Re: Re:
The original post in which you asked if you'd missed anything had to do with LA and the USPs case. I'm keeping up, try to hold the big picture in view.
So did the ASO thing happen? No. So that matters how?
So LA doped heavier than others, so what? He didn't corrupt the sport, he arrived at a particular conjuncture and took advantage. You've yet to make a single comment about structure that does so from any perspective but that of LA. People call my arguments lots of things; vapid is fine. Let's say that yours evidence a certain detachment from reality.
D-Queued said:aphronesis said:...
Most of your post has nothing to do with USPS. Forgiven or forgotten? Get real. Key phrase in your rehearsal of the known litanies is "his corruption", as opposed to the sport's. You want to grind your axe, fine but leave the homilies and "justice" in your basement. That's not ad hominem: the rhetoric you push is not viable and no negligible schadenfreude of lance in a plano trailer park will change that.
:lol:
Oh, and try and follow the plot here. You commented about structure. I responded on structure.
Ok, the attempted purchase of ASO/TdF was post Posties (2006-8). Pretty much everything else was Postal related or connected. The attempted purchase of ASO/TdF, however, is relevant on a discussion of Lance's impact on the sport's structure, however, as noted by The Sydney Morning Herald:
Rumours are circulating that behind Armstrong's decision, which will allow him to race in next year's Tour de France, is an audacious plan that will change the face of cycling. http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/once-he-dominated--now-lance-could-own-the-tour/2008/09/19/1221331205913.html
Now, you want to switch the subject - one that you introduced - again.![]()
Your arguments are vapid.
Oh, and FMK just did us all a favor by posting a like that illustrates how Lance is and was the acknowledge king of dope.
'His corruption' refers to more than just Lance himself. He corrupted the sport, not the reverse. Knowing just how bad cycling was way back when he began tilting the scale, that is quite a feat.
Dave.
The original post in which you asked if you'd missed anything had to do with LA and the USPs case. I'm keeping up, try to hold the big picture in view.
So did the ASO thing happen? No. So that matters how?
So LA doped heavier than others, so what? He didn't corrupt the sport, he arrived at a particular conjuncture and took advantage. You've yet to make a single comment about structure that does so from any perspective but that of LA. People call my arguments lots of things; vapid is fine. Let's say that yours evidence a certain detachment from reality.