Lemond - Trek lawsuit

[blackcat]

Cancer Awareness, I forgot all about that, he obviously did a $hitty job. I was quite struck by ego awareness tho.

 

[blackcat]

Riley, his name is Sprog. Get it right.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

It was my experience in this past year riding with other, casual, riders, that the tide is turning somewhat against Lance, with many people convinced that he doped. I wouldn't say these people swing from being ardent supporters decked in Livestrong kits, to instantly being what Lance calls "trolls", no, it's more subtle, but it's definitely noticeable.

As to the 1991 Tour, as Sprocket noted, Greg did exhaust himself. The stage to Jaca he did a lot of chasing while others followed, and going over the Tourmalet and then to Val Loran, he rode himself into the ground and cracked. It's my opinion that Greg and his Z team probably had heard of EPO, but probably assumed it wouldn't be used as widely as it was, and that it probably wasn't much more effective than cortisone. steroids or amphetamines - the most popular gear of the day.

Had everyone been clean, it stands to reason Greg may likely have won in 1991, maybe Mottet would have, maybe Indurain or Bugno, but we'll never know.

 

[Sprocket01]

You guys even hate on his charity. You're living in a different universe.

 

[Race Radio]

Again - get your facts correct Sproket01.

Facts are like kryptonite to Trolls.

 

[blackcat]

You guys even hate on his charity. You're living in a different universe.

it aint a charity.

A charity does not spend its money with placards "hope rides again" and yellow chalk. That is a political campaign. That is Armstrong's future grass roots.

 

[red_flanders]

red_flanders,

you're one of the biggest haters of Armstrong in this forum, so forgive me if I don't trust your judgment. I've seen more people wearing livestrong gear this year than ever before. Armstrong has a whole new level of fans.

Again, you make it so easy to see where the truth is. Yet again you repeat that which is agreed upon in an effort to make some kind of case.

It really doesn't matter if you trust my judgement. The judgement has been made by the larger group, on this forum and others. In cycling groups, race teams, and in the cycling world in general. He has lost the core fans almost completely. The change could not be more apparent.

Does it matter to him? I don't know. My guess is that he sees that as a battle lost. Why does it matter to you?

As with most "Armstrong haters" I started out as a HUGE fan. Went nuts when he won the Worlds. Went absolutely crazy that day on Sestriere. Raised my eyebrows on Hautacam, and became bored after number 4. I defended him against the Pantani fans who accused him of doping, and then the whole thing blew open with the constant stream of lies, bullying, payoffs, threatened lawsuits, and on and on.

His actions turned me from fan to strong critic. It didn't happen in a vacuum.

 

[Sprocket01]

It was my experience in this past year riding with other, casual, riders, that the tide is turning somewhat against Lance, with many people convinced that he doped. I wouldn't say these people swing from being ardent supporters decked in Livestrong kits, to instantly being what Lance calls "trolls", no, it's more subtle, but it's definitely noticeable.

Most people I know think they were all at it, so think it made no difference. That's the mentality that I come across.

As to the 1991 Tour, as Sprocket noted, Greg did exhaust himself. The stage to Jaca he did a lot of chasing while others followed, and going over the Tourmalet and then to Val Loran, he rode himself into the ground and cracked. It's my opinion that Greg and his Z team probably had heard of EPO, but probably assumed it wouldn't be used as widely as it was, and that it probably wasn't much more effective than cortisone. steroids or amphetamines - the most popular gear of the day.

Yes, probably. Does seem a little bit strange though that someone in the heat of the peloton wouldn't know these things - maybe he is just sexing up his story a little bit for effect. Hell we all do that.

Had everyone been clean, it stands to reason Greg may likely have won in 1991, maybe Mottet would have, maybe Indurain or Bugno, but we'll never know.

If would be interesting to know how Armstrong would have faired in a clean peloton during the early 1990s. I guess we'll never know that either.

 

[scribe]

Oh boy. This thread disintegrated into nothing.

Wake me up when Greg does something else significant.

 

[Sprocket01]

.it really doesn't matter if you trust my judgement. The judgement has been made by the larger group, on this forum and others.

LMAO!!! :d

 

[BikeCentric]

I do, all the time. Amongst the racers with whom I ride there are exactly zero people who are supportive of Armstrong. None. That's a dramatic change from 3 years ago.

With the cyclo-tourist group I do trips with, there is one guy left clinging to the fantasy, and he has changed his tune this year.

You want obsessive? Look at your post count.

Look, there's nothing really here to argue about. The tide has turned within cycling. You can't stop it, and frankly when I think of people who do the most to turn the tide, I think of people like you. Your continual stream of unsupported, uninformed, fact-less, and diversionary comments do more to expose the myth than anything, because they are so easy to refute with the droves of evidence at hand.

I thank you for your contribution to the truth. Honestly.

I am seeing the same thing Red, even though we both apparently hate excellence and love cancer!

But seriously, I know a lot of people involved in the cycling community because I've been in it for over 10 years as a shop mechanic, amateur racer, club manager, member of 3 different race teams over the years and 3 different clubs. Of all the hundred odd people I know in the cycling community I know not one, NOT ONE, who is an Armstrong supporter today. Contrast this to 3 years ago when probably 70% were still strong Lance supporters.

But then again, I am probably just so negative and cynical that I am like a walking black hole who sucks the positive life energy out of every human being I encounter.

 

[Sprocket01]

He will be unpopular one day. I have a feeling he will go into politics.

 

[Hugh Januss]

red_flanders,

you're one of the biggest haters of Armstrong in this forum, so forgive me if I don't trust your judgment. I've seen more people wearing livestrong gear this year than every before. Armstrong has a whole new level of fans.

These are the truest (only true?) words that our sprocket has ever typed. As the newby fans are drawn into the world of Lance the lifetime fans of cycling are exiting the coolaid tent at the other end.
I myself have been a cyclist and fan for long enough to have watched that upstart junior Greg whatzis name beat us all at Superweek and yet up until this year I would have considered myself an Armstrong fan. Sure I have had a pretty good idea what goes on in pro cycling forever but in terms of individual riders I was always ambivalent.
Armstrong truly does transend cycling in two ways, drawing new uninitiated fans to cycling is one. The other unfortunately is in being the poster child for omerta and the doctor prescribed doping program.
I am thinking of starting a new thread, Lance Fans Anonymous, where all of us who have managed to throw off the shackles can go and testify about what gave us the strength.

 

[Sprocket01]

I am thinking of starting a new thread, Lance Fans Anonymous, where all of us who have managed to throw off the shackles can go and testify about what gave us the strength.

No offense to anyone, but I've noted most of Armstrong's biggest critics seem to be quite long in the tooth. Some might say they could be bitter old men who are past their best and bash Armstrong to feel better about themselves. This could in part be a generational thing. What do we think?

 

[BikeCentric]

No offense to anyone, but I've noted most of Armstrong's biggest critics seem to be quite long in the tooth. Some might say they could be bitter old men who are past their best and bash Armstrong to feel better about themselves. This could in part be a generational thing. What do we think?

I think you've come up with a new and original theory! I don't think I've heard you or any other troll repeat some variant of this theory over a thousand times! I think you're a genious!

P.S. sadly I won't get to race in the Masters cat for 7 years.

 

[Hugh Januss]

No offense to anyone, but I've noted most of Armstrong's biggest critics seem to be quite long in the tooth. Some might say they could be bitter old men who are past their best and bash Armstrong to feel better about themselves. This could in part be a generational thing. What do we think?

I think we can all agree that most people learn things as they get older that make them less stupid and gullible, and more able to make up their own minds about life questions.

 

[Sprocket01]

I think we can all agree that most people learn things as they get older that make them less stupid and gullible, and more able to make up their own minds about life questions.

How old are you then?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

red_flanders,

you're one of the biggest haters of Armstrong in this forum....

Nice Sproket01 - when you cannot argue the points that someone puts and have to resort to ad hominem attacks its shows you have little to offer the debate.

 

[Hugh Januss]

How old are you then?

Obviously older than you.

 

[BikeCentric]

Round and round the Sprocket wheel turns, over and over and over and over again...

 

[BikeCentric]

Nice Sproket01 - when you cannot argue the points that someone puts and have to resort to ad hominem attacks its shows you have little to offer the debate.

Whatever Doc we all know that you eat cancerous tumor chunks for breakfast and drink hatorade all day.

 

[pmcg76]

No offense to anyone, but I've noted most of Armstrong's biggest critics seem to be quite long in the tooth. Some might say they could be bitter old men who are past their best and bash Armstrong to feel better about themselves. This could in part be a generational thing. What do we think?

It just gets weirder and weirder.............

Rubbish, I am much younger than Lance and I know there are many more posters also much younger than Lance, this is the most common jibe thrown at non Lance fans, we all have an inferiority complex because Lance is so great which is plain stupid because we are inferior to all professional cyclists, period. Indurain was as boring as ****, had as many GTs as Lance and I never disliked the guy. I am betting I would have disliked Hinault if I was round in his time as he seemed a right **** as well.

 

[Sprocket01]

Nice Sproket01 - when you cannot argue the points that someone puts and have to resort to ad hominem attacks its shows you have little to offer the debate.

We can't go around in circles arguing the same point. We've done all that already.

And didn't see you speaking out against people using my mental health as a debating point, so you're a hypocrite on that, Doctor.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

How old are you then?

If you have a point - why not put it out there. And then posters can reveal their age if they wish?

BTW - in calculationg age do we have to use Sproket01 logic and math?

 

[Sprocket01]

Obviously older than you.

Well I'll come clean and say I'm 29. Not that young, but not that old.

I have noticed most of Armstrong's critics are 40 plus. I do wonder if this has something to do with it.