"some dopers worse than others".....

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Benotti69 said:
IAAF have Radcliffe's back. Gaimon needs to schmooze ol Brian Cookson and then he is on easy street to granfondo heaven.......
Phil needs to deliver the money to the UCI. And never see doping, anywhere, ever. THEN he's on Easy Street.

Good on Phil The Thrill for being honest, and as a result highlight inconsistencies, with Cooke.

It's never going to be a perfectly consistent world view. Especially when the sport is so rife with corruption.
 
Aug 9, 2010
6,264
0
0
pmcg76 said:
Well at least I think I learned where the stories of Cooke being a doper probably arose from. Being friends with and living with Phil Zajicek probably got him a rep. Hard to believe he was trying to call Gaimon a hypocrite with that in his background. Cooke just seems like an attention seeker at this stage. Not very good on the bike so has to get attention other ways.

Though that '**** the Hypocrisy' guy was even worse with the self-entitled, look at me attitude. Why did he keep tweeting Digger when he didn't appear in the conversation? Maybe he did but I don't really understand twitter tbh.
Digger's 'handle' on twitter is "Feck the Hypocrisy"
..I know..twit is pretty confusing and strange..but it does make for some interesting exchanges. most of which would be better off in private.:rolleyes:
 
May 10, 2009
4,638
1
0
pmcg76 said:
Well at least I think I learned where the stories of Cooke being a doper probably arose from. Being friends with and living with Phil Zajicek probably got him a rep. Hard to believe he was trying to call Gaimon a hypocrite with that in his background. Cooke just seems like an attention seeker at this stage. Not very good on the bike so has to get attention other ways.

Though that '**** the Hypocrisy' guy was even worse with the self-entitled, look at me attitude. Why did he keep tweeting Digger when he didn't appear in the conversation? Maybe he did but I don't really understand twitter tbh.
hello

I am entitled
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
DirtyWorks said:
This is all well-known and ancient history at this point. Here's the highlights for cycling: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dope-and-glory-10-04-2001/





Well, you need to pick a point in time to start the narrative because it goes back to any kind of competition, formalized or not.

Since the rise of the modern IOC, many nations run doping programs because the IOC is perfectly okay with doping. Do it enough to attract an audience and not too much to scare away the corporate sponsors.

Meanwhile, we know, fundamentally, the IAAF, FIFA, and UCI are thoroughly corrupt. I don't follow other sports too carefully to say more. This too is perfectly okay with the IOC because it's a sh!t show too.

It's not like WADA can do anything about it either. That is not their job.
here it is in a sentence, modern sport and doping....


Do it enough to attract an audience and not too much to scare away the corporate sponsors.


It is that simple folks and dont think WADA are not in on it. This is every Inter/National Sporting Federations goal. Allow doping to keep the sport interesting to audiences, world records getting broken regularly but not too regularly and pop the odd athlete to show the sporting feds are doing their job and Bingo, nearly everyone is a winner!

And the athletes play along, call out guys like Sayer and Ricco but keep quiet on Piti, Bertie and big names that attract the audiences and sponsors.
 
May 25, 2009
403
0
0
The guy who tricks a friend into smuggling blood bags is worse than the guy who just dopes himself. So is the guy who also distributes drugs and gets young riders to start, or the one who bullies people who speak out against doping, or the guy who gets fans to donate a bunch of money to his defence fund.

And yeah, the guy who has admitted and is now riding clean is better than the guy who comes back from a ban and goes straight back to doping. Though of course it's pretty impossible to know who is who.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
William H said:
The guy who tricks a friend into smuggling blood bags is worse than the guy who just dopes himself. So is the guy who also distributes drugs and gets young riders to start, or the one who bullies people who speak out against doping, or the guy who gets fans to donate a bunch of money to his defence fund.

And yeah, the guy who has admitted and is now riding clean is better than the guy who comes back from a ban and goes straight back to doping. Though of course it's pretty impossible to know who is who.
CFA

you mean, "smuggling artificial hemoglobin blood bags"

Chicken Rass
Rass Chicken

thats a chicken KFC left at the markets
#Inghams #Steggles #ozreferencesnhashtags
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
This is all well-known and ancient history at this point. Here's the highlights for cycling: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dope-and-glory-10-04-2001/





Well, you need to pick a point in time to start the narrative because it goes back to any kind of competition, formalized or not.

Since the rise of the modern IOC, many nations run doping programs because the IOC is perfectly okay with doping. Do it enough to attract an audience and not too much to scare away the corporate sponsors.

Meanwhile, we know, fundamentally, the IAAF, FIFA, and UCI are thoroughly corrupt. I don't follow other sports too carefully to say more. This too is perfectly okay with the IOC because it's a sh!t show too.

It's not like WADA can do anything about it either. That is not their job.
definitely started before Europe, and before USPS. and before Lance. But all the blame is sheeted home to Lance, which is such BS. And that is why BroDeal cracked it.

And ask Matt DeCanio. Ask him about the hypodermics falling out of DZ's bag at a training camp for jnrs? Yeah, DeCanio might be full of it, and I dont automatically believe this story, and if it was not cycling, i would think it was BS.
 
RiccoDinko said:
Bad Doper: 1. Lance 2.Horner, everyone else is forgiven.
Horner is not even close to be a "bad" doper, considering that he can still ride his bike at airgas whatever team at 44 instead of being banned forever.

Edit: Do it enough to attract an audience and not too much to scare away the corporate sponsors.

Well, this sentence pretty much sums what JV is doing for years.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
It's important to the survival of the filthy circus that dopers (of the "better" sort) have their own fanbois. You do need to keep buying those fragile, high performance parts and those fugly cycling jerseys!
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
thehog said:
True. The joke is that dopers pretend that they are good because they weren't as bad as lance.... see: Garmin dopers.
Ah yes, the convenient forgetting what Lance did that almost no other dopers did...

Gaimon is incorrect as it relates to actual doping. However, Lance's sins extended to areas that only he was privileged enough to extend them to, and it makes all the difference in the world. I mean, who else got to use the Cancer Shield to deflect and attack those who questioned him? There are a myriad of other examples.

EDIT: And I know you agree with the above statement. :)
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
Sins? In professional cycling? You have GOT to be kidding. Arguing about whether one turd in the sewer stinks more than the other turds?
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
MarkvW said:
Sins? In professional cycling? You have GOT to be kidding. Arguing about whether one turd in the sewer stinks more than the other turds?
Only a blind fool doesn't understand the distinction I made. If the shoe fits.

BTW, when is that Summary Judgment motion in the SCA case going to be ruled upon?...Sorry, Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted...
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
MarkvW said:
Blind fools and histrionic trolls...
Self-actualization must have been your New Year's resolution this year. You're off to a good start. Keep it up, I'm rooting for you!
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
Self-actualization must have been your New Year's resolution this year. You're off to a good start. Keep it up, I'm rooting for you!
And baiting, to boot!
 
ChewbaccaD said:
BTW, when is that Summary Judgment motion in the SCA case going to be ruled upon?...Sorry, Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted...
To be fair I think you said it would be resolved about a year ago, with the next step "check books" coming out.

Speaking of which... any news on SCA? oh... wrong thread, sorry :p
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
thehog said:
To be fair I think you said it would be resolved about a year ago, with the next step "check books" coming out.

Speaking of which... any news on SCA? oh... wrong thread, sorry :p
I did. (Edit: I don't think I said it would be over last year, just that I thought it would be over sooner than now) What I haven't done is make ridiculous claims about the law involved, and then avoid the fact that I was completely incorrect about it. That's MarkvW's job, and your's. :)
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
MarkvW said:
And baiting, to boot!
No baiting at all. I sincerely hope you understand the irony of your post because you've become more self-aware. I'd wish that kind of thing upon anyone.
 
Aug 10, 2010
6,286
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
No baiting at all. I sincerely hope you understand the irony of your post because you've become more self-aware. I'd wish that kind of thing upon anyone.
Yeah, I've become more aware. And you REALLY did pass the California State Bar?
 
ChewbaccaD said:
I did. (Edit: I don't think I said it would be over last year, just that I thought it would be over sooner than now) What I haven't done is make ridiculous claims about the law involved, and then avoid the fact that I was completely incorrect about it. That's MarkvW's job, and your's. :)
Well you did supply of lot spaghetti logic and bolganse sauce law to your arguments. You also took a position of authority on the matter and wouldn't allow others to express their opinion because you knew better.

I was saying it would take a long time and it's got a long way to run... which has proven to be correct.

There's a big difference between what you want to happen and what will happen...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS