- May 13, 2009
- 3,093
- 3
- 0
- Jul 23, 2009
- 2,891
- 1
- 0
BanProCycling said:
What do you mean by that? I'm not picking a fight, but apart from the obvious recovery from a life threatening illness, is there any science suggesting he can recover from repetitive hard efforts better than other elite cyclists?
On the other hand, there's always this....
http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/ExerciseFitness/1607
- May 13, 2009
- 3,093
- 3
- 0
pedaling squares said:
Ignore him literally. I tried to say this a week or so ago, and then I myself got caught up in it, but he is a troll and LITERALLY nothing more. In the last few days he has really whipped up a storm. You have to know that there are actually people who troll for no other reason than to be a troll. The only way to kill a troll is to ignore them.
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,546
- 8,394
- 28,180
BanProCycling said:
Hey. I'm not TFF. Feel free to contact the site admins and see if they can help you with your fear of TFF. They can surely identify different IP addresses unless TFF is both working at my company and stealing my home WiFi. And posting from my iPhone.
The aggressive nature of my posts is a counter to what is clearly an agenda-driven attempt to obfuscate facts regarding Armstrong. What drives this agenda I can only imagine, but your utter unwillingness to address factual or scientific information removes any credibility you might have. I like this forum, and I'll aggressively question anyone who seems completely agenda driven. Try and make an analysis on the facts at hand that considers all sides, and maybe someone will listen. Add insight, facts even.
The new talking point, that "we're all speculating here" is another wonderous obfuscation of the topic or direct challenges to the wild theories put forth in your posts.
- May 13, 2009
- 3,093
- 3
- 0
Thoughtforfood said:
Agree. And he's not even a particularly smart one. See what he writes:
acceptional? Really??? :sigh:
Cobblestones said:
The spelling, everything is calculated. As I said, I doubt he is a fan of cycling. He just came here, cruised some threads, found a topic that would garner emotional responses, and started planting responses to get reactions. It is ALL about getting reactions. It has nothing to do with the topics at hand.
Like I said in the thread I started, there is only one way to kill a troll like that. Ignore him.
laura.weislo
Administrator
- Mar 4, 2009
- 138
- 1
- 8,835
My bad... merging mistake
I meant to merge the two Armstrong blood values threads and mistakenly merged them w/ the official Armstrong doping thread - now all the posts are here.
Sorry about that - I can't un-do the change... or can't figure out how. We needed a new Official thread anyhow as this one had deteriorated into name-calling anyhow!
I meant to merge the two Armstrong blood values threads and mistakenly merged them w/ the official Armstrong doping thread - now all the posts are here.
Sorry about that - I can't un-do the change... or can't figure out how. We needed a new Official thread anyhow as this one had deteriorated into name-calling anyhow!
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,546
- 8,394
- 28,180
Why would you "stick up for Armstrong"? If you have a reason to believe he's clean (the only reason I could imagine to "stick up" for him), then state it (as you seem to have) and then follow up challenges with a serious intellectual discussion, allowing for the possibility that you're wrong.
Take an interest in facts. Analyze data. Listen to testimonial evidence. From all sides. Then pull together an opinion which you're open to having challenged. Most of all, address the thread topic--the blood values, instead of calling people names, imagining stalkers, making up your own new accounts, etc, etc, ad infinitum. I'm relatively new here, but I've seen enough to know you're not discussing this topic in good faith with an open mind.
"Stick[ing] up for Armstrong" is an agenda. Pure and simple. It's as transparent as could be, and simply not credible.
Take an interest in facts. Analyze data. Listen to testimonial evidence. From all sides. Then pull together an opinion which you're open to having challenged. Most of all, address the thread topic--the blood values, instead of calling people names, imagining stalkers, making up your own new accounts, etc, etc, ad infinitum. I'm relatively new here, but I've seen enough to know you're not discussing this topic in good faith with an open mind.
"Stick[ing] up for Armstrong" is an agenda. Pure and simple. It's as transparent as could be, and simply not credible.
- May 13, 2009
- 3,093
- 3
- 0
laura.weislo said:
I've seen a few message boards and one policy I really like is to close threads which have more than three-four hundred replies. Usually threads drift from the original subject or evolve into something nasty. And no one is going to read through a 40 page thread anyway. Maybe something to think about as editorial policy.
- Aug 16, 2009
- 600
- 0
- 0
BanProCycling said:
And it is not simply about bashing Armstrong and attempting to bring him down with their hate, rather it is about bringing all cyclists and cycling down into the mud. It is totally inappropriate to tarnish the good name of honest people with this wild speculation. One wonders how they would react if it was them who were being insulted in this way.
- Aug 13, 2009
- 12,854
- 2
- 0
- Aug 13, 2009
- 12,854
- 2
- 0
- Aug 16, 2009
- 600
- 0
- 0
Race Radio said:
Namely that any cyclist who wins or even does anthing is doping, including signing/not signing contracts, moving teams even not finishing races. All these are evidence of doping for you.
Thoughtforfood said:
Since you have ignored me already, I guess there is no point me telling you AGAIN that I am my own person. BPC says he’s from the UK, I am Australian. (Its 9am in the morning here)
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,546
- 8,394
- 28,180
When you say things like this, it's clear that there is no useful basis for discussion. You have either not been watching cycling very long, or are willfully ignorant.
red_flanders said:
No, just another troll. Statements like that are bait from trolls. He just wants to hook someone. Don't take the bait.
- Apr 3, 2009
- 12,546
- 8,394
- 28,180
- Aug 16, 2009
- 600
- 0
- 0
- Jul 19, 2009
- 949
- 0
- 0
BanProCycling said:
Sure that is why he should retire after 2 mountain stages... why not retire just before the mountain stages like Cippolini?
Clearly, he had few ability to ride a GT, not able to recover after mountain stages despite riding with grupetto.
Just have a look to Chavanel, Gilbert,... they are able to ride slightly better than Lance did even if they are not doped and not GT contenders.
- Jul 28, 2009
- 333
- 0
- 0
My understanding is (and I am not defending anyone) but if you lost a pint of fluid (very hot day, diarreah, not enough electrolytes so you just pee water out even if you are dehydrated etc) if that happens your blood concentrations change. Any test subject to the effects of dehydration (or deliberate dilution) should be trated as such, not as gospel.
- Aug 16, 2009
- 600
- 0
- 0
BanProCycling said:
+1 Small fluctuations cannot be regarded as evidence of doping they can be due to any number of factors.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 789
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 855
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 40K
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s ITT, September 21- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 942
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram