• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Richard Virenque

Jul 16, 2010
31
0
0
Visit site
Do people think Virenque rode clean when he came back?.

Did he change his ways? Just after watching his win on The Ventoux in 2002 TDF. Great ride

But did he still continue to dope? Was this possible considering all his training before was helped so much by doping?
 
BroDeal said:
Virenque never tested positive, thus he rode cleaner than Armstrong.

I love revisionist history as much as the next guy. So please tell us exactly when did Armstrong officially test positive, and what was the length his UCI suspension???

And please, after you exhaust all the inane "Fanboy" bulls!t, try and actually answer the question.
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
VeloFidelis said:
I love revisionist history as much as the next guy. So please tell us exactly when did Armstrong officially test positive, and what was the length his UCI suspension???

And please, after you exhaust all the inane "Fanboy" bulls!t, try and actually answer the question.

His '99 samples tested positive well after the fact. The test was legitimate and official... but not binding for suspensions and such.

I beleive he tested positive for a corticosteroid as well... but got a TUE after the fact to excuse the test.

It's okay to not hate Lance but still admit he was doping. I don't think anyone in recent memory finished in the top 5 of the tour without some medicinal help.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
His '99 samples tested positive well after the fact. The test was legitimate and official... but not binding for suspensions and such.

I beleive he tested positive for a corticosteroid as well... but got a TUE after the fact to excuse the test.

It's okay to not hate Lance but still admit he was doping. I don't think anyone in recent memory finished in the top 5 of the tour without some medicinal help.
Vino made the high placings without doping, just ask him.
 
kurtinsc said:
His '99 samples tested positive well after the fact. The test was legitimate and official... but not binding for suspensions and such.

I beleive he tested positive for a corticosteroid as well... but got a TUE after the fact to excuse the test.

It's okay to not hate Lance but still admit he was doping. I don't think anyone in recent memory finished in the top 5 of the tour without some medicinal help.

I don't believe for a minute that Lance raced cleaner than any other top pro, and I am well familiar with your examples. But they are neither official positives, and there were no sanctions. This is actual, and official history, despite what we all think we know.
 
Jul 6, 2009
795
0
0
Visit site
VeloFidelis said:
I don't believe for a minute that Lance raced cleaner than any other top pro, and I am well familiar with your examples. But they are neither official positives, and there were no sanctions. This is actual, and official history, despite what we all think we know.

exactly...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloFidelis said:
I love revisionist history as much as the next guy. So please tell us exactly when did Armstrong officially test positive, and what was the length his UCI suspension???

And please, after you exhaust all the inane "Fanboy" bulls!t, try and actually answer the question.

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

After you read it and come back with the inane _____________________ bullsh!t explanation about how it couldn't be true, try and actually explain how Ashenden doesn't know what he is talking about...using actual science.:rolleyes:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloFidelis said:
I don't believe for a minute that Lance raced cleaner than any other top pro, and I am well familiar with your examples. But they are neither official positives, and there were no sanctions. This is actual, and official history, despite what we all think we know.

Some people recognize the difference between that and actual, and official reality. Some don't.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloFidelis said:
Translation: You do, and all who disagree don't. Surprise! Surprise!

Sorry, but the REALITY is that there was synthetic EPO in his urine. That is not an opinion, therefore terms like "disagree" are erroneous.
 
VeloFidelis said:
Yeah... and this is a fact not in dispute, so your point is?

My point being that you took exception to this:

BroDeal said:
Virenque never tested positive, thus he rode cleaner than Armstrong.

which YOU chose to qualify by saying:

VeloFidelis said:
I love revisionist history as much as the next guy. So please tell us exactly when did Armstrong officially test positive, and what was the length his UCI suspension???

And please, after you exhaust all the inane "Fanboy" bulls!t, try and actually answer the question.

There was no mention of sanctionable positives or sanction in BroDeal's original post. If you can qualify it, so can I.

I say Virenque has never tested positive in ANY manner whatsoever, while Armstrong has. Oh, and that's no "Fanboy bulls!t".
 
Thoughtforfood said:
http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

After you read it and come back with the inane _____________________ bullsh!t explanation about how it couldn't be true, try and actually explain how Ashenden doesn't know what he is talking about...using actual science.:rolleyes:

Wow, that was a long read. I'm surprised you got through it. So what's to dispute? Looks pretty conclusive to me.

So now, since you obsession with him is "hors categorie", I am sure that you can tell us what the sanctions against Armstrong were. I can't seem to find any.
 

ThaiPanda

BANNED
Jun 26, 2010
93
0
0
Visit site
Thoughtforfood said:
Sorry, but the REALITY is that there was synthetic EPO in his urine. That is not an opinion, therefore terms like "disagree" are erroneous.

That's a diversion in the discussion. Kurt upthread said the results of the 99 EPO samples were "official". Velofidelis said it wasn't because he wasn't sanctioned.

How can something be "official" if this "official" AAF did not result in a sanction? Point out somewhere, in any rules in any organization, that says during those years samples could be kept and retested X years in the future with no B sample for the rider, during testing of new methods not yet in use? Good luck.

Now, back on topic. Why wouldn't Verenque dope during this time like everybody else? This is a pretty stupid thread.
 
Jun 30, 2009
367
0
0
Visit site
VeloFidelis said:
Wow, that was a long read. I'm surprised you got through it. So what's to dispute? Looks pretty conclusive to me.

So now, since you obsession with him is "hors categorie", I am sure that you can tell us what the sanctions against Armstrong were. I can't seem to find any.

ok, i've been mostly an observer this month as most threads seem to get 20 pages deep before i even have a chance to read them, but i can't let this one go...

we're REALLY going to make the new standard of guilt whether or not someone received sanctions? really?

just to be clear, by this standard:

-OJ Simpson never killed anyone
-Jonbenet's parents are totally nice people
-Richard Nixon is not a crook
-Bill Clinton was monogamous
-Ken Lay was an honest businessman
....

i'll take a break for now. let me know if you need any more.
 
Jul 16, 2010
31
0
0
Visit site
How the hell did this threas get on the Armstrong? Get back in topic. What do people think about Virenque? Did he dope again? Just a smaller programme with less money?
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
VeloFidelis said:
I don't believe for a minute that Lance raced cleaner than any other top pro.

Actually, it is a fact that Lance DID ride cleaner than many top pros.

Floyd revealed that Lance stopped using EPO while many other top pros continued to use.
 
Nov 24, 2009
1,602
0
0
Visit site
Polish said:
Actually, it is a fact that Lance DID ride cleaner than many top pros.

Floyd revealed that Lance stopped using EPO while many other top pros continued to use.

BLOOD AND EPO!

Just Epo to bring Hct back up after taking blood out not in comp after the 2001 Suisse issue