Official lance armstrong thread, part 2 (from september 2012)

Page 120 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
happy new year

Aleajactaest said:
Yes.

USADA and WADA are warts on the buttock of sport and a waste of my tax dollars.( at least USADA is. I have no idea whose money WADA is wasting)
ah well............an honest answer................good on ya for expressing your
point of view

shame it's wasted on a cheatin' lyin' lance worse than any wart on the buttock of sport

be proud to support usada they did a good / necesary job...............be happy in the year ahead
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
I read the report. I see no empirical evidence that TT did the legwork. And, if he did, he is a bad executive.

I stand by my statement about the UCI. Stonewalling, blustering and obfuscation do not equal cojones. That is stupidity. Real leadership would be protecting the future of their sport as opposed to short term gain.

e.g. real leadership in other sports involves drafting and developing a team as opposed to using free agency to try and BUY a team. One is long view the other is short. The UCI has consistently show no appreciation for the long view and has always done the most expedient thing they can.
Wait a second. You say Tygart didn't do the work. Now you support that statement by saying "I see no empirical evidence that TT did the legwork."

That's trolling.
 
Aleajactaest said:
I read the report. I see no empirical evidence that TT did the legwork. And, if he did, he is a bad executive.

I stand by my statement about the UCI. Stonewalling, blustering and obfuscation do not equal cojones. That is stupidity. Real leadership would be protecting the future of their sport as opposed to short term gain.

e.g. real leadership in other sports involves drafting and developing a team as opposed to using free agency to try and BUY a team. One is long view the other is short. The UCI has consistently show no appreciation for the long view and has always done the most expedient thing they can.
That statement is idiotic.

The statement is either a troll or exposes you as completely ignorant about organizational leadership (in small organizations).

Ok, ok, it could be both.

Dave.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
I read the report. I see no empirical evidence that TT did the legwork.
You need to tone down the trolling, it is too obvious

You didn't read the report did you? Travis did many of the interviews, met with Interpol, FBI, FDA, IRS agents.etc. As would be expected. USADA is not a big organization. Travis and Bill Bock ran the show.
 
Mar 18, 2009
775
0
0
Race Radio said:
You need to tone down the trolling, it is too obvious

You didn't read the report did you? Travis did many of the interviews, met with Interpol, FBI, FDA, IRS agents.etc. As would be expected. USADA is not a big organization. Travis and Bill Bock ran the show.
But don't you see--if he did all that work then he's a bad CEO, because a CEO is supposed to make sure other people do all the work and then take the credit, which makes him a fraud because he's taking credit for other people's work unless he's doing the work which makes him a bad CEO for doing the work he isn't taking credit for because he's wasting tax payer money doing what he was hired to do because everyone else was doing it and even if they weren't the CEO playing field is a fraud because there's a stonewall in it which can't protect the future from cancer. And who's taking credit for that? Not Tygart. I rest my case.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
Race Radio said:
You need to tone down the trolling, it is too obvious

You didn't read the report did you? Travis did many of the interviews, met with Interpol, FBI, FDA, IRS agents.etc. As would be expected. USADA is not a big organization. Travis and Bill Bock ran the show.
So, it was a personal vendetta after all as I suspected. No, I did not read the entire brief. I wanted to see if you would make my point for me. It was a small group of people dedicated for finding evidence for a verdict they already reached. Much easier than following the real evidence.
 
Aleajactaest said:
So, it was a personal vendetta after all as I suspected. No, I did not read the entire brief. I wanted to see if you would make my point for me. It was a small group of people dedicated for finding evidence for a verdict they already reached. Much easier than following the real evidence.
Any time you want to actually discuss reality, including the real evidence, I am sure we would all be willing to accommodate you.

Dave.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Aleajactaest said:
I read the report. I see no empirical evidence that TT did the legwork. And, if he did, he is a bad executive.

I stand by my statement about the UCI. Stonewalling, blustering and obfuscation do not equal cojones. That is stupidity. Real leadership would be protecting the future of their sport as opposed to short term gain.

e.g. real leadership in other sports involves drafting and developing a team as opposed to using free agency to try and BUY a team. One is long view the other is short. The UCI has consistently show no appreciation for the long view and has always done the most expedient thing they can.
Aleajactaest said:
So, it was a personal vendetta after all as I suspected. No, I did not read the entire brief. I wanted to see if you would make my point for me. It was a small group of people dedicated for finding evidence for a verdict they already reached. Much easier than following the real evidence.
You are going all Liggett on this.
 
Mar 18, 2009
775
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
So, it was a personal vendetta after all as I suspected. No, I did not read the entire brief. I wanted to see if you would make my point for me. It was a small group of people dedicated for finding evidence for a verdict they already reached. Much easier than following the real evidence.
This really disappoints me, purely from a performance standpoint. While I do admire the "consistency is the hob-goblin of little minds" and Whitmanian "I am large and contain multitudes" approach, the lack of subtly here only points to some truly mediocre trolling. When you come here saying "I dislike Tygart because of_______," and then when shown that claim is inaccurate, can only switch to, "well, I really dislike Tygart because (insert opposite of previous claim)" and then, when that's shown to be erroneous, can only scratch around for another preposterous reason.... well: its just too obvious. Ham-fisted. Look at how many threads Laura Lynn clogged up for so long as an example of how a little consistency and subtly can really bog down a site. You need to develop a more subtle and seemingly reasoned persona, if you really want to do some damage here.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
Wallace said:
This really disappoints me, purely from a performance standpoint. While I do admire the "consistency is the hob-goblin of little minds" and Whitmanian "I am large and contain multitudes" approach, the lack of subtly here only points to some truly mediocre trolling. When you come here saying "I dislike Tygart because of_______," and then when shown that claim is inaccurate, can only switch to, "well, I really dislike Tygart because (insert opposite of previous claim)" and then, when that's shown to be erroneous, can only scratch around for another preposterous reason.... well: its just too obvious. Ham-fisted. Look at how many threads Laura Lynn clogged up for so long as an example of how a little consistency and subtly can really bog down a site. You need to develop a more subtle and seemingly reasoned persona, if you really want to do some damage here.
I could say I was devastated by your disappointment but I am not.

There is no way to win an argument as there is no moving the needle here.

Those who try are derided as trolls and fools.

It comes down to this.

I can do one of two things.

1. Admit that like most americans, I really don't care that he doped. They all did, he just did the same things, trained more and still kicked their asses. His natural gifts showed up as a teenager. Had they all raced clean he would have done equally well. For a better recitation, I'd refer to Sally Jenkins but we all know how you feel about here here.

2. I can deny all that and decide that a man I admired suddenly became something else. Shiva, the destroyer of World. The I can become one of the Mass of men living lives of quiet desperation and spend my life excoriating Lance on internet forums.

I don't see the latter as something I would participate in regardless. Tearing people down endlessly by making the same argument over and over is the foolish consistency of little minds.

I'm gonna stop posting and ride my bike.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
So, it was a personal vendetta after all as I suspected. No, I did not read the entire brief. I wanted to see if you would make my point for me. It was a small group of people dedicated for finding evidence for a verdict they already reached. Much easier than following the real evidence.
You see an imaginary personal vendetta......the rest of the world sees a man doing his job
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
I could say I was devastated by your disappointment but I am not.

There is no way to win an argument as there is no moving the needle here.

Those who try are derided as trolls and fools.

It comes down to this.

I can do one of two things.

1. Admit that like most americans, I really don't care that he doped. They all did, he just did the same things, trained more and still kicked their asses. His natural gifts showed up as a teenager. Had they all raced clean he would have done equally well. For a better recitation, I'd refer to Sally Jenkins but we all know how you feel about here here.

2. I can deny all that and decide that a man I admired suddenly became something else. Shiva, the destroyer of World. The I can become one of the Mass of men living lives of quiet desperation and spend my life excoriating Lance on internet forums.

I don't see the latter as something I would participate in regardless. Tearing people down endlessly by making the same argument over and over is the foolish consistency of little minds.

I'm gonna stop posting and ride my bike.
It is actually possible to do both, but my hope is that you will never discover that. You were just taken down thoroughly and accurately. I have to admit, it was pretty sweet.

As for your Thoreau quote, seriously dude, save the drama for your mama. It is actually possible to recognize reality here and assess without the butthurt disappointment so many of his fanboys are experiencing.

Have fun riding your bike...please ride it far...really far...like a LOOOONNNNNGGGG way...like "hope to never see you again" far.

Props to Wallace. That was one of the sweetest troll meltings I have ever read. Bravo good sir, BRAVO!!!
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
I could say I was devastated by your disappointment but I am not.
Had they all raced clean he would have done equally well. For a better recitation, I'd refer to Sally Jenkins but we all know how you feel about here here.
I don't see the latter as something I would participate in regardless. Tearing people down endlessly by making the same argument over and over is the foolish consistency of little minds.

I'm gonna stop posting and ride my bike.
Good. Because young Lance was beaten by my entire amateur team as a Natz team member. George Hincapie, on the other hand; was second to a seasoned pro, Steven Swart. George was probably clean then and Steven questionable. One thing for certain; Lance showed national level promise as an amateur and never improved until he met Eddie B and Mr. Weisel. That's real. You clearly don't know much about cycling so you should spend as much time on your bike as possible.
 
red_flanders said:
Probably a good time to get back to the topic. :) Por favor.
With pleasure.

Something that I have been confused about is when the UCI actually stripped Armstrong.

On 11 Dec 2012 the following story was published:

UCI officially nullifies Armstrong's Tour de France titles and results

Yet, way back in October, we had multiple stories like this:

UCI confirms Lance Armstrong's life ban

And this:

UCI management committee will not reallocate Armstrong's Tours

and this:

Tour de France organizers confirm UCI decision on Armstrong's victories

Then, of course on 30 November we had this:

UCI names panel for Armstrong affair commission

Perhaps the commission should be asking how they were chartered before Lance's doping was confirmed and his results were nullified.

Was the UCI trying to pull a fast one here?

Dave.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
D-Queued said:
With pleasure.

Something that I have been confused about is when the UCI actually stripped Armstrong.

On 11 Dec 2012 the following story was published:

UCI officially nullifies Armstrong's Tour de France titles and results

Yet, way back in October, we had multiple stories like this:

UCI confirms Lance Armstrong's life ban

And this:

UCI management committee will not reallocate Armstrong's Tours

and this:

Tour de France organizers confirm UCI decision on Armstrong's victories

Then, of course on 30 November we had this:

UCI names panel for Armstrong affair commission

Perhaps the commission should be asking how they were chartered before Lance's doping was confirmed and his results were nullified.

Was the UCI trying to pull a fast one here?

Dave.
Isn't the commission largely dealing with the implications of UCI complicity and coverups? That McQuaid as the UCI pres. accepted and confirmed the USADA sanctions would be topical but the report's suggestion of malpractice is the bigger deal.
 
Oldman said:
Isn't the commission largely dealing with the implications of UCI complicity and coverups? That McQuaid as the UCI pres. accepted and confirmed the USADA sanctions would be topical but the report's suggestion of malpractice is the bigger deal.
We can only hope.

But, why did it take the UCI two months to officially do what they officially said that they had done?

Dave.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
D-Queued said:
We can only hope.

But, why did it take the UCI two months to officially do what they officially said that they had done?

Dave.
Why is a mafioso race promoter running the UCI? Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe they needed time to hide some casheesh.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
Race Radio said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20833119

Sunday Times sues for over $1.6 Million

It has always seemed to me that Lance should just pay off the Sunday Times. (a) He can't defend himself without testifying under oath; (b) he plainly defrauded them; and (c) the Times can milk the legal drama for every last drop of advertising value. Paying off the Sunday Times would be very expensive, but the alternatives would seem to be much worse. And doesn't the winner in a GB lawsuit get attorney fees?

If Lance doesn't pay up quick, he must be seriously insolvent or totally bat**** crazy.

This will be fun to watch.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY