No longer a Lance fanboy thread

[lean mean &green]

genius?

Sorry LMG - but thats a bit of a strawman. I don't know anyone here who says he is a 'genius'.
Now I will add that he is a very good doping Doctor primarily because he is a hematologist and unlike other Docs he traveled with LA for key training blocks.

i won't argue with you about a simple word choice but many describe ferrari's recipe's as far better than anyone else's with little real evidence to support it. anecdotally we have a few rider's opinions but there's so much secrecy it's hard to figure out why or if it's justified and it's a big pill to swallow. the point is that some assumptions have been accepted as fact but much of the story is murky at best. both sides of the debate lose their head from time to time.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

i won't argue with you about a simple word choice but many describe ferrari's recipe's as far better than anyone else's with little real evidence to support it. anecdotally we have a few rider's opinions but there's so much secrecy it's hard to figure out why or if it's justified and it's a big pill to swallow. the point is that some assumptions have been accepted as fact but much of the story is murky at best. both sides of the debate lose their head from time to time.

I understand what you are saying - but like the Ferrari example, often a lot of posters get attributed views or comments that were never made.
But I accept the overall point you were originally trying to make.

As a brief aside - I remember someone attacking a thread with something like, "all you guys who say LA is evil...." - so I checked it and the only time the word "evil" had been used was by posters claiming that the anti Lance people had used it - I found that quite amusing.

One point on Ferrari - if, as has been acknowledged, the riders themselves thought he was a 'genius' or the best, then it almost matters little if he was or not.

 

[lean mean &green]

One point on Ferrari - if, as has been acknowledged, the riders themselves thought he was a 'genius' or the best, then it almost matters little if he was or not.

the specifics really do matter from an anti-doping standpoint. originally merckx index was trying to separate what we know from what we think we know about how the "successes" of LA and USPS took place. he asked some important questions like how much leeway did armstrong really have with the UCI or the swiss lab? how much of an advantage could actually be gained with advanced notice of random tests? etc. i merely added my own doubts about ferrari's mystical doping powers. IOW how do we explain an unprecedented string of doping successes and miserable failures on the part of anti-doping efforts when TH and FL suggest armstrong's program wasn't too different than anyone else's? it seems to cast doubt over some of mine and many others' earlier assumptions. when news such as this breaks we have to reconcile it with earlier information and might need to accept that we were wrong in some ways. that's a tedious and sometimes painful process.

i agree it doesn't matter much when setting the record straight on character issues. the most reprehensible aspects of this story to me are the use of livestrong as a PR shield, bribery, coercion, etc. how the performance enhancements actually occurred is only a small part of that larger story but i care just as much about seeing the record corrected as i do about avoiding blunders of this magnitude going forward.

 

[Berzin]

Well, the program at US Postal WAS different. It was different in ways we do not know, because the information isn't available.

It wasn't just the fact that US Postal were able to avoid detection, whether by design or by allegiance.

The US Postal "train" was something unique, something rarely seen in the pro peloton since the abuse of EPO began.

The only teams that rode in a comparable fashion were Gewiss and the ONCE team of Manolo Saiz when Zulle and Jalabert were at the top of their respective games. Two of those teams had Dr. Ferrari as an in-house doping guru-Gewiss and US Postal.

Once never managed to pull it off at the Tour, but there were plenty of races, including the Vuelta, where their dominance was an open joke. And we all know what Gewiss accomplished.

Having so many guys from the same team pulling at the front day in and day out is an outstanding accomplishment that begs further scrutiny, especially since with US Postal the same guys went to other teams and either NEVER performed the same way again, like George Hincapie, or just got busted.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

the specifics really do matter from an anti-doping standpoint. originally merckx index was trying to separate what we know from what we think we know about how the "successes" of LA and USPS took place. he asked some important questions like how much leeway did armstrong really have with the UCI or the swiss lab? how much of an advantage could actually be gained with advanced notice of random tests? etc. i merely added my own doubts about ferrari's mystical doping powers. IOW how do we explain an unprecedented string of doping successes and miserable failures on the part of anti-doping efforts when TH and FL suggest armstrong's program wasn't too different than anyone else's? it seems to cast doubt over some of mine and many others' earlier assumptions. when news such as this breaks we have to reconcile it with earlier information and might need to accept that we were wrong in some ways. that's a tedious and sometimes painful process.

i agree it doesn't matter much when setting the record straight on character issues. the most reprehensible aspects of this story to me are the use of livestrong as a PR shield, bribery, coercion, etc. how the performance enhancements actually occurred is only a small part of that larger story but i care just as much about seeing the record corrected as i do about avoiding blunders of this magnitude going forward.

I have gone back and reread MI's post - and they are good and valid questions, which I will get to.

Firstly - to your point to MI, "if you're implying that players on both sides of the armstrong debate are guilty of it - you're right!".
I do not necessarily agree with this - I do not believe there are 2 sides. Many people post different accounts of the same scenario.
Also - some like myself often try to point out the subtlety - but that can understandably be broken down to a 'Ferrari is a master' type post, and indeed I am sure I have done that myself on other issues.

The blue is a great example - how did LA get the advantage when almost everyone else was doing the same?
On the face of it looks that way- the PEDs were the same and methods the same.
But as Manzano stated USPS also got advance notice of OOC tests. Also Ferrari accompanied LA on many camps - so Ferrari could constantly monitor the effects and dope around the testing, max benefit and little chance of getting caught.

 

[schnebit]

they all lied.. i am just waiting for him to ask fans for their money so he can spend it on a losing legal defense like floyd and tyler...

Exactly! They're all a bunch of liars. Floyd and Tyler have absolutely NO credibility in my book. As far as Hincappie goes, if he admitted to the FED that he exchanged EPO with Armstrong, how was he still allowed to race in the ToC?

 

[schadenfreude]

The thought of this gullible moron waking up every day with this giant tattoo on his back seems very funny to me. Do you think he is still a fanboy? Can he sue Armstrong for tattoo removal money?

priorities, priorities: he should sue the tattooist for ham-fisted rendering.

 

[skippythepinhead]

Exactly! They're all a bunch of liars. Floyd and Tyler have absolutely NO credibility in my book. As far as Hincappie goes, if he admitted to the FED that he exchanged EPO with Armstrong, how was he still allowed to race in the ToC?

 and this thread was so close to page 2

 

[schnebit]

 and this thread was so close to page 2

Huh? It's strange for me to be of the opinion that two confessed liars don't have credibility?

If you assume that I believe that Armstrong is clean, you are mistaken. However, I do think that the media is just slinging mud in some cases.

For example, if the story surrounding GH's testimony is true, he wouldn't be currently racing. Why is that assertion absurd to you?

 

[Cloxxki]

I have gone back and reread MI's post - and they are good and valid questions, which I will get to.

Firstly - to your point to MI, "if you're implying that players on both sides of the armstrong debate are guilty of it - you're right!".
I do not necessarily agree with this - I do not believe there are 2 sides. Many people post different accounts of the same scenario.
Also - some like myself often try to point out the subtlety - but that can understandably be broken down to a 'Ferrari is a master' type post, and indeed I am sure I have done that myself on other issues.

The blue is a great example - how did LA get the advantage when almost everyone else was doing the same?
On the face of it looks that way- the PEDs were the same and methods the same.
But as Manzano stated USPS also got advance notice of OOC tests. Also Ferrari accompanied LA on many camps - so Ferrari could constantly monitor the effects and dope around the testing, max benefit and little chance of getting caught.

If it's true that Lance obtained a limited stash of HemAssist, for some limited resale and otherwise personal use, that alone could explain it all.
Keeping close ties to the UCI regarding substances being tested for would proof very benificial, as he'd know when to stop using HemAssist, which he likely only did in 2010. It being for him-only, had it not been leaked to the press, would have guaranteed him sportive immortality. No retro-active testing for a substance no-one ever realized was used in sports!
But Lance had to over-do it. Use it on top of a blood doping regime pencilled by Ferrari. He had to let his messed up personality loose on other riders and people in his proximity. He had to start a for-his-profit charity. Almost like he wanted to get nailed for something, he did all in his powers, at any risk, for any gain.

He could have won a couple Tours, and never get into his current situation. It's Karma. His life ain't getting any better hereonwards.

 

[powerste]

Huh? It's strange for me to be of the opinion that two confessed liars don't have credibility?

If you assume that I believe that Armstrong is clean, you are mistaken. However, I do think that the media is just slinging mud in some cases.

For example, if the story surrounding GH's testimony is true, he wouldn't be currently racing. Why is that assertion absurd to you?

Because the "story" is a leak of grand jury testimony, and as a leak, cannot be confirmed as true. And the GJ transcripts are not published for review by USADA/USAC/UCI/WADA/AtoC organizers/BMC team/etc...

There's nothing actionable about GH's history that can be proven - thus no cause to prevent him from racing.

FWIW I don't doubt that the story of GH's testimony is broadly accurate, but it's not solid enough for authorities to suspend him.

 

[skippythepinhead]

Huh? It's strange for me to be of the opinion that two confessed liars don't have credibility?

If you assume that I believe that Armstrong is clean, you are mistaken. However, I do think that the media is just slinging mud in some cases.

For example, if the story surrounding GH's testimony is true, he wouldn't be currently racing. Why is that assertion absurd to you?

Oh, I see. Credibility is the question. Was Armstrong a cheat when they said he wasn't? Was Armstrong a cheat when they said he was? Credibility is an opinion-based quality. You can quibble all you like about your feelings about Landis and Hamilton. But facts are facts and that's why we convene grand juries.

Hincapie can ride because grand jury testimony is sealed and there's no one else saying he can't.

 

[MacRoadie]

For example, if the story surrounding GH's testimony is true, he wouldn't be currently racing. Why is that assertion absurd to you?

Why wouldn't he be racing?

Has he tested positive for PED's?

Did he have irregular blood values?

Has he admitted PUBLICLY that he used PED's?

Has he stated or has it been leaked) that he is still CURRENTLY using PED's?

If his testimony was selectively leaked prior to the 60 Minutes airing then what indicates USADA knew about it before the ATOC (or knew at all)?

If USADA DOES know about it, does leaked hearsay (and not a public statement) about an admission satisfy WADA Code triggering a sanctionable offense?

 

[schnebit]

Why wouldn't he be racing?

Has he tested positive for PED's?

Did he have irregular blood values?

Has he admitted PUBLICLY that he used PED's?

Has he stated or has it been leaked) that he is still CURRENTLY using PED's?

If his testimony was selectively leaked prior to the 60 Minutes airing then what indicates USADA knew about it before the ATOC (or knew at all)?

If USADA DOES know about it, does leaked hearsay (and not a public statement) about an admission satisfy WADA Code triggering a sanctionable offense?

60 Minutes (and an article on Cyclingnews.com for that matter) asserted GH's testimony as fact. If it were true, I'd expect to see at the very least a mention of an investigation into GH. So far, nothing... nada.... I think that the story is bubkas.

 

[MacRoadie]

60 Minutes (and an article on Cyclingnews.com for that matter) asserted GH's testimony as fact. If it were true, I'd expect to see at the very least a mention of an investigation into GH. So far, nothing... nada.... I think that the story is bubkas.

Maybe, just maybe, in the current environment someone at USADA finally figured out that the McQuaid/Verbruggen modus operandi isn't the most effective way to run an investigation.

 

[skippythepinhead]

60 Minutes (and an article on Cyclingnews.com for that matter) asserted GH's testimony as fact. If it were true, I'd expect to see at the very least a mention of an investigation into GH. So far, nothing... nada.... I think that the story is bubkas.

Well, if it turns out not to be true, and Hincapie did not testify before the grand jury, remind me and I'll publicly apologize and send a $50 check to Livestrong in your name. If it turns out to be true, I doubt your life will get much worse.

 

[VeloCity]

Exactly! They're all a bunch of liars. Floyd and Tyler have absolutely NO credibility in my book.

Quite a conspiracy getting Landis, Hamilton, Hincapie, Swart, F Andreu, B Andreu, Lemond, Startt, O'Reilly, Ressiot, et al. to make the same basic claims about Armstrong.

But I suppose that they're all lying about the same thing makes MUCH more sense than Armstrong lying about his own doping.

 

[thehog]

Exactly! They're all a bunch of liars. Floyd and Tyler have absolutely NO credibility in my book.

Are you writing a book? Publicity seeker.

 

[Anonymous]

Exactly! They're all a bunch of liars. Floyd and Tyler have absolutely NO credibility in my book. As far as Hincappie goes, if he admitted to the FED that he exchanged EPO with Armstrong, how was he still allowed to race in the ToC?

Is your book a really short book with pictures and one word per page? Maybe some scratch and sniff pictures too?

 

[MacRoadie]

Is your book a really short book with pictures and one word per page? Maybe some scratch and sniff pictures too?

No, but it may as well have.

 

[schnebit]

Well, if it turns out not to be true, and Hincapie did not testify before the grand jury, remind me and I'll publicly apologize and send a $50 check to Livestrong in your name. If it turns out to be true, I doubt your life will get much worse.

Huh? I have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously...

Why would you publicly apologize and send a $50 check to Livestrong in my name?

Why in the world would you do that?

 

[schnebit]

Is your book a really short book with pictures and one word per page? Maybe some scratch and sniff pictures too?

Not at all... it's a figure of speech. I'm not actually planning on publishing a book.

 

[schnebit]

Are you writing a book? Publicity seeker.

No, as I already pointed out I'm not actually writing a book... it's a figure of speech? I really have no idea what you guys are talking about, unfortunately.

 

[thehog]

No, as I already pointed out I'm not actually writing a book... it's a figure of speech? I really have no idea what you guys are talking about, unfortunately.

Not sure I understand. Are you actually writing a book or talking about writing one?

 

[schnebit]

Not sure I understand. Are you actually writing a boom or talking about writing one?

No, I was just pointing out that both Tyler Hamilton & Floyd Landis have no credibility because they are confessed liars.