Landis Attacks Vaughters

Page 13 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Digger said:
Lol this post is mental stuff!!!
Blood doping is and was every bit as prevalent this year and 09 as it was in 06. AC and plasticides should indicate that much.

You said earlier that he focused on certain TT stages. Why were his results worse in these stages than in 09, when he could be 'saving' himself? Logically your posts make no sense whatsoever. Prior to 09 he couldn't climb or TT with the very elite. According to your logic and focusing on the track, he should at least have been winning the Prologue or coming close. :rolleyes:
Just the miracle of hard work. There is lots of that in pro cycling.
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
0
Paraphernalia said:
It was fairly famous that Wiggins was a track cyclist first and foremost and he framed his season to revolve around that. That's how he won all of those gold medals. It's not some invented excuse, it was how it was.

As he focused on the road instead, conbined with less riders around like Landis who were blood doped up to their eye balls, it's not a great surprise that Wiggins shined through.
Yes, that and the physiological gifts that allow for an all-out 5-minute fastest in the world pursuit effort are very, very different from those required of a 3-week Grand Tour rider who needs to not get dropped over many mountains and put out multiple very solid 1-hour ITT's throughout.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
andy1234 said:
Jeez, now I'm confused.
Are you being an A**, or are you just feigning being an A**?
...again the filters foil my retort! DANG YOU FILTERS!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
0
Benotti69 said:
didn't Wiggin's increase his cadence too:rolleyes:
Actually, you are all correct.

In those earlier Tours, Wiggins was actually saving himself FOR 2009! This is the first known example of a rider saving himself, not for a specific stage, but for an entire Tour, in preparation for un upcoming year.

As an added bonus, he utilized those Tours to reconnoiter stages, even ones they wouldn't be using again, to provide himself with an edge over his competitors.

;)
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Paraphernalia said:
If you are wrong about Wiggins, as I believe you are, would you feel guilty for spreading these rumors about him?
about as guilty as he obviously now feels about what he said in 2007 about doping in pro cycling and in 2010 made a complete u turn;)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mambo95 said:
It is a shame that you do not feel sufficiently confident in the breadth of your vocabulary to express youself adeqately without recourse to vulgarity. I would have valued your input. Be assured, I will attribute this deficiency to the schooling standards of Charlotte rather than you personally.

As to my polarity, as I am confident that your IQ exceeds 90, would you mind enlightening me as to what it is, given that I consistently says that a) Armstrong doped and b) not everything Landis says should be believed unquestioningly.

The truth is, I stopped caring about Armstrong long ago.
I don't know what that first paragraph means, but I would have spell checked "youself" and "adequately" before I insulted someone else regarding their schooling, that's for sure.

And for someone who doesn't "care" about Armstrong, you sure do have a lot of posts in regards to him. That "find posts by" thing comes in preeeeety handy...:rolleyes:

Toodles!
 
May 10, 2009
4,638
1
0
Paraphernalia said:
That's why I said a lower level of doping, not that doping wasn't going on. It's true that AC was on a different planet, but Armstrong had to post his numbers online and this showed through in his performance.



But I explained that he did not focus on the tour.



Doping was at a higher level in the mid part of the last decade. That combined with Wiggins focusing on the track would make a huge difference. If his change was only down to doping then why would he bother to lose the weight at all?

If you are wrong about Wiggins, as I believe you are, would you feel guilty for spreading these rumors about him?
Absolutely 100 percent not. I would love him to be on here and I would tell him directly that he;s a lying hypocrite. His numbers which purport to how him clean :rolleyes: his defense of the Uniballer last week, his transformation in one year.
He went from a guy spitting blood about Moreni to being very blase about it all, in hte time he went from Autobus to contender. Strange coincidence.
And his weight loss.....you're digging a hole. How did he actually increase his power, if he was clean, and lose weight all at once? The guy is a medical wonder. As far back as Sean Kelly in the 80s, he said when he went to improve his climbing, his sprint and power suffered. But amazingly, Bradley loses weight and increases his power. :rolleyes:
 
May 10, 2009
4,638
1
0
MacRoadie said:
Actually, you are all correct.

In those earlier Tours, Wiggins was actually saving himself FOR 2009! This is the first known exanple of a rider saving himself not for a specific stage, but for an entire Tour, in preparation for un upcoming year.

As an added bonus, he utilized those Tours to reconnoiter stages, even ones they wouldn't be using again, to provide himself with an edge over his competitors.

;)
Post of the day by a mile :D
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
andy1234 said:
Just use the words Fudge, Ship, Winker, etc. I'll get the idea.
What about "frock mucker" and "jucking funt?"...just kidding, I only think you are moosh crag. (I went for the "rhymes with" because its easier than substituting a whole word.)
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Digger said:
We are talking about his transformation to a guy barely making the time limits to coming in fourth, in one year.
Or a guy who often didn't finish them winning 7 in a row? ;-)
 
Thoughtforfood said:
What about "frock mucker" and "jucking funt?"...just kidding, I only think you are moosh crag. (I went for the "rhymes with" because its easier than substituting a whole word.)
Nicely restrained. You could have gone over the jucking top.
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
Thoughtforfood said:
I don't know what that first paragraph means, but I would have spell checked "youself" and "adequately" before I insulted someone else regarding their schooling, that's for sure.

And for someone who doesn't "care" about Armstrong, you sure do have a lot of posts in regards to him. That "find posts by" thing comes in preeeeety handy...:rolleyes:

Toodles!
The 'find posts by' thing is useful. I invite you use it (and anyone else). You'll find maybe 20-30 posts by me pertaining to Armstrong out of over 700 (and half of those aren't actually about him).

More nonsense from the lunatic fringe.
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
0
Thoughtforfood said:
What about "frock mucker" and "jucking funt?"...just kidding, I only think you are moosh crag. (I went for the "rhymes with" because its easier than substituting a whole word.)
"Fargin icehole bastiges!"

Forum Primer
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mambo95 said:
The 'find posts by' thing is useful. I invite you use it (and anyone else). You'll find maybe 20-30 posts by me pertaining to Armstrong out of over 700 (and half of those aren't actually about him).

More nonsense from the lunatic fringe.
Well, at least you spelled everything correctly in that post! Keep up the good work!
 
Paraphernalia said:
You did not answer the question. I said if you are wrong, as most people in cycling believe you are - the test was simply taken in the morning when the blood is thicker and there is not a hint of a doping connection to Wiggins - then would you feel guilty about spreading false rumors against someone's professional reputation?

If I did that and I was wrong, I would feel like crap about it. But you don't appear to have given the possibility two second's thought. Do you think you should?
I don't believe that "most people in cycling" who have really looked into the possibility of Wigan's doping have necessarily come to that conclusion. Wigans was doing something in '09 that made him ride real fast, and for whatever reason did less of it the next year and consequently sucked.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Paraphernalia said:
That's why I said a lower level of doping, not that doping wasn't going on. It's true that AC was on a different planet, but Armstrong had to post his numbers online and this showed through in his performance.



But I explained that he did not focus on the tour.



Doping was at a higher level in the mid part of the last decade. That combined with Wiggins focusing on the track would make a huge difference. If his change was only down to doping then why would he bother to lose the weight at all?

If you are wrong about Wiggins, as I believe you are, would you feel guilty for spreading these rumors about him?
His weight? We don't have to spread rumours for Bradley:
Here is what BW said about his 2009 transformation to the Sunday Times June 2010:
He had weighed in that morning at 77kg and went to bed that night with a smile on his face. “I thought, ‘Blimey! I wonder if I lost another two kilos?’ And I kept going like that. I started the Giro [the Tour of Italy in May] at 75 kilos — three kilos lighter than I had ever raced before — and hung on for as long as possible on the first mountain stage.
But here is an interview with his nutritionist back in 2006:
“We aim to get Bradley to the Tour very lean, around 75 to 76kg. The goal is to come out of the Tour at roughly the same weight he went in. If he comes out only a kilo lighter, that’d be a good job.”
 
May 20, 2010
877
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
I don't believe that "most people in cycling" who have really looked into the possibility of Wigan's doping have necessarily come to that conclusion. Wigans was doing something in '09 that made him ride real fast, and for whatever reason did less of it the next year and consequently sucked.
Wiggans has often recounted the story of having a drink with Brett Lancaster who told him everyone was saying he had doped up for 4th place. So most people in cycling probably do think he has.
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
Thoughtforfood said:
Well, at least you spelled everything correctly in that post! Keep up the good work!
I prefer to make a couple of typos and be right than be as horribly wrong as you often are. Did you check my posting history?

If you have to pick up typos to continue a debate, you're really struggling.
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
0
Francois the Postman said:
We get the idea. It's still bypassing the language filter, and utterly off topic. Move on.
Yeah, but the videos are a lot more entertaining than the discussion...although equally pointless.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY