Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession)

[MarkvW]

aarrr...
first Tuesday in November..we have a lot of time to kill in this thread until then

Translation: When thehog comes back, we'll try to bait him into another ban.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Translation: When thehog comes back, we'll try to bait him into another ban.

Crazy, right?

Oddly, Hog isn't responsible for his posts. It's someone's else's fault.

 

[MarkvW]

Crazy, right?

Oddly, Hog isn't responsible for his posts. It's someone's else's fault.

The "personal responsibility" theme you continuously hammer doesn't make baiting any less undesirable.

 

[sittingbison]

. Hog isn't responsible for his posts. It's someone's else's fault.

The "personal responsibility" theme you continuously hammer doesn't make baiting any less undesirable.

correct on both counts

back on topic thanks gentle(wo)men

cheers
bison

 

[jam pants]

Here's something ridiculous:

http://www.theouterline.com/anti-doping-is-the-cure-worse-than-the-disease/

 

[Wallace]

Here's something ridiculous:

http://www.theouterline.com/anti-doping-is-the-cure-worse-than-the-disease/

Jesus God that's stomach-turning. And if you want proof perfect of how wrong it is, look at the comments: Joe Papp loves it! So there you go.

 

[jam pants]

Jesus God that's stomach-turning. And if you want proof perfect of how wrong it is, look at the comments: Joe Papp loves it! So there you go.

I felt ill before reaching the comments, so I'll dip into those later (though not directly after a meal).

 

[Oldman]

Jesus God that's stomach-turning. And if you want proof perfect of how wrong it is, look at the comments: Joe Papp loves it! So there you go.

When the article uses the phrase "anti-doping enthusiasts" to characterize the increased effort to enforce the rules it's clear they want to categorize a group. That attempt to define a single force of opposition exposes the bias immediately. Bush league journalism.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Jesus God that's stomach-turning. And if you want proof perfect of how wrong it is, look at the comments: Joe Papp loves it! So there you go.

Joe Papp referring to the article as "brilliant" isn't much of a surprise. But for pesky anti-dope rules and drug laws the dude would be golden.

We are by no means Armstrong apologists

Okay...

but we must question the inconsistencies of holding one person (or a few people) responsible for the sins of a whole generation, and more importantly, what this kind of witch hunt implies for the overall nature of competitive sports

But please allow "us" to apologize anyway.

Why has this punishment and sense of moral outrage not extended back to Anquetil, or to Merckx – who also tested positive for drugs three times in his career?

Not sure I remember Merckx purchasing influence at the UCI. So, all doping is the same apparently.

We do not condone doping

Okay....

but we believe that it basically spells the end of competitive sport if we insist on erasing victories when, at any point in the future, it may be found out that the winner was cheating. Cheating has always been part and parcel of sport, and we have to find a way to live with it and try to moderate it in order to maintain any competitive structure for elite sport at all.

So..... the authors condone doping. Got it.

•There are numerous situations where this tendency towards anti-doping hysteria has effectively overwhelmed the rules of the sport. Bad decisions have been made – based not upon logic or the regulations of the sport, but upon presumptions, concerns about public image, or perceived credibility issues. A prime example is the forced withdrawal of leading riders – including Basso and Ullrich – from the 2006 Tour de France. This decision was made on the basis of their suspected, but not proven, involvement with Operation Puerto. This deprived fans and sponsors of the best performing riders. Moreover, it undermined one of the essential features of sport – that top races should be a competition of the best talent.

Basso won the 2006 Giro by 9:18. Right f'ing on!! I think, clearly, that's what everyone wants to see.
This is possibly the single stupidest paragraph I've ever read on the subject. I think the author is BPC.

Consider the expulsion of Michael Rasmussen from the 2007 Tour. His dismissal, as well as the exclusions in 2006, was not conducted in the spirit of fairness, and none of these riders, at the time of the event, had actually been caught breaking any rules.

I guess getting pulled by your employer because you lied about which continent you were on when you missed the out of competition test equates to being unfair.

•

Another example where cycling authorities followed their preferences rather than rule book was the 2010 case of Alberto Contador’s positive clenbuterol test

More utter nonsense.

We need, fundamentally, to know for certainty that the athlete who wins a race is actually indeed the winner of that race.

It would also be nice to know if the athlete was clean of oxygen vector doping.



Here's an idea that the authors seemingly would embrace. Let's not restrict doping on any scale except for possibly the 50% haematocrit so we don't have 25 year olds stroking out at night. So here's something that Joe Papp will probably embrace;

Dope your ass off, no restrictions, as long as it's public. On the rest days at the grand tours the riders have to transfuse publicly. Any EPO positives must be accompanied with a public display of the IV injections or the rider is thrown out for cheating.

Wanna change cycling? Let's be utterly transparent regarding the use of PEDS for the good of the sport.

 

[Race Radio]

More utter nonsense.

The whole thing is absurd. One person responsible? This ignores the hundreds for riders sanctioned over the last 15 years.

Rassmusen never should of STARTED the Tour. The rules were clear, miss an OOC in the month prior to a GT and you don't get to start. The UCI hid the fact that he had missed the controls and then dropped it on the Tour right before the start in order to cause maximum embarrassment. Why? Clerc said it was because Verburggen and Armstrong were trying to buy the Tour and wanted to drive down the price.

 

[Microchip]

...The UCI hid the fact that he had missed the controls and then dropped it on the Tour right before the start in order to cause maximum embarrassment. Why? Clerc said it was because Verburggen and Armstrong were trying to buy the Tour and wanted to drive down the price.

!!!!

Am sooo glad he didn't get his hands anyway near ownership!!!!

Why didn't he go and start his own race if he wanted one so badly!??!

(That's not a real question - it doesn't need answering.)

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7HPSVvovZA

David Walsh at Newsworks' Shift North conference

 

[sniper]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7HPSVvovZA

David Walsh at Newsworks' Shift North conference

thanks for the link.

but imo that's pretty pathetic.
or at least walsh is turning into a pretty pathetic figure.
considering the fanboy stuff he's written on sky i can't watch that without a puke bucket close by.

did walsh get paid for this talk?

 

[86TDFWinner]

The whole thing is absurd. One person responsible? This ignores the hundreds for riders sanctioned over the last 15 years.

Rassmusen never should of STARTED the Tour. The rules were clear, miss an OOC in the month prior to a GT and you don't get to start. The UCI hid the fact that he had missed the controls and then dropped it on the Tour right before the start in order to cause maximum embarrassment. Why? Clerc said it was because Verburggen and Armstrong were trying to buy the Tour and wanted to drive down the price.

Could you imagine what would've happened had they been successful in buying the tour? I doubt Wonderboy would've ever confessed to doping.

 

[Bluenote]

Joe Papp referring to the article as "brilliant" isn't much of a surprise. But for pesky anti-dope rules and drug laws the dude would be golden.



Okay...



But please allow "us" to apologize anyway.



Not sure I remember Merckx purchasing influence at the UCI. So, all doping is the same apparently.



Okay....



So..... the authors condone doping. Got it.



Basso won the 2006 Giro by 9:18. Right f'ing on!! I think, clearly, that's what everyone wants to see.
This is possibly the single stupidest paragraph I've ever read on the subject. I think the author is BPC.



I guess getting pulled by your employer because you lied about which continent you were on when you missed the out of competition test equates to being unfair.

•

More utter nonsense.



It would also be nice to know if the athlete was clean of oxygen vector doping.



Here's an idea that the authors seemingly would embrace. Let's not restrict doping on any scale except for possibly the 50% haematocrit so we don't have 25 year olds stroking out at night. So here's something that Joe Papp will probably embrace;

Dope your ass off, no restrictions, as long as it's public. On the rest days at the grand tours the riders have to transfuse publicly. Any EPO positives must be accompanied with a public display of the IV injections or the rider is thrown out for cheating.

Wanna change cycling? Let's be utterly transparent regarding the use of PEDS for the good of the sport.

Haha, intelligent and funny takedown.

 

[MarkvW]

So only Lance Armstrong purchased influence from Verbruggen?

I've always figured that Hein was much more open to moneymaking opportunity.

 

[Race Radio]

So only Lance Armstrong purchased influence from Verbruggen?

I've always figured that Hein was much more open to moneymaking opportunity.

Don't know. Can you name any other riders who went into business with him? Buying the Tour was a $900,000,000 deal. Any other riders do that? Did any other team owners manage Verbrugen's $$$?

 

[DirtyWorks]

So only Lance Armstrong purchased influence from Verbruggen?

I've always figured that Hein was much more open to moneymaking opportunity.

Not sure if you saw the old news bit about Och working for Wiesel's firm running some amount of Verbruggen's money.

Some combination of Thom and Hein at work to buy the event.

 

[MarkvW]

Don't know. Can you name any other riders who went into business with him? Buying the Tour was a $900,000,000 deal. Any other riders do that? Did any other team owners manage Verbrugen's $$$?

Yeah, Lance is the worstest.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Yeah, Lance is the worstest.

Pretty simple questions Mark.

Things change when exposed to the light, don't you think?

 

[Scott SoCal]

The whole thing is absurd. One person responsible? This ignores the hundreds for riders sanctioned over the last 15 years.

Rassmusen never should of STARTED the Tour. The rules were clear, miss an OOC in the month prior to a GT and you don't get to start. The UCI hid the fact that he had missed the controls and then dropped it on the Tour right before the start in order to cause maximum embarrassment. Why? Clerc said it was because Verburggen and Armstrong were trying to buy the Tour and wanted to drive down the price.

The thing that really gets me is this is recent history. It's not like this crap happened thirty years ago.

 

[MarkvW]

Pretty simple questions Mark.

Things change when exposed to the light, don't you think?

I'm not buying that Lance corrupted Hein. Hein was a going concern long before Lance came along. You can believe that Lance was the only one who made payoffs to the UCI. I cannot.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Yeah, Lance is the worstest.

So, who are those other riders then. Or are you just blowing smoke, as usual? Gee I wish thehog was back, you are not even a good troll.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I'm not buying that Lance corrupted Hein. Hein was a going concern long before Lance came along. You can believe that Lance was the only one who made payoffs to the UCI. I cannot.

Hein was, but how many others had the ball or the bucks to think they could pay off the UCI?

 

[MarkvW]

So, who are those other riders then. Or are you just blowing smoke, as usual? Gee I wish thehog was back, you are not even a good troll.

Do you really believe what you're writing? You're using the "never tested positive" line of argument to defend Verbruggen's and the UCI's honor.