Official "another interesting piece I found on Floyd Landis" Thread

[Caruut]

At what point did I psychoanalyse you?

Floyd presented a lot of BS, yes. At the time everyone assumed everything was BS. When he told some things that were true, it seems fair to re-evaluate old assumptions based on new information.

The only things people are changing is whether or not they though Floyd was being truthful. An entirely objective thing. Maybe some take it too far, but I just felt you were being to sweeping and too eager to find hypocrisy.

Maybe I was wrong, but that's no reason to start making poor disses at my name. It's just an online name that I use because I always use it.

 

[ChrisE]

*** edited by mod ***

 

[Caruut]

In the skull landscape you see some way to tie the holocaust to anything Landis??

I was talking about the meaning of the term "revisionist history". Get a grip.

 

[Caruut]

*** edited by mod ***

 

[Dr. Maserati]

*** edited by mod ***

No - not really.
I think he helps cut to the point - which of course, you are trying to move away from.

So, 2006 - you still think the Feds would have started an investigation?
On who and what?
What stopped them investigating at any point back then? Why did they not investigate Landis? Or Hamilton? Both caught, so a lot easier to investigate then LA or USPS.

Landis would have been better advised to take the rap - plead ignorance and perhaps escape a full 2 year ban and he might have been allowed back in the fold.

 

[thehog]

Are you off your meds? Or has flicker hijacked the hog's username?

So, if LA just doped instead of the team doping, he would be ok in your eyes? What about the cancer patients being duped into believing in something to give them hope? What about those victimized competitors like JU, Vino, Rumsas, Beloki that fell prey to the doper LA?

You would put up with that scandalous activity if GH got dropped in the first KM of the Tourmalet instead of the 10th?

I like your posts because they are realistic. Our thinking doesn't have to fold into two camps - Armstrong lovers and haters.

I think you also misunderstood my post. I'm not making a critical assessment of those who doped and those who didn't. I know everyone doped. I was there in the sport and saw it all around me - I never had a problem with it. I admire the strength of the mere few who could say no - i didn't.

What I stated was that I like when cycle racing is hard and when you never know who might win. The USPS style of racing was difficult to take because they completely dominated the Tour for years on end. They were unstoppable. I liked when Armstrong was on the ropes - thats when his best racing came to the fore. When he was backed into a corner he always came out fighting and often his superior tactics won him the race. Amstel Gold comes to mind along with his World Championship win. The 2004 Tour was just silly. Probably the worst the sport ever got to in terms of a completive spectacle - it was plain boring.

The stressful part of doping is not doping. Cyclists don't have a problem with the act of doping... its the pretending and the lying that becomes stressful. Because you have to pretend to everyone that it doesn't exist. Thats the hard part. The other factor is you never know just how good you are.... you have battle with your conscience if you're actually any good or if its just the meds kicking in. You forget the level that you're at as a pure athlete.

Most on this board are dreamers. They try to pretend if faced with the same conditions and decisions they wouldn't dope. When you're on a one-year rolling contract at 50,000euros per year and you can barely stay in the peloton you're going to spend a little to keep up - and by keeping up I mean keeping your job.

When you're standing on the abysses looking down the raven do you say - "no I shouldn't dope"? - or do you say - "I need to get paid so I can put food on the table for my family and keep the house" - its a simple as that.

 

[ChrisE]

No - not really.
I think he helps cut to the point - which of course, you are trying to move away from.

So, 2006 - you still think the Feds would have started an investigation?
On who and what?
What stopped them investigating at any point back then? Why did they not investigate Landis? Or Hamilton? Both caught, so a lot easier to investigate then LA or USPS.

Landis would have been better advised to take the rap - plead ignorance and perhaps escape a full 2 year ban and he might have been allowed back in the fold.

If he says in 2006 what he says in 2010, there would be no basis of an investigation???? I am beginning to think you are trolling me with this whack line of reasoning.

Why is there a basis for starting an investigation in 1010 when FL says there was systematic doping on USPS, as opposed to not having a basis for starting an investigation in 2006 if he says the same thing?

Why didn't the US feds investigate FL in 2006? He was on Phonak, and he was denying all. TH was on Phonak as well, denying. Is your next question for me what 2+2 is?

BTW, I already agreed upthread with you that FL would have been better to stfu and take his medicine. That either means I am as smart as you or you are as stupid as me.

 

[andy1234]

Interesting - I am sure you will remind us soon that you are not a fan of LA.

The exact same observation about Landis could be used in relation to Joe Papp - but of couse that would mean your point is worthless, oh wait....

I will remind you again, I am not a fan of LA. Happy now?

Neither am I an irrational hater of all that he says and does.

If Joe Papp had the ability to bring Armstrong down like Landis did, he would have been raised to the same admiration level as Landis. So whats your point? Oh wait....

 

[Caruut]

Nice post.

I do feel a certain animosity towards Lance more than the others because of the way so many other lives have been ruined or set back by the crusade against doping, yet he has sailed through with ease.

I do know that if it weren't Lance winning a juiced Tour it would be someone else. The man's self-promotion is a bit wearing too, though no-one else had the chance to self-promote that much since he beat them all.

I know I would probably dope if faced with the same issue, but I guess what everyone is doing in trying to act against doping is making a situation where people don't have that choice available to make.

I do have an irrational dislike of Lance though. Partly because he's a consistent winner, and I like some uncertainty, and partly because of what I said before.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If he says in 2006 what he says in 2010, there would be no basis of an investigation???? I am beginning to think you are trolling me with this whack line of reasoning.

Why is there a basis for starting an investigation in 1010 when FL says there was systematic doping on USPS, as opposed to not having a basis for starting an investigation in 2006 if he says the same thing?

Why didn't the US feds investigate FL in 2006? He was on Phonak, and he was denying all. TH was on Phonak as well, denying. Is your next question for me what 2+2 is?

BTW, I already agreed upthread with you that FL would have been better to stfu and take his medicine. That either means I am as smart as you or you are as stupid as me.

Why indeed.
This is where your opinion is based on wrong information - the current investigation did not begin with Floyd (or even USPS or Lance) - it began with Rock Racing and probably Kayle Leogrande.
Landis admissions linked it to Armstrong, Tailwind and USPS.

That is why your logic is flawed that a Federal investigation would have begun in 2006.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I will remind you again, I am not a fan of LA. Happy now?

Neither am I an irrational hater of all that he says and does.

If Joe Papp had the ability to bring Armstrong down like Landis did, he would have been raised to the same admiration level as Landis. So whats your point? Oh wait....

But you said "you're either with us or against us" - yet you claim to sit on the fence?
So, its "you're either with us against us, or siting on the fence and/or neither a rational or irrational hater or lover...... or something.

I think you will find that the same people who welcome Papps eventual honesty are the same who welcome Landis - for the same reason that they are exposing the doping and corrupt system.
The fact that you cannot see past Armstrong is your problem and no-one elses.

 

[Benotti69]

*** edited by mod +++

It all gets confusing doesn't it? One day FL is a lying clown, the next day after he jams LA we are confronted with the confusing situation where we don't know whether to call him a liar when he says he knows nothing about hacking LNDD computers, or whether to give him a pass now when he still claims he has no idea how synthetic testosterone got into his system. By coincidence, not admitting that keeps him out of some legal troubles. What a shock.

So no, I don't see it like you do whether I am a fan, ie non-hater in binary clinic world, or not of LA.

FL could have changed the sport, and perhaps all sports, if he would have admitted at the time of the AAF that he did it, and spilled what he knew about the culture.

*** edited by mod ***

I understand why he didn't admit then, and why he chose to lie and fight with BS. But, I don't whitewash that lack of integrity at that time, and overinflate his integrity now just because LA was mean to him.

I understand what FL is and how he arrived at his situation today. You obviously cant. I have not over inflated his integrity.

 

[Kretch]

I like your posts because they are realistic. Our thinking doesn't have to fold into two camps - Armstrong lovers and haters.

I think you also misunderstood my post. I'm not making a critical assessment of those who doped and those who didn't. I know everyone doped. I was there in the sport and saw it all around me - I never had a problem with it. I admire the strength of the mere few who could say no - i didn't.

What I stated was that I like when cycle racing is hard and when you never know who might win. The USPS style of racing was difficult to take because they completely dominated the Tour for years on end. They were unstoppable. I liked when Armstrong was on the ropes - thats when his best racing came to the fore. When he was backed into a corner he always came out fighting and often his superior tactics won him the race. Amstel Gold comes to mind along with his World Championship win. The 2004 Tour was just silly. Probably the worst the sport ever got to in terms of a completive spectacle - it was plain boring.

The stressful part of doping is not doping. Cyclists don't have a problem with the act of doping... its the pretending and the lying that becomes stressful. Because you have to pretend to everyone that it doesn't exist. Thats the hard part. The other factor is you never know just how good you are.... you have battle with your conscience if you're actually any good or if its just the meds kicking in. You forget the level that you're at as a pure athlete.

Most on this board are dreamers. They try to pretend if faced with the same conditions and decisions they wouldn't dope. When you're on a one-year rolling contract at 50,000euros per year and you can barely stay in the peloton you're going to spend a little to keep up - and by keeping up I mean keeping your job.

When you're standing on the abysses looking down the raven do you say - "no I shouldn't dope"? - or do you say - "I need to get paid so I can put food on the table for my family and keep the house" - its a simple as that.

+1

An insightful perspective and one that would suggest that all of the peleton are "victims", whether they dope or not, and that the real villains are the ones that create and police the rules of the game - the UCI.

The allegation that sets LA apart from the rest of the peleton and perhaps helps to explain the level of hate is that he was in bed with the villains.

 

[andy1234]

But you said "you're either with us or against us" - yet you claim to sit on the fence?
So, its "you're either with us against us, or siting on the fence and/or neither a rational or irrational hater or lover...... or something.

I think you will find that the same people who welcome Papps eventual honesty are the same who welcome Landis - for the same reason that they are exposing the doping and corrupt system.
The fact that you cannot see past Armstrong is your problem and no-one elses.

The "wit us or aginst us" was a mockery of the Anti LA brigade. Not my standpoint.
That should have been clear from the post. If you couldnt see that then you are slipping doc.

I will try not include subtitles for you next time, if that would help?

 

[ChrisE]

Why indeed.
This is where your opinion is based on wrong information - the current investigation did not begin with Floyd (or even USPS or Lance) - it began with Rock Racing and probably Kayle Leogrande.
Landis admissions linked it to Armstrong, Tailwind and USPS.

That is why your logic is flawed that a Federal investigation would have begun in 2006.

You don't know that. You don't know what the trigger is to spur investigation for any particular accusation. Perhaps FL admission would have eventually spurred investigation into them.

I see where your cute line idiotic questioning leads to; your assumption that some type of previous investigation must be taking place for other wrongdoing to be investigated. Wow, how does anybody ever get investigated for anything?

This is chicken/egg gone gonzo. Let's try it out on something current..."Gee Mr. Investigator, you can't investigate me for child molestation because nobody at Penn State is currently being investigated for child molestation".

TdF Champion coming clean when AAF, stating there was systematic doping on a cycling team sponsored by the US government. It took Rock Racking for anybody to give a shyt about something like that. Yes, I am sure he would've been written off as a drunk and dismissed.

Move along, doc. I am finally convinced that discussion with you is not something I should do when sober.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The "wit us or aginst us" was a mockery of the Anti LA brigade. Not my standpoint.
That should have been clear from the post. If you couldnt see that then you are slipping doc.

I will try not include subtitles for you next time, if that would help?

Ah - a mockery of the "Anti LA Brigade" ........ yet no "mockery" of the other side?
If you are adding subtitles please remind us again that you are not a fan of LA.

 

[ChrisE]

+1

An insightful perspective and one that would suggest that all of the peleton are "victims", whether they dope or not, and that the real villains are the ones that create and police the rules of the game - the UCI.

The allegation that sets LA apart from the rest of the peleton and perhaps helps to explain the level of hate is that he was in bed with the villains.

Yes, it is a good post but right about now is where the divergence starts in the present harmony amongst us.

People choose what they do in their lives. I doubt very seriously that riders became professionals without knowing what was required to do that. If they didn't want to have to dope, then be something else.

The power to change the sport is with the riders.

 

[andy1234]

Ah - a mockery of the "Anti LA Brigade" ........ yet no "mockery" of the other side?
If you are adding subtitles please remind us again that you are not a fan of LA.

The "other side" regularly mock themselves, so job done.

Stop acting dumb doc, it doesn't suit you.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You don't know that. You don't know what the trigger is to spur investigation for any particular accusation. Perhaps FL admission would have eventually spurred investigation into them.

Actually we do know - you may not know, but thats nothing new.

This investigation is centered around the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

If this investigation was centered on Armstrong it would have been initiated in Texas.

I see where your cute line idiotic questioning leads to; your assumption that some type of previous investigation must be taking place for other wrongdoing to be investigated. Wow, how does anybody ever get investigated for anything?

This is chicken/egg gone gonzo. Let's try it out on something current..."Gee Mr. Investigator, you can't investigate me for child molestation because nobody at Penn State is currently being investigated for child molestation".

TdF Champion coming clean when AAF, stating there was systematic doping on a cycling team sponsored by the US government. It took Rock Racking for anybody to give a shyt about something like that. Yes, I am sure he would've been written off as a drunk and dismissed.

Move along, doc. I am finally convinced that discussion with you is not something I should do when sober.

No idea what any of this means.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The "other side" regularly mock themselves, so job done.

Stop acting dumb doc, it doesn't suit you.

Stop acting neutral Andy - it doesn't suit you.

 

[Kretch]

Yes, it is a good post but right about now is where the divergence starts in the present harmony amongst us.

People choose what they do in their lives. I doubt very seriously that riders became professionals without knowing what was required to do that. If they didn't want to have to dope, then be something else.

The power to change the sport is with the riders.

To the bold: Theoretically yes. Given the existing power structures NO WAY.

 

[ChrisE]

Actually we do know - you may not know, but thats nothing new.

This investigation is centered around the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

If this investigation was centered on Armstrong it would have been initiated in Texas.
.

Who said this FEDERAL investigation was centered around LA? Like I said, I am not drunk so I am not so easily fooled by lying on your part about things I have/haven't posted within the last hour or so. It would be much better if you accuse me of something several weeks ago, because I have told you before I will not go back and spend time digging up something to prove you are wrong. Your games are not that important to me.

FL: there was systematic doping on USPS.

FEDs: Let's run off to a district in Tx to investigate LA.

lol.

** edited by mod ***

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Who said this FEDERAL investigation was centered around LA? Like I said, I am not drunk so I am not so easily fooled by lying on your part about things I have/haven't posted within the last hour or so. It would be much better if you accuse me of something several weeks ago, because I have told you before I will not go back and spend time digging up something to prove you are wrong. Your games are not that important to me.

FL: there was systematic doping on USPS.

FEDs: Let's run off to a district in Tx to investigate LA.

lol.



That's the smartest thing you've written in awhile.

BTW, you can get the last word on this particular issue to satisfy your insatiable superiority complex. I'm done.

I will post something tomorrow about the sun rising in the east and you can start a new argument with me, err I mean get trolled by me. Take care.

No idea what you are on about except that you stated an opinion that if Floyd had admitted his doping much earlier that it could have changed the sport.

I said it wouldn't have - because the UCI are complicit with Armstrong and the Feds would not have got involved.

Then you suggested this....

You don't know that. You don't know what the trigger is to spur investigation for any particular accusation. Perhaps FL admission would have eventually spurred investigation into them.

As I said, we do know where the Federal investigation has started, and as it is not Texas or even North California where Tailwind were based.

The investigation did not start with Armstrong - but as the biggest benefactor of doping in the US it is not surprising that an investigation by the proper authorities would lead to him and his corrupt cronies.

 

[Polish]

The investigation did not start with Armstrong - but as the biggest benefactor of doping in the US it is not surprising that an investigation by the proper authorities would lead to him and his corrupt cronies.

Lance is the biggest benefactor of doping in the US?
How do you figure that?

Not even in the top 100 more likely.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Lance is the biggest benefactor of doping in the US?
How do you figure that?

Not even in the top 100 more likely.

Lance Armstrong net worth - $125 million.