw the UCI's conflict of interest when faced with the whole Contador debacle and look how long that lasted while they tried to disaster manage it.
 
Jan 14, 2011
504
0
0
I'm a believer

the Tooth Fairy
Santa Claus
The Easter Bunny
Big Foot (or is that Bigfoot?)
Alien abduction
Holy Water
Heaven's Gate ... Hale Bop!!
A man who doped so much he gave himself cancer would never, ever cheat just to win the Td France 7 times.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS