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

[LauraLyn]

LauraLyn, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you misinterpreted RR's remark.

However, I will still go back and delete the references.

Susan

ETA: I decided after all not to delete all references. LL, please do not make further such mistaken claims.

Thank you Susan. I did misinterpret what RaceRadio claimed to have chatted with Sheryl Crow about, and I stand corrected on that.

Claiming to have had a conversation with an international celebrity about sealed court documents, and insulting the celebrity at the same time, is far more outrageous. I have not seen the monitors intervene regarding such outrageous claims or insults.

May I also kindly ask you to request that my own postings are not misinterpreted, that the personal insults directed at me and others are addressed directly, and that outlandish accusations without any basis are checked by the monitors.

This would improve the civility of the discussion as well as the shared objectives of the conversations.

I would appreciate to see those done publicly and addressed to each specific contributor as well, as this has been.

It is just a suggestion.

 

[Anonymous]

Thank you Susan. I did misinterpret what RaceRadio claimed to have chatted with Sheryl Crow about, and I stand corrected on that.

May I also kindly ask you to request that my own postings are not misinterpreted, that the personal insults directed at me and others are addressed directly, and that outlandish accusations without any basis are checked by the monitors.

This would improve the civility of the discussion as well as the shared objectives of the conversations.

I would appreciate to see those done publicly and addressed to each specific contributor as well, as this has been.

It is just a suggestion.

Misinterpreted? You mean like suggesting I and others imply stuff that you just make up?

Very BPC of you.

 

[LauraLyn]

Misinterpreted? You mean like suggesting I and others imply stuff that you just make up?

Very BPC of you.

Yes, you and others.

Please provide one instance where I made something up, other than the misinterpretation of the content of RaceRadio's conversation with Sheryl Crow.

I am not suggesting that all of what I have said is correct. I am saying that I am unaware of saying things that are not true and that neither you nor anyone else here has ever pointed to something I said that was not true. Rather you have insulted my person, questioned my identity openly in the forum discussions, and assigned me motivations or interests which I do not have.

 

[Anonymous]

Yes, you and others.

Please provide one instance where I made something up, other than the misinterpretation of the content of RaceRadio's conversation with Sheryl Crow.

I am not suggesting that all of what I have said is correct. I am saying that I am unaware of saying things that are not true.

I wrote

The average person on the street, with regard to all things Lance, is a total idiot.

You replied

Perhaps. But this might be too simplistic. It could also imply that the average person on the street is "a total idiot" regarding many things

I was specific and implied nothing other than what I wrote.

 

[LauraLyn]

I wrote



You replied



I was specific and implied nothing other than what I wrote.

I disagree and stand by what I wrote.

Firstly, I in no way implied that you suggested that. I remarked on that the statement "the average person on the street is, with regard to all things Lance, is an idiot". I firmly disagree with that statement. And how the average person, myself included, on the street regarding everything about Lance Armstrong could be an idiot without being an idiot about so many other things is beyond me. Perhaps you could explain. The information sources the average person has available for Lance Armstrong, including this thread, are no different than the information sources the average person has available for a whole host of other public topics.

If you really believe that "the average person on the street is, with regard to all things Lance, is an idiot" and not an idiot about a whole host of other things, then . . . that speaks volumes for you. It would be a completely irrational position to assert and impossible to defend.

RaceRadio similarly spoke of "cancer groupies". This is insulting language. I don't know how many people working in cancer or cancer patients you have met in the world, but I have met a few and I have never been able to define a single one as a groupie.

Of course, I understand the context and the intent, but insulting people never improves a conversation.

 

[Race Radio]

Yes, you and others.

Please provide one instance where I made something up, other than the misinterpretation of the content of RaceRadio's conversation with Sheryl Crow.

I am not suggesting that all of what I have said is correct. I am saying that I am unaware of saying things that are not true and that neither you nor anyone else here has ever pointed to something I said that was not true. Rather you have insulted my person, questioned my identity openly in the forum discussions, and assigned me motivations or interests which I do not have.

Instead of disrupt yet another thread with your inane babble perhaps you can open a thread about your persecution?

This thread is about Lance failing tests

 

[LauraLyn]

. . . . The "Never tested positive" myth is is only believed by the most desperate groupies.

The "never tested positive" is believed by many people in cycling, in the media, in the cancer community, and by the general public.

It would be one rather large set of "desperate groupies".

There are good reasons why so many people believe this. And many will likely continue to believe it even after they have become disillusioned with Lance.

That people believe this or not may not be so important at the end of the day.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

The "never tested positive" is believed by many people in cycling, in the media, in the cancer community, and by the general public.

It would be one rather large set of "desperate groupies".

There are good reasons why so many people believe this. And many will likely continue to believe it even after they have become disillusioned with Lance.

That people believe this or not may not be so important at the end of the day.

I like RR's credibility. Passed over 7000 posts.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Yes, that is exactly what it is about. Please stay on topic.

Exactly. We must remember that being in cahoots with the UCI and USAC helps beat those tests, but it's not a requirement. Plenty of people with no particularly strong connections have beaten hundreds of tests during their careers.

Yes. Kohl said he was tested about 200 times in his career, many of those tests the same day he took EPO, with no positive. Papp said he was tested maybe 100 times, and could have beaten the positive he had if he had self-cathetered, but chose not to.

History has shown that tests, especially 1995-2005, were very easy to defeat, even by average cyclists.

 

[LauraLyn]

I like RR's credibility. Passed over 7000 posts.

Now that's fair.

 

[131313]

You know, the real myth here seems to be that the tests "don't work". Sure, you can beat the tests, and not testing positive is certainly not proof of being clean, but let's look a little more at the numbers:

-he was tested about 200 times (260 is a "maximize to the extreme" number)

-he's had at least 11 positive tests (3 pre-cancer test samples for test, 6 EPO positive samples, the corticosteroid + and the TdS positive), and those are just the ones known about

-add in showergate and the story from Anderson, and you have 2 more instances where there probably would have had a positive test, had they actually tested the athlete on time.

All in all, if the test implementation and results were managed differently, you're looking at between 5 and 10% of the tests being positive. I think this is important, because one of the big fanboy refrains that gets parroted is "if the tests don't work, why bother". The truth seems to be that the tests actually work reasonably well, even if they only work a small % of the time. The problem is when they're administered and managed by a corrupt organization.

So, I guess the answer to "How did Armstrong beat those 500 tests" is a simple one: he didn't.

 

[LauraLyn]

Yes, that is exactly what it is about. Please stay on topic.


Yes. Kohl said he was tested about 200 times in his career, many of those tests the same day he took EPO, with no positive. Papp said he was tested maybe 100 times, and could have beaten the positive he had if he had self-cathetered, but chose not to.

History has shown that tests, especially 1995-2005, were very easy to defeat, even by average cyclists.

The doping is always far ahead of the testing, and that will not change. We probably do not know about half of the products Lance used. And we probably do not even know the product names current teams are using. Some of these products may not even have names yet.

Testing is necessary. I agree with Travis Tygart. But it is not the be all and end all of eliminating doping.

 

[autologous]

Listening to NPR weekend edition this morning, at the end of the sports segment a very specific follow-up to last weeks news about Lance.

Addressed the talking point about never nested positive: "We need to think really critically about how misleading this talking point is"

2 minutes into this segment

http://m.npr.org/programs/all/10/160457821


Doesn't quite reach the idiot masses, but it's a pretty healthy audience both in terms of size and ability to adjust their thinking based on the facts.

 

[JRTinMA]

You know everyone,

There would be a lot fewer threads turning into crap if a few people would put "LauraLyn" on ignore.

Just saying, there's an awful lot of otherwise valuable bandwidth getting chewed up just responding to her/him.

Really? You need to use the ignore feature to stop replying to a troll? I can't imagine how you make it through the day.

LauraLyn is certainly a problem, but the real problem is the halfwits who continue to engage her.

 

[soverylarry]

LauraLyn, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you misinterpreted RR's remark.

However, I will still go back and delete the references.

Susan

ETA: I decided after all not to delete all references. LL, please do not make further such mistaken claims.

Congratulations 'LauraLyn' you're the first poster to inspire my use of the 'ignore' feature. And who are you to post so much here anyways? You've come out of nowhere with an idea that we all have a burning need to hear your thoughts. Show some discretion in your posts at least.

And can someone shoot me the ignore feature how-to's? And no LL, i don't want the instructions from you.

 

[krebs303]

Congratulations 'LauraLyn' you're the first poster to inspire my use of the 'ignore' feature. And who are you to post so much here anyways? You've come out of nowhere with an idea that we all have a burning need to hear your thoughts. Show some discretion in your posts at least.

And can someone shoot me the ignore feature how-to's? And no LL, i don't want the instructions from you.

User CP>Edit Ignore List>type"LauraLyn">OK

 

[ggusta]

When I am not busy being amused by the groupie-intern coalition I am examining their rationale and attacks to try and gain some sort of insight into how our favorite narcissist will try and massage his image into something approaching what he wants it to be in the public's eye.

The public being defined (by me) as that vast gulf of people between the groupies, diehards, trolls, paid disinformers and zealots who are trying to conceal the facts on one side and a lot people in this message board (and elsewhere) who just want the facts to be known on the other. He wants the mind of the average joe who cares nothing for cycling to adore him. That REALLY matters to him.

Latest tactic seems to be to attack the accusers here and attempt to put individual people on the defensive. They are down to a door-to-door retail level combat as well as their failing wholesale assault on USADA.

Times is Tough!

And the 'Secret Forum', 'BPC' and 'Laura Lyn's of the world are really just sticking their fingers in the **** that is bursting all around them and it's both funny and pathetic. They don't matter to Lance. Other than as soldiers in his army who will die for him. They aren't the prize. The prize is slipping away from him and I must confess it is just delicious to observe.

I really see no point in banning them, if people cannot withstand the urge to either read or respond that is their problem. The bannings actually energize them to come back more vigorously. It's working well for my entertainment, but not so much for others' enjoyment apparently.

 

[the big ring]

The public being defined (by me) as that vast gulf of people between the groupies, diehards, trolls, paid disinformers and zealots who are trying to conceal the facts on one side and a lot people in this message board (and elsewhere) who just want the facts to be known on the other. He wants the mind of the average joe who cares nothing for cycling to adore him. That REALLY matters to him.

Agreed.

I cannot believe people truncate the sound bite from the Cancer Congress held recently in Montreal.

LA says,

My name is Lance Armstrong. I am a cancer survivor. blah blah And yes, I won the Tour de France seven times.

which is what news outlets love to replay / document - the polemic. For me the telling bit was what he said next:

And for those who have no idea what I am talking about, I love you.

Well duh.

 

[ggusta]

Agreed.

I cannot believe people truncate the sound bite from the Cancer Congress held recently in Montreal.

LA says,


which is what news outlets love to replay / document - the polemic. For me the telling bit was what he said next:



Well duh.

Jesus hates the sin and loves the sinner.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

LauraLyn is certainly a problem, but the real problem is the halfwits who continue to engage her.

Seriously. Why do people bother with this poster?
LL reminds me of BPC. Endless stream of garbage posts.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Guys, heed Susans advice. If you don't like Laura's posts, ignore her (him?). We don't need a stream of quotes and declarations.

 

[hiero2]

Guys, heed Susans advice. If you don't like Laura's posts, ignore her (him?). We don't need a stream of quotes and declarations.

I 2nd that motion.

 

[hiero2]

Congratulations 'LauraLyn' you're the first poster to inspire my use of the 'ignore' feature. And who are you to post so much here anyways? You've come out of nowhere with an idea that we all have a burning need to hear your thoughts. Show some discretion in your posts at least.

And can someone shoot me the ignore feature how-to's? And no LL, i don't want the instructions from you.

Ohyeay, ohyeay! Haleluja, brothers, the truth has been revealed!

I had to laugh. Thanks,l soverylarry! At first, I thought it might be just me. But somebody stepping in as a newb and acting like "The Boss", without getting recognized or voted as same? I'm glad to see others are offended.

BTW - I would love to see the posts of LL, if they took a more moderate and balanced tone. He/she is obviously intelligent and educated - but he/she seems (my opinion) to be lacking in empathy, sympathy, and respect. The "credit to others" thanks seems to be schooled, not natural. But, in spite of that, I think he/she could add to the conversation.

 

[Kender]

The beat 500 tests line is PR nothing more. wrong in 2 ways. he didnt have that many tests, and he has tested positive. It was spun because it;s the sort of thing joe/jane public needs to hear to be able to believe he's clean

Most tested athlete since his comeback?. Another PR line. this was untrue. He was tested less than another Armstrong, Kristin.


I think the single biggest thing to come out of all of this will be how athletes view doping from this point forward. to strip someone of everything going back as far as USADA has done in this case is huge.

The risk of testing positive years after the fact with retesting, or being exposed with other evidence is much more realistic now. I'm not sure if there is a systematic retest process in place, but perhaps that is needed. Samples held for 8 years? test all the winners samples before they are destroyed. You can't claim to have never tested positive if the new tests pick up previously untestable products. This may well be what's happened with the new positives rumour going around (positive retest).

It wont stop dopers, but it might give clean athletes a more level playing field if dopers try smaller and smaller doses to avoid detection

 

[python]

thought on 2 positives...

French offer Armstrong a re-test of his 1999 Tour sample
http://www.cyclingforums.com/t/466918/french-offer-armstrong-a-re-test-of-his-1999-tour-sample

French agency set to hand over Lance Armstrong's '99 samples
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2010-09-16-french-anti-doping-lance-armstrong-samples_N.htm

so let’s assume that yesterday’s news about the positive(s) was this 1999 tdf sample usada retested.

what would they look for and how significant would that be ?

if it was me who finally obtained the sample - provided I have at least 20 ml - i would first test it for epo and exogenous testosterone.

Epo positive would confirm the lndd 6 positives. that's huge but expected.

any presence of exogenous testosterone, however, would be a bigger news and a brand new positive. armstrong, due to his own limited production, must have been a great responder and it would make perfect sense to try to catch it.

in 1999 testosterone (or anabolic steroids) presence was still tested by an easily beatable t/e test. the new the technique - irms - pioneered by catlin was just being introduced. This test almost certainly was not used during the 1999 tdf. the test allows long window of detectability - much longer than a classic t/e test.

Btw, the recent news of some positives from the Seoul Olympics were the victims of irms. i recall dave asking about the applicability to Armstrong. Perhaps, we have the answer.

as to the plasticizer test, i don’t believe the 1999 sample would be exposed to it. mainly because in 1999 the peloton was still gorging on epo without any fear of detection. the epo test for cyclists was still 2 years away.