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

[MD FACG FACP]

Have not visited the clinic since Tyler and 60 minutes. The posts are comical from the fanboy side.

To the reality side keep up the good work. But remember these fanboys have a one sided emotional tie to LA, logic and facts are out the window.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don’t think there’s any question this is a major part of it. If there were a totally clean peloton, then any doping at all would immediately provide an edge. So it would just start all over.

But I think there’s an additional factor. Riders just like to go as fast as they can. Think of the changes in technology, e.g., time trial bikes. It’s all legal, it’s all out in the open, no one can get an advantage over others. So why bother one way or another? Because riders want to improve their performance, they want to be as fast as they possibly can be. Really, why not go back to the old steel clunkers of the early part of the last century? It’s a level playing field, in principle at least, regardless of the technology. But the sport wants to see riders on light, fast bikes. They want to see their natural talents enhanced in certain ways.

I think the riders themselves see PEDs in much the same manner, and probably so do many of the organizers. If everyone is using them, they’re not a lot different from advances in bike technology. The problem is that there is a public image that has to be upheld, so riders are put in this incredible situation of cognitive dissonance, where they’re all doing something they feel is moral, yet have to pretend to the outside world that they’re not doing it. Two worlds, two entirely different perspectives and sets of rules.

No wonder guys like Tyler develop serious mental/emotional problems. I’m surprised more riders don’t. At least when someone confesses to a social crime like theft, he knows it’s wrong. He may rationalize to himself that he had to do it, or that it was fair for him to do it, but he knows very well that that it's illegal and that everyone except himself thinks it's wrong. But PEDs are only wrong to the outside world, not to the world of racing these guys are immersed in.

To the highlighted - an important distinction has to be made here, only the PED users think that way.

It is convenient for the doping riders to suggest that they were beating other dopers (& in some races that may be true) and they feel victimized or an unfairness if they are the ones who are caught.
But ultimately they realise that what they have done is against the rules and principle of sport, it is why one of the more startling comments in The Times recentley was:

"The problem" said one source close to the investigation, "was not getting them to talk but to stop them from crying so they could continue talking".

 

[seatpost]

It was my understanding that after the award SCA could not be revisited. I alluded to this earlier in the thread; I thought this had a legal basis in that settlement. I am willing to be wrong.

Funny you bring up Bonds. One guy went to jail for him. Why? I don't know but he will probably be set for life when he gets out.

Ironically LA wouldn't be in this situation and would end up with alot more $ in his pocket if he would've brought FL onto RS lol. I bet he wishes he had now. FL would've cost less than $900/hour lol.

But, the Bonds trial shows us how stupid juries can be. Remember that.

Imagine if he hired Floyd and then Floyd beat him.

 

[Square-pedaller]

But I think there’s an additional factor. Riders just like to go as fast as they can. Think of the changes in technology, e.g., time trial bikes. It’s all legal, it’s all out in the open, no one can get an advantage over others. So why bother one way or another? Because riders want to improve their performance, they want to be as fast as they possibly can be. Really, why not go back to the old steel clunkers of the early part of the last century? It’s a level playing field, in principle at least, regardless of the technology. But the sport wants to see riders on light, fast bikes. They want to see their natural talents enhanced in certain ways.

So how do you feel about electric motors concealed inside the frame, or lower weight limits (for safety reasons) on bicycles?

 

[MD FACG FACP]

Chill out forum warrior! And face the facts-the riders were more or less all it. Others who won grand tours went to Dr Ferrari as well. You'd think it was only Lance who doped.

Pull back from your full *** setting. The thread is about LA doping. Who ever said no one else doped ? If you want to go after other riders go for it. Start a thread. But why whine about it on an LA thread. He doped and now he's paying the price, the same way a lot of people did. If LA would would make an admission the way David Millar did it would all be over and we would all be moving on.

What others who won GT's saw Ferrari during LA's reign ?

 

[sniper]

Pull back from your full *** setting. The thread is about LA doping. Who ever said no one else doped ? If you want to go after other riders go for it. Start a thread. But why whine about it on an LA thread. He doped and now he's paying the price, the same way a lot of people did. If LA would would make an admission the way David Millar did it would all be over and we would all be moving on.

What others who won GT's saw Ferrari during LA's reign ?

+1

it's fascinating.
this exroadmandude is definitely on LA's payroll.
Why else come on here and start trivializing the fraud of all frauds in a thread dedicated to exposing that fraud?
Fascinating stuff, because he's not the first to come on with similar trolling techniques. wonder if LA is really making phonecalls to get people on here.

 

[Microchip]

I'd like to get some expert explanation on the schematics of cycling during a race. I'll explain.

I've concluded that Lance won the Tours on more than PEDs. Due to reading the forum for a long time, I've seen that there are a few reasons someone can win (okay, 5 that I can count).

1. They're on PEDs.
2. The money coming to the team/them is substantially higher than other teams, so they can afford better products, and hire a genius doctor exclusively.
3. They can suppress any hindrances to their winning, by doling out some cash to the appropriate person(s).
4. They can pay another racer (perhaps of another team?) to let them remain in the lead.
5. They can arrange with another racer (of another team) unknown to anyone, to help them keep gaining advantages during the race.

With regard to #4 and #5, this is where I'd appreciate some explanation since it's a hypothesis. I did read some time back, that a racer approached Lemond during a race and told him he'd help him win for $10,000.00. (I think it was Lemond.) Therefore, this can be done.

What I'd like to know is "how". I don't believe all PEDs are made equal, and if quite alot of racers have access to it, there must be other avenues to ensure a win.

Also I notice that much of the talk is centred around the products used and the cover ups afterward. How is it that the other avenues aren't being discussed? Is it too risque?

And if LA and JB had contacts in the lab or at the UCI, couldn't they have had inside info on what other teams' strategy was going to be the next day? Or is it that team strategy is so obvious that it isn't necessary to go snooping around the team bus during the night?

This is why I'd appreciate some tactical explanations.

 

[Magic Spanner]

This is the clinic so the tactical discussion belongs elsewhere but I think we can surmise that he had the strongest (best doped) team and that they were more single minded in their goal (LA in yellow in Paris) than other teams.

....... and noone is denying LA was in impressive athlete. However the point is ........... He was assisted by PEDs.

 

[Magic Spanner]

This is the clinic so the tactical discussion belongs elsewhere but I think we can surmise that he had the strongest (best doped) team and that they were more single minded in their goal (LA in yellow in Paris) than other teams.

....... and noone is denying LA was in impressive athlete. However the point is ........... He was assisted by PEDs.

And of course there aremany other points regarding other offences and his disregard for others as he bullied his way to the top and the lies and the hiding behind cancer fundraising and ........

You get the picture.

 

[tubularglue]

Januss, you just surmised my entire teen years in one eloquent quote. gracias

As I recall the sense of my own mortality and the ability to go against what I perceived as the "common wisdom" of my peers were not my most finely honed traits when I was young.

 

[Exroadman24902]

Pull back from your full *** setting. The thread is about LA doping. Who ever said no one else doped ? If you want to go after other riders go for it. Start a thread. But why whine about it on an LA thread. He doped and now he's paying the price, the same way a lot of people did. If LA would would make an admission the way David Millar did it would all be over and we would all be moving on.

What others who won GT's saw Ferrari during LA's reign ?

you give a skewed impression to the outside world-the gen public. Anyone reading the clinic would infer the doping probs relate to one person when YOU KNOW they don't.

 

[Exroadman24902]

+1

it's fascinating.
this exroadmandude is definitely on LA's payroll.
Why else come on here and start trivializing the fraud of all frauds in a thread dedicated to exposing that fraud?
Fascinating stuff, because he's not the first to come on with similar trolling techniques. wonder if LA is really making phonecalls to get people on here.

He buddy, for maybe the second or third time, I have no counter argument that Lance is clean..he doped..and just about everyone else did. I think we need a broader variety of threads-too much about Lance

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

'...' [blatant strawmen] '...'

On the front page of the clinic there are threads on Contador, Ullrich, Nadal and Toure. Even while there is a major criminal investigation into the activities of the team led by Armstrong and his business associates, other athletes are being discussed.

You've been recently implying that the American investigation is about whether or not Armstrong doped and that the clinic pays insufficient attention to other athletes' doping. Both your talking points are demonstrably ridiculous.

Hopefully any lurkers who come across your posts will take the time to check the validity of you comments and the validity of the counter arguments. It should only take a moment for them to work out who is misrepresenting the situation.

 

[D-Queued]

I'd like to get some expert explanation on the schematics of cycling during a race. I'll explain.

I've concluded that Lance won the Tours on more than PEDs. Due to reading the forum for a long time, I've seen that there are a few reasons someone can win (okay, 5 that I can count).

1. They're on PEDs.
2. The money coming to the team/them is substantially higher than other teams, so they can afford better products, and hire a genius doctor exclusively.
3. They can suppress any hindrances to their winning, by doling out some cash to the appropriate person(s).
4. They can pay another racer (perhaps of another team?) to let them remain in the lead.
5. They can arrange with another racer (of another team) unknown to anyone, to help them keep gaining advantages during the race.

With regard to #4 and #5, this is where I'd appreciate some explanation since it's a hypothesis. I did read some time back, that a racer approached Lemond during a race and told him he'd help him win for $10,000.00. (I think it was Lemond.) Therefore, this can be done.

What I'd like to know is "how". I don't believe all PEDs are made equal, and if quite alot of racers have access to it, there must be other avenues to ensure a win.

Also I notice that much of the talk is centred around the products used and the cover ups afterward. How is it that the other avenues aren't being discussed? Is it too risque?

And if LA and JB had contacts in the lab or at the UCI, couldn't they have had inside info on what other teams' strategy was going to be the next day? Or is it that team strategy is so obvious that it isn't necessary to go snooping around the team bus during the night?

This is why I'd appreciate some tactical explanations.

'Gifting' and exchanging favors (I will split the pot with you... if you work with me during this break...) is a common part of bike racing.

Could this be extended to a whole Tour, multiple races, or multiple Tours?

Yes.

Dave.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I think we need a broader variety of threads-too much about Lance

You just joined this month.

Just kidding. Everyone here knows who you are.

 

[Microchip]

'Gifting' and exchanging favors (I will split the pot with you... if you work with me during this break...) is a common part of bike racing.

Could this be extended to a whole Tour, multiple races, or multiple Tours?

Yes.

Dave.

Thanks!

It's not discussed much, as far as I can recall. It's something like "match fixing".

 

[uberbiker]

neither have you any idea what the feds have dug up beyond the weak evidence in the public domain. Does the eye witness testimony of a team mate who said he didn't see Lance dope have the same weight as one who says he did. If the court thinks so, then you have even less chance of getting him. You support two tier justice?

none of us do really, but with now 3 of LAs ex teamates lining up the circumstantial evidence is building...

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

If person A says they saw OJ commit a murder but person B says they didn't see OJ commit a murder, who do you think the court is going to believe?

There are tons of people who never saw Armstrong dope. He wasn't doing it on youtube. There are a few inner-circle guys who did. The prosecution will make this point abundantly clear, despite the incessant attempts of the hacks on the Armstrong payroll to confound the issue.

 

[tubularglue]

none of us do really, but with now 3 of LAs ex teamates lining up the circumstantial evidence is building...

3 that we know about

 

[MarkvW]

If person A says they saw OJ commit a murder but person B says they didn't see OJ commit a murder, who do you think the court is going to believe?

There are tons of people who never saw Armstrong dope. He wasn't doing it on youtube. There are a few inner-circle guys who did. The prosecution will make this point abundantly clear, despite the incessant attempts of the hacks on the Armstrong payroll to confound the issue.

So doping is going to be relevant to a criminal indictment charging Armstrong? What is the charge going to be?

 

[Hitchey]

I don't post much but do enjoy reading the seemingly prophetic and insightful information as well as speculation as posted by RR and hog.

What I'm confused about is why some continue to respond to posts from many who appear to be trolling or in the "paid with an agenda" camp. It's so painfully clear what their intentions are with every duck, cover, diffuse, confuse, "they all did it so let's talk about Indurain" posts.

Polish sounds as if they can't get the apron off long enough to study enough about cycling history and google enough LA facts to respond in a passive aggressive diffuse manner in the time since hired.

ChrisE's posts and arguments just plain read like a psuedonym for Richard that ends in ick.

Then we have the regurgitants such as flckr, gree, andy, uspostal, et al who are just trolling or are truly the Jamie's of this world.

What I see is that they will most certainly not change the minds of many here who despite what appears to be a personal dislike for LA, are clear headed and sensible people.

Are you all going to continue to allow them to waste your time responding to the ridiculous dribble that they continue to re-incarnate?
How about spending time responding to posters, even those who are LA fans, who actually have intelligent questions or can post without such a clear agenda of obfuscation?

Even though I have all those above on my ignore list, some of you quote them. As a result of that, I don't see every post they write except for those quoted.

What I do see is that every post they write is just plain bad and with an agenda-some more subtle than others-to put it lightly. The pattern of "FL, TH, etc are liars worthless, there's no evidence, OH! but I agree with you here and there, but here's more crap" is evident in every single one I've read.

How about not engaging them so often or even at all on each and every one of their useless posts?

Just my 2 cents.

 

[bhack361]

Wow. Remind me not to post. Are you sure you don't mean drivvle?

 

[Hitchey]

You are duallly reminded.
In the village where I come from, it's also known as the secretion that can sometimes be found below certain farm animals. Thanks for trying though.

 

[rata de sentina]

No. Saugy claimed it was 70-80%, so by today’s standards it would not be positive, and it would not even rate a notification of suspicion. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t positive, just that it didn’t make the official criterion. It was in what today is considered a gray area, very likely positive, but not called as such.

Just to follow up on this and clarify that there's been a lot of water under the bridge in the intervening years on the epo test. I don't think that you can say with any certainty that 70-80% in 2001 would not be positive today. Sure in the intervening time the % criteria was tightened to reduce the chance of false postives but subsequently this method of interpretation was dropped around 2004 because it was too imprecise plus it was felt a few dopers were escaping. The interpretation of these gels is quite different today and based on the relative intensity of specific bands not overall percentages. A number of studies have demonstrated that the current methods are actually more sensitive than the previous basic bands criterion. So it is quite conceivable for a previous negative or 'suspicious' sample to become positive.

It doesn't really matter that the urine sample is no longer in existence. The actual physical method is pretty similar, the main difference is the interpretation of the gel images which might be stored electronically somewhere.

 

[Stevie039]

New You Tube Lance Tribute

lol

i tried