More on the Betsy Andreu & Lance. Now with Sally Jenkins

[Digger]

Because Lance lost ALL THAT WEIGHT! He didn't need to dope for his tour wins because he lost so much weight during his illness!

Kind of funny really. He doped when he was an average TdF rider pre-'96 but didn't need to dope from '99-2005.

Yes, that's exactly the point I'm alluding to.

 

[blackcat]

Because Lance lost ALL THAT WEIGHT! He didn't need to dope for his tour wins because he lost so much weight during his illness!

Kind of funny really. He doped when he was an average TdF rider pre-'96 but didn't need to dope from '99-2005.

that is Wiggins101. He lost the weight. Fact was, he was a **** roadie, and could never use his weight and power, to win chronos or Belgian semi classics in the cross winds, but now we are expected to believe he can make the podium.

Wiggins is as big a fraud as Armstrong and the rest of 'em imo

 

[Digger]

You clearly do have a personal and bitter agenda. You even use Bruyneel's wife as your username - that is very damning to your reputation. It's unclear what relationship you have to professional cycling - whether you just worked for a sponsor or even rode for a team - you don't seem to want to clarify this, and instead just throw out bits of gossip and tittle tattle about what you apparently know. But it is certain that you have a personal grudge from the things you say.

For all the talk of Armstrong groupies, it's actually people like you with personal vendettas and spreading malicious lies about 'myths' that people should watch out for on these forums. You cannot be trusted.

Give one example of a 'malicious lie' from Race Radio, formerly Eva Maria.

 

[Anonymous]

Because Lance lost ALL THAT WEIGHT! He didn't need to dope for his tour wins because he lost so much weight during his illness!

Kind of funny really. He doped when he was an average TdF rider pre-'96 but didn't need to dope from '99-2005.

You forgot that his heart grew 3 sizes that day. Here is a discussion: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Grinch's_heart_size

 

[Race Radio]

You clearly do have a personal and bitter agenda. You even use Bruyneel's wife as your username - that is very damning to your reputation. It's unclear what relationship you have to professional cycling - whether you just worked for a sponsor or even rode for a team - you don't seem to want to clarify this, and instead just throw out bits of gossip and tittle tattle about what you apparently know. But it is certain that you have a personal grudge from the things you say.

For all the talk of Armstrong groupies, it's actually people like you with personal vendettas and spreading malicious lies about 'myths' that people should watch out for on these forums. You cannot be trusted.

If you feel that I have posted something that is untrue then you are free to present your point of view....otherwise you come across as

 

[Anonymous]

If you feel that I have posted something that is untrue then you are free to present your point of view....otherwise you come across as

Classic....

 

[RigelKent]

If there are any legal types on this board, please explain to me how someone who is testifying can submit evidence. Is that possible during a civil trial? I thought only the lawyers can submit evidence.

Second - how is it possible Greg Lemond was not prosecuted for taping his conversation with Stephanie McIlvain or was allowed in the SCA trial? From what I've found, it is against Minnesota law to tape a conversation without prior consent. Listening to the conversation, I didn't hear either Lemond or Stephanie give consent. I'm assuming Lemond was calling from his home in Minnesota.

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=626A.02&year=2008

Late to the thread, what with things like a job and all that, but the key line is
"It is not unlawful under this chapter for a person not acting under color of law to intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication where such person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the constitution or laws of the United States or of any state."

Both sides don't have to know a conversation is being taped. One can tape any conversation one is party to in l'Etoile du Nord without telling the other party

 

[Digger]

Betsy, it's worth noting that some of the anti Armstrong fanatics you associate with here believe Armstrong's seven tour wins were a "myth". Your husband, who admits to taking EPO but didn't win the ToF, may have something to say about that.

Be careful not to be too flattered by these people. Some have their own rather personal and bitter agendas and are just using you.

So do you believe Lance was clean for his seven wins?

 

[Digger]

Use your brain a little bit and think through what I could be saying. Frank Audrea admits to being off his face on EPO, yet he did not win the ToF.

Some people who know better use the drug issue to further personal grudges that have nothing to do with the issue. They know ignorant types like yourself are easy bait and will believe anything they say. Just be careful that you don't get sucked in as well.

So Frankie and Betsy made it up because of bitterness that Frankie doped, yet never won the Tour? Is that your theory?
I am asking you a straight question...do you believe Lance doped for his seven tour wins? Secondly, do you believe there is ANY evidence that he doped?

Andreu is how it is spelled by the way. But thanks for bring him into the conversation. I am also curious as to why you say he was 'off his face' on EPO. You reckon he took such a dose of EPO that he was stoned?

Also, present one example of malicious lies from Race Radio. Otherwise, it is you who is presenting the malicious lies.

 

[Cobber]

that is Wiggins101. He lost the weight. Fact was, he was a **** roadie, and could never use his weight and power, to win chronos or Belgian semi classics in the cross winds, but now we are expected to believe he can make the podium.

Wiggins is as big a fraud as Armstrong and the rest of 'em imo

Yeah.. except the difference is that Wiggins did lose a hell of a lot of weight.

Lance in '92

Lance in 2001

Track Wiggo

Wiggo this year

 

[Race Radio]

Use your brain a little bit and think through what I could be saying. Frank Audrea admits to being off his face on EPO, yet he did not win the ToF.

Some people who know better use the drug issue to further personal grudges that have nothing to do with the issue. They know ignorant types like yourself are easy bait and will believe anything they say. Just be careful that you don't get sucked in as well.

Who is this "Frank Andrea" guy you talk about?

 

[Digger]

Who is this "Frank Andrea" guy you talk about?

Some kind of coke dealer or something because he was 'off his head' on EPO apparently. Wonder why he's bringing drug dealers into the conversation though. Never heard of a Frank Audrea in cycling...maybe he's a soigneur or something...strange...

 

[Race Radio]

Some kind of coke dealer or something because he was 'off his head' on EPO apparently. Wonder why he's bringing drug dealers into the conversation though. Never heard of a Frank Audrea in cycling...maybe he's a soigneur or something...strange...

I am pretty sure he was a domestique for Fausto Coppi back in the day. I wonder if Mr. BanPro knows that EPO wasn't around back in Coppi's day?

 

[Zen Master]

You clearly do have a personal and bitter agenda. You even use Bruyneel's wife as your username - that is very damning to your reputation. It's unclear what relationship you have to professional cycling - whether you just worked for a sponsor or even rode for a team - you don't seem to want to clarify this, and instead just throw out bits of gossip and tittle tattle about what you apparently know. But it is certain that you have a personal grudge from the things you say.

For all the talk of Armstrong groupies, it's actually people like you with personal vendettas and spreading malicious lies about 'myths' that people should watch out for on these forums. You cannot be trusted.

Arbiter, is that you ?!

 

[Digger]

I do not believe that Wiggins doped, but this picture has clearly been doctored. No cyclist has legs like that.

He lost weight on his upper body, not his legs.

This is what we're dealing with here.

 

[Race Radio]

I do not believe that Wiggins doped, but this picture has clearly been doctored. No cyclist has legs like that.

He lost weight on his upper body, not his legs.

Spoken like someone who has never met a pro cyclist.

The picture has clearly been doctored by the same space aliens who doctored Landis's samples.

 

[Digger]

Spoken like someone who has never met a pro cyclist.

The picture has clearly been doctored by the same space aliens who doctored Landis's samples.

I know yeah, and they call us the conspiracy theorists.

 

[Race Radio]

It's not a conspiracy theory - pictures are photoshoped on the internet all the time.

Maybe it's just the angle or something, but those obviously do not look like his legs. There is no muscle on them. Show me another picture of a pro- cyclist with legs that thin?

It appears you have only watched Pro Cycling on the TV. You know the TV adds 10 pounds.

Have you ever heard of this guy?

 

[Zen Master]

Other pictures of Wiggin's legs in the Tour...

The same legs? It's hard to tell. I'd still say they don't look quite like the other picture.

Absolutely the same legs only without Paris - Roubaix dirt my dear The Arbiter a.k.a. BanProCycling Retardihno

 

[red_flanders]

You appear to be wrong. I saw Rasmussen up close in person in 2007 and his legs didn't look as thin as the Wiggins picture.

I knew someone would throw Rasmussen at me. That's why I specifically said cyclists lose weight on the upper body, and asked for pictures of legs that thin. Nobody has yet provided.

I'm not saying they can't be his legs - just doesn't look quite right to me. Rasmussen couldn't time trial for toffee so being as thin as he was made more sense.

Why would someone doctor this photo, exactly?

Anyway, once you get past that, get a 24-35 mm lens and take a photo of yourself sitting in that position, with your calf muscles hanging down. Then take a photo of yourself with a 50mm + lens standing up. See which photo makes your calves look notably thinner.

He's a really skinny dude, and that particular sitting position exacerbates his really, really thin legs.

 

[drfunk000]

I saw him in person at the Tour, and he was definately nice and skinny. If you wanted to, you could work through the calculations to come up with an estimate of his power output and W/kg on the climbs... then compare that with his previous TT performances. You'd have something to go on then - otherwise you truly have no evidence that Wiggins has done something illegal to improve his performance.

 

[Race Radio]

You appear to be wrong. I saw Rasmussen up close in person in 2007 and his legs didn't look as thin as the Wiggins picture.

I have met, and ridden with, Rass a few times. He even gave me one of these

The chicken is crazy skinny, as are most GT contenders.

 

[Deagol]

You appear to be wrong. I saw Rasmussen up close in person in 2007 and his legs didn't look as thin as the Wiggins picture.

I knew someone would throw Rasmussen at me. That's why I specifically said cyclists lose weight on the upper body, and asked for pictures of legs that thin. Nobody has yet provided.

I'm not saying they can't be his legs - just doesn't look quite right to me. Rasmussen couldn't time trial for toffee so being as thin as he was made more sense.

Rasmussen doesn't look right to lots of people..

 

[bianchigirl]

Whilst the weight loss debate rages, this from cyclismag:

La légèreté n'est pas toujours un atout pour un coureur de Grand Tour. Selon le photographe James Startt, le manque de puissance de Lance Armstrong sur le Tour 2009 a une explication : "C'est peut être parce qu'au départ de ce Tour il pesait 2 kilos de moins qu'au départ des sept tours qu'il a dominés" (Vélo Magazine).
Pourtant, pendant des années, Lance Armstrong a justifié son retour au premier plan par une perte de 10 kg. Dans son livre "La grande imposture" (Editions Hugo&Cie), Jean-Pierre De Mondenard donne une petite synthèse de l'évolution du poids du Texan : en 1993, juste après son titre de champion du monde, il pèse 75,1 kg. Au départ du Tour 2003 l'aiguille de la balance s'arrêtait sur 74 kg et sur 77,2 kg en 2004. En février 2009, L.A. comptait sur le Giro pour perdre du poids. "Et j'espère arriver en juillet, au départ du Tour, avec mes 74 kg d'autrefois", avait-il déclaré à L'Équipe.
Si on en croit James Startt, la cure d'amaigrissement a été trop forte.

moins=less. Now where does that leave the (spurious, as the article points out) weight loss argument?

 

[Digger]

Whilst the weight loss debate rages, this from cyclismag:

La légèreté n'est pas toujours un atout pour un coureur de Grand Tour. Selon le photographe James Startt, le manque de puissance de Lance Armstrong sur le Tour 2009 a une explication : "C'est peut être parce qu'au départ de ce Tour il pesait 2 kilos de moins qu'au départ des sept tours qu'il a dominés" (Vélo Magazine).
Pourtant, pendant des années, Lance Armstrong a justifié son retour au premier plan par une perte de 10 kg. Dans son livre "La grande imposture" (Editions Hugo&Cie), Jean-Pierre De Mondenard donne une petite synthèse de l'évolution du poids du Texan : en 1993, juste après son titre de champion du monde, il pèse 75,1 kg. Au départ du Tour 2003 l'aiguille de la balance s'arrêtait sur 74 kg et sur 77,2 kg en 2004. En février 2009, L.A. comptait sur le Giro pour perdre du poids. "Et j'espère arriver en juillet, au départ du Tour, avec mes 74 kg d'autrefois", avait-il déclaré à L'Équipe.
Si on en croit James Startt, la cure d'amaigrissement a été trop forte.

moins=less. Now where does that leave the (spurious, as the article points out) weight loss argument?

Edited post.........