Official Lance Armstrong Thread **READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING**

[flicker]

Before I jump on the anti- Lance bandwagon, I would like to know who this Race Radio is, his name, age and his relationship with LIVESTRONG and Lance, that he can make accusations against the afore mentioned.
As for the Strickland.and article, I think it was fairly written, and Strickland is covering himself and Bicycling Magazine in case of an indictment. It is obvious he still believes in Lance, but like many others uses Lance as a money making tool. Fair enough, this is a capitalistic society.
In conclusion I still question what motivation the faceless blogger Race Radio has to be on the attack, and why now? Why is Race Radio an admired leader of the anti-Armstrong camp?

 

[popolo]

Before I jump on the anti- Lance bandwagon, I would like to know who this Race Radio is, his name, age and his relationship with LIVESTRONG and Lance, that he can make accusations against the afore mentioned.

Bobke Roll

 

[jimmypop]

Of course I am not concerned, the libel babble comes from their uninformed groupies. No real lawyer would say that

It is comical that they pretend that I am hiding behind the RR name. Wonderboy and his buddies know exactly who I am. The story of how they got that info is disturbing and shows how desperate they are. Will have to save it for another day as I do not want to interfear any current cases.

Intentional?

 

[flicker]

Bobke Roll

<<<<<<<<<<Chapaue!>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[blackcat]

Ah yes, the next grand tour. The prologue consists of the delousing and the cavity search. Good times, good times.

more commonly understood as foreplay

 

[Granville57]

And the average American will probably connect a lot more dots...

Especially with more headlines like these popping up:

'Bicycling' Writer 'Is Convinced' that Lance Armstrong Used Drugs

 

[D-Queued]

Especially with more headlines like these popping up:

'Bicycling' Writer 'Is Convinced' that Lance Armstrong Used Drugs

Huh.

Does this mean Lance will have to eat some of his words?

Words like:

"If the individuals responsible do not accept responsibility and yield their positions voluntarily, those individuals must be suspended or expelled..."

It would be the charitable thing to do, wouldn't it?

Dave.

 

[webvan]

Until that dude explains why he now KNOWS that Lance doped there's not a lot for LA to worry about, I wonder why I'm the only one to apparently be upset about this "missing link"!

 

[Ferminal]

Until that dude explains why he now KNOWS that Lance doped there's not a lot for LA to worry about, I wonder why I'm the only one to apparently be upset about this "missing link"!

Why would he worry about people knowing he doped? People have known it for decades. He's not going to end up in court just because he doped.

 

[leftover pie]

RR, you should consider calling their bluff and visit their offices in Austin. Ask them beforehand what exactly they have in mind to show you or talk to you about, who will be there, how long, etc.

that would be so cool.

and do it michael moore style, with a camera crew.

before long you'd be standing outside in front of their building talking to the camera, "they invited me here but then wouldn't answer my questions on camera etc etc etc"

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Huh.

Does this mean Lance will have to eat some of his words?

Words like:

"If the individuals responsible do not accept responsibility and yield their positions voluntarily, those individuals must be suspended or expelled..."

It would be the charitable thing to do, wouldn't it?

Dave.

If those responsible do not acknowledge their responsibility, and voluntarily yield their high-yield voluntary positions, or defer their utter lack of defference to the defence, I'm going to start getting cranky.

Further to that, if the suspended individuals are not expelled or hinder the individual expulsion of those suspended, to say nothing of the defensive defference that may be perceived as a legitimate defence, there needs to be some sort of voluntary volunteering to ensure the expulsion of the expelled.

That being said, if charity rests upon the will of the fortunate, who rests upon the fortunate bed of charity? I see this whole debacle as a weasle in a rucksack. Uncomfortable to carry, but handy if you get hungry and desperate.

Words of wisdom...

 

[popolo]

Before I jump on the anti- Lance bandwagon, I would like to know who this Race Radio is, his name, age and his relationship with LIVESTRONG and Lance, that he can make accusations against the afore mentioned.
As for the Strickland.and article, I think it was fairly written, and Strickland is covering himself and Bicycling Magazine in case of an indictment. It is obvious he still believes in Lance, but like many others uses Lance as a money making tool. Fair enough, this is a capitalistic society.
In conclusion I still question what motivation the faceless blogger Race Radio has to be on the attack, and why now? Why is Race Radio an admired leader of the anti-Armstrong camp?

He's one of these guys who were banned...

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

Damn, talk about omerta. The Public Strategies people must have gotten to Toolhand, not really, he is a real tool at any rate.

What the hell did Bianchigirl ever do except make a lot of sense?

That kind of thing doesn't go over too well in the alternate reality known as RBR.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

 

[BroDeal]

He's one of these guys who were banned...

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

Damn, talk about omerta. The Public Strategies people must have gotten to Toolhand, not really, he is a real tool at any rate.

What the hell did Bianchigirl ever do except make a lot of sense?

That kind of thing doesn't go over too well in the alternate reality known as RBR.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

Wow. Bianchigirl was banned. What was the pretext used for that? How does Dwayne Berry and Blackhat manage to survive? By not posting that much anymore?

What would be really funny would be to find a thread from 2005. Half the posters would be banned. In a bit of karma, Toolhand's purge of everyone who does not worship Armstrong has destroyed RBR's pro racing forum.

 

[D-Queued]

He's one of these guys who were banned...

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

Damn, talk about omerta. The Public Strategies people must have gotten to Toolhand, not really, he is a real tool at any rate.

What the hell did Bianchigirl ever do except make a lot of sense?

That kind of thing doesn't go over too well in the alternate reality known as RBR.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

She just tweeted on this interesting blog that mentions her ... and is actually on topic here:

Bill, Festina, and Tejay: The difference between PR, facts, and fluff

http://cyclismoairn.blogspot.com/2011/03/bill-festina-and-tejay-difference.html

Dave.

 

[Digger]

He's one of these guys who were banned...

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

Damn, talk about omerta. The Public Strategies people must have gotten to Toolhand, not really, he is a real tool at any rate.

What the hell did Bianchigirl ever do except make a lot of sense?

That kind of thing doesn't go over too well in the alternate reality known as RBR.

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?p=2108681#poststop

Yeah me too banned. Coolhand is the most biased Moerator I've ever seen. Goebbels.

 

[bianchigirl]

I have no idea why I suddenly & quite arbitrarily received a lifetime ban but am not losing any sleep Though I do miss the opportunities to wind up Coolhand & his merry band of fanboys

 

[Rydberg]

I have no idea why I suddenly & quite arbitrarily received a lifetime ban but am not losing any sleep Though I do miss the opportunities to wind up Coolhand & his merry band of fanboys

It's sort of fun posting on RBR, but about 90% of the discussions there are about pro team kits or whatever Radioshack rider velonews has highlighted in the last week. In the doping forum the worst thing is the irrational hatred of Contador. However, there is a poster over there called Dr. Falsetti who is doing a fine job winding up the merry band.

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah me too banned. Coolhand is the most biased Moerator I've ever seen. Goebbels.

The little twerp begged me to stop creating new accounts and posting last year. (You have to love proxy servers and unlimited email account options) He banned me and then used my real name in a post about it. I went ballistic. I got all of his information and sent him a PM threatening to post it on every cycling forum I could find. He quickly took the offending post down. The guy is weak little noodle of a man. I suggest you all get a sock puppet and go back there. Its great fun.

 

[thehog]

Especially with more headlines like these popping up:

'Bicycling' Writer 'Is Convinced' that Lance Armstrong Used Drugs

The problem being is the Federal case has very little to do with the use of drugs. It has lot more to do with tax evasion, trafficking and fraud. Drug use means nothing.

There’s also the defence is most concerning - "Lance can comment on the on-going Federal investigation and the alleged use of PEDs?" - "Look can I start by saying that I won't give up this fight to rid the world of cancer, nothing will distract me from that cause".

 

[PumpySchwartz]

Lance Armstrong's Endgame
It's time to stop arguing about whether Lance doped and start figuring out what it means.

http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/lance-armstrongs-endgame

 

[skippythepinhead]

Thanks for the link

I took the time to read the entirety of Mr. Strickland's article. I don't know him personally, but I have read his stuff in the past. The only takeaway I got from his article was the feeling that he's a wuss--and that's not actually the word that came to mind.

 

[thehog]

The comments are sooo strange on the BiCycling story.... Slander? Really? I can't believe there are those who still things Lance didn't dope...

Bill, while there are several differences between me and you, one stands out. I choose to believe you are completely wrong about Lance and doping. You have worked (No doubt) long and hard to be at a point in your life where you control billions of pixels and your company buys ink by the barrel. Your opinion can be shared with far and wide. I read with dissapointment your article on Lance. While I have never met the man, I don't care for him as a person based on what I have heard from those who do know him personally and what I have read in books and in print. That said, I have the utmost respect for what he accomplished. Anyone who comes back from the brink of death to accomplish what he has deserves the credit. He has earned the benefit of the doubt and until there is absolute proof, not just random speculation or hearsay that he doped. Anyone who takes a public forum to say he doped discredits only themselves. That means you, Bill. I heard about Lance for more than 15 years. Today is the first time I recall hearing your name. After 15 plus years of receiving Bicycling Magazine, my subscription expired a year or so ago. I have been looking for a reason to renew, or not. With articles such as yours being published, you have given me that final reason why I should no longer subscribe. I expect to hear the name Lance Armstrong for the next few decades. Should I ever hear your name again, it would be no surprise to learn it is connected to a legal suit concerning slander.

 

[Benotti69]

Bill, while there are several differences between me and you, one stands out. I choose to believe you are completely wrong about Lance and doping. You have worked (No doubt) long and hard to be at a point in your life where you control billions of pixels and your company buys ink by the barrel. Your opinion can be shared with far and wide. I read with dissapointment your article on Lance. While I have never met the man, I don't care for him as a person based on what I have heard from those who do know him personally and what I have read in books and in print. That said, I have the utmost respect for what he accomplished. Anyone who comes back from the brink of death to accomplish what he has deserves the credit. He has earned the benefit of the doubt and until there is absolute proof, not just random speculation or hearsay that he doped. Anyone who takes a public forum to say he doped discredits only themselves. That means you, Bill. I heard about Lance for more than 15 years. Today is the first time I recall hearing your name. After 15 plus years of receiving Bicycling Magazine, my subscription expired a year or so ago. I have been looking for a reason to renew, or not. With articles such as yours being published, you have given me that final reason why I should no longer subscribe. I expect to hear the name Lance Armstrong for the next few decades. Should I ever hear your name again, it would be no surprise to learn it is connected to a legal suit concerning slander.

that comment has LiveWrong intern written all over it. 15 years reading that mag and not knowing who strickland is, as a wonderboy fan it cant be true.

 

[Digger]

Some really classy comment......humourous if nothing else, because they are certainly not knowledgeable.

I always believed Armstrong was a doper. Cancer treatment requires a multitude of drugs to beat it. I partly believe his success in cycling is because of all the cancer drugs he took changed his body chemistry and enlarged his heart to be advantageous over most of his competitors.

Apparently Greg is lterally insane.....

Floyd Landis and really nothing else. If he did he did, but, there is nothing on the table. Lance wins, and you idiots run another hero through the mud, with nothing, but, confirmed liars and convicted dopers, Oh Yeah! when you add Lemond a guy guy that could literally be insane. I hope you guy's and SI are happy.

I think that in court this would come down to who do you believe, Betsy Andreu or Dr. Nichols. To me, Nichols wins this contest hands down every time. Indeed, this judgment was alread made in the SCA case that Armstrong won, handily.

Let's not forget that bicycling wasn't Lance's first sport. He was a phenom among top triathletes as a young kid. Why would Lance attempt to make a presumably doping-free comeback if he wasn't clean all those years? If the comeback wasn't clean, why would he risk tarnishing his image by being subjected to more tests? If Armstrong had doped in the previous years, and not during the comeback--how could he still step on to the podium, free of doping, after retirement? Saying he doped, retired, then didn't dope...and still put in a top notch race (without doping)...isn't very likely...unless he was clean to begin with. If history proves me wrong, I'll still be amazed!

By the way, anyone else notice Strickland in his final judgement, of the ten most damning pieces of evidence, gives Lance the verdict and a draw, even in light of everwhelming evidence to the contrary. In fact, it is hard to imagine how he ever came to the conclusion Lance doped by reading these verdicts.
I believe like others on here that this article is not just the work of Strickland.

 

[MacRoadie]

While I don't doubt the very strong possibility that the Armstrong PR machine had some involvement in the Strickland article, I still can't get my head around the up-side for Rodale and Bicycling.