The Official LANCE ARMSTRONG Thread 2010-2011

[Mellow Velo]

Even on ignore, you get the message.
Clearly, Crank meant to say, "podium cleaned", in that, being the great team player that he is, Armstrong took a mop to the top step, just before Contador arrived for the victory ceremony.
Didn't want his best bud slipping on any Parisien pidgeon crap and spoiling the photo shoot.

 

[Digger]

I had nothing bad to say about Merckx.

Coppi was no chior boy, but evidently the greatest amphetamine fueled rider of his era.

or couse you want to ignore the infantile name calling in lew of actually debating what I said, and someone quoting my handle and writing things I didn't say.

Your romanticized worship of riders long gone is quaint.
Was Coppi the biggest crank head of his era or was he not?

The hypocrisy is blatant.

Lance podiumed clean which is something you internet cranks claimed for years could never happen.

The responses here have been long on insult, short on actual debate of my facts. I lay out why I think something and the children gang up in insult contests, not debating my reasoning.

It just solidifies the image of the Lance haters as a self congratulating clique of cranks without much of an ability to defend their position.

More proof of this, is the notion that you just put anybody that argues with you on ignore so you can then go on congratulating each other on how smart you are in uncovering Lances evil plots against humanity and small children.

His bloods certainly do not signify a clean rider....unless he had the sh*** for a whole week...in which case his hole would have been weak.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Actually, Lance WAS the third best rider... that's why he placed... third.

no he wasn't. take away the ttt, so it is based on a riders strength. he was 5th and will be luck to get their this year.

 

[Mellow Velo]

His bloods certainly do not signify a clean rider....unless he had the sh*** for a whole week...in which case his hole would have been weak.

Since there is an almost constant stream of sh** coming out of his opposite end, maybe this would account for all his blood values heading in the wrong direction?

 

[unsheath]

Hmmm, so JB is saying he was satisfied with the TDU, while Pharmstrong says he is lighter, stronger, and has a new position. So all was good with the TDU, right?

What about this comment from Pharmstrong - "We need to perform," said the Texan. "If we leave without a stage win, I would be disappointed."

I guess he is disappointed in his TDU. Aw, too bad

I call BS on this, particularly LA finding a new position.... I mean, they must think we are idiots to believe he somehow lost all his data from the Disco Postal days. Someone that precise and pedantic? Give me a break. Unless his uniball has sagged and given him a pronounced asymmetric posture, it's complete Hogwash.

 

[auscyclefan94]

phil ligett is commentating the skiing for aus tv at the winter olympics.

 

[Publicus]

no he wasn't. take away the ttt, so it is based on a riders strength. he was 5th and will be luck to get their this year.

I think Murray is stating that Lance finished 3rd, which is undisputed. You are suggesting that he was, at best, the fifth best rider. I agree with both of you.

I think the obvious answer is that his 3rd place finish was the fact that he was on the strongest team, which was reflect in the significant bonus he received relative to the other GC contenders (other than Contador) and his moving from fifth to 3rd.

 

[Publicus]

I call BS on this, particularly LA finding a new position.... I mean, they must think we are idiots to believe he somehow lost all his data from the Disco Postal days. Someone that precise and pedantic? Give me a break. Unless his uniball has sagged and given him a pronounced asymmetric posture, it's complete Hogwash.

Either Carmichael, Bruyneel or Ferrari (or all 3) should have portions of the data. Same with Trek (for purpose of bike design). Yes they are full of crap, but no one (save these forums) is willing to publicly challenge them.

 

[issoisso]

I call BS on this, particularly LA finding a new position.... I mean, they must think we are idiots to believe he somehow lost all his data from the Disco Postal days. Someone that precise and pedantic? Give me a break. Unless his uniball has sagged and given him a pronounced asymmetric posture, it's complete Hogwash.

Actually it's quite possible. He's getting older and thus losing flexibility. It's only natural that he can't ride his old position and therefore had to find the next best thing.

 

[Publicus]

Is it my imagination or is the Team Radio Shack run through LiveStrong.COM? Is there another website?

 

[Carboncrank]

Just reading the new article on the front page and I wonder if one of the moderators can perhaps ask Team RadioShack/ Lance Armstrong to step on a scale. As I noted earlier in this thread, Armstrong looks almost exactly the same as he did at the TdF. I know weight is self-reported, but we should see visible evidence that he lost 8.8 pounds

You can ask but by doing so you look like rookie by doing so.

I've said repeatly nobody publishes real figures on weight. It's the equivalent of a trade secret. Doesn't take genius to figure that out.

Keep telling your self he looks the same. Keep telling yourself that he's just playing a head game and he's not smart enough to know he needed to shed unneeded upper body mass to climb better...

You're probably right.. it's just a head game... he's no threat.

 

[Carboncrank]

I think Murray is stating that Lance finished 3rd, which is undisputed. You are suggesting that he was, at best, the fifth best rider. I agree with both of you.

I think the obvious answer is that his 3rd place finish was the fact that he was on the strongest team, which was reflect in the significant bonus he received relative to the other GC contenders (other than Contador) and his moving from fifth to 3rd.

Or you could argue that if his teammate wasn't so insecure as to go off team orders he'd have finished second as that gap wasn't very large.

I'm just as tired of your argument as you are of mine.

 

[Publicus]

You can ask but by doing so you look like rookie by doing so.

I've said repeatly nobody publishes real figures on weight. It's the equivalent of a trade secret. Doesn't take genius to figure that out.

Keep telling your self he looks the same. Keep telling yourself that he's just playing a head game and he's not smart enough to know he needed to shed unneeded upper body mass to climb better...

You're probably right.. it's just a head game... he's no threat.

I'm not telling myself he looks the same. I'm looking at photographic evidence that he looks the same. There is a difference champ.

As for the question, I won't bother to explain to you the purpose of asking the question--given your lack of understanding of non-verbal communication, it would be lost on you. But thanks for sharing your consistently uninformed opinion. It's always good to get other's perspectives on these things.

 

[Carboncrank]

Since there is an almost constant stream of sh** coming out of his opposite end, maybe this would account for all his blood values heading in the wrong direction?

Oh, you are so clever. i just can't wait to hear what you will come up with next.

Don't quit your day job.

 

[Publicus]

Or you could argue that if his teammate wasn't so insecure as to go off team orders he'd have finished second as that gap wasn't very large.

I'm just as tired of your argument as you are of mine.

I'm not tired of your argument. By all means continue making it. It's uninformed, but it is a valid opinion and is critical to a healthy debate.


As for your assertion that Armstrong would have finished second, that's not supported by the facts. Perhaps you can revisit the Stages 15 and, in particular, 17, which saw Armstrong lose time to the eventual second place winner Andy Schleck. None of Contador's actions had anything to do with Armstrong's inability to maintain contact on Verbier or the Col de Romme. At least not in the reality based world. Perhaps you can share with us how things turned out in the LiveStrong-based world?

 

[Carboncrank]

I'm not telling myself he looks the same. I'm looking at photographic evidence that he looks the same. There is a difference champ.

As for the question, I won't bother to explain to you the purpose of asking the question--given your lack of understanding of non-verbal communication, it would be lost on you. But thanks for sharing your consistently uninformed opinion. It's always good to get other's perspectives on these things.

I saw exactly the same pictures. Like I said.. you just go on believing he hasn't lost weight...that he's not smart enough to know he had to.

So.. just where do you get these weight figures you actually believe?

You are claiming that I'm wrong about them being secret right? Hence the uninformed comment?

 

[patricknd]

You are just digging the hole deeper, give up while you are behind. None of your babble changes the fact you were wrong and now, like a 5 year old, you are throwing a tantrum.

nor does the babble change the fact that you did try to attribute a fake quote to him.

i expect better from you.

 

[Publicus]

I saw exactly the same pictures. Like I said.. you just go on believing he hasn't lost weight...that he's not smart enough to know he had to.

So.. just where do you get these weight figures you actually believe?

You are claiming that I'm wrong about them being secret right? Hence the uninformed comment?

I'm not claiming anything about what you think other than it is predicated on uninformed conjecture on your part. Given Armstrong and Bruyneel's propensity to discuss his weight loss, it should not be a problem for them to establish, unequivocally, that it has in fact occurred. Despite your disagreement, photographic evidence from the 2010 Tour de France (where Armstrong listed his weight as 75 kg (Le Tour website)) and his team photograph on the Team RadioShack site (which lists his weight as 71 kg) does not support the loss of 4 kg (8.8 pounds).

So to the extent Armstrong and Bruyneel want to make this a discussion topic, I'm encouraging the media (in particular Cycling News which ran the story this morning) to ask him to substantiate his claims. Unlike the LiveStrong-based World, in the reality based world, where there is a prima facie evidence (comparative photos) contrary to the statements being asserted (4 kg weight loss), then one seeks objective evidence to substantiate the statements. Again, this is in the reality based world. Obviously things differ in the LiveStrong-based world.

EDIT: Just to clarify, I consider you uninformed based on the body of your commentary here on the forum. It seems largely predicated on what you apparently want to believe and overlooking and dismissing facts that are not consistent with those beliefs/thoughts. To the extent the rider weights are in fact secret, then the fact that Armstrong is discussing them at length is the classic "opening of the door." Once it is open, then questions regarding his self-reported weights and inconsistencies thereof are fair game. Hopefully this isn't too far over your head.

 

[Carboncrank]

no he wasn't. take away the ttt, so it is based on a riders strength. he was 5th and will be luck to get their this year.

You're reduced to having to take away stages of the race to fit your theory?

Let's take away 17. Lance is second.

Better yet. Alberto stays with Kloden, Lance bridges up, the two of them ride on the back wheels of the Schlecks down the mountain protecting AC, and Lance finishes second.

 

[Publicus]

You're reduced to having to take away stages of the race to fit your theory?

Let's take away 17. Lance is second.

Better yet. Alberto stays with Kloden, Lance bridges up, the two of them ride on the back wheels of the Schlecks down the mountain protecting AC, and Lance finishes second.

And you are reduced to pretending that Kloden could stay with the Brothers Schleck and Contador. Or that even assuming Kloden had the physical strength to ride with the trio, that Armstrong would have had the strength to close down the gap. You are guilty of advancing the same type of argument here that ACF is advancing on obviously weaker grounds (too many variables to account for properly to draw any conclusions (at least in the reality based world)).

What's the word in the LiveStrong-based world for hypocrite?

 

[Hugh Januss]

You're reduced to having to take away stages of the race to fit your theory?

Let's take away 17. Lance is second.

Better yet. Alberto stays with Kloden, Lance bridges up, the two of them ride on the back wheels of the Schlecks down the mountain protecting AC, and Lance finishes second.

You don't have a point here, next years tour will have mountain stages but it won't have a team time trial. Therefore when using this past tour as a gauge for next year it makes sense to take out TTT gains. What you are saying on the other hand makes no sense at all.

 

[Carboncrank]

'Podiumed clean' Yikes, that is some weird construction raght thar!

Please illuminate: What draws you to defend him the way you do.

I am not trying to insult you. I have taken a job that pays me a fraction of what I used to make to keep my family afloat. If anyone is hiring pro-lance witers, I will gladly (well- not gladly, strike that) sell my integrity to pay my bills.

The fact that I can at times post volumes during the middle of a weekday is a testament to where I have fallen in the workplace.

Yes podiumed clean. If you're still one of those that thinks all the top guys are cheats, I'd think you'd have to include Alberto in that.

He was the most tested rider there. They showed up at every imaginable time of day to test. He was held the same standard as the other riders.
Podiumed clean.

As to why I believe it.. I don't want start a discussion that would belong in the clinic. With the program in place now they don't even have to find a drug, they can see indirect changes in values and ban you for that.

I haven't been to the clinic in a long time so I don't know what the current thinking on that is but I know from previous discussions there that it's hard to find any reasonable talk about it.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Yes podiumed clean. If you're still one of those that thinks all the top guys are cheats, I'd think you'd have to include Alberto in that.

He was the most tested rider there. They showed up at every imaginable time of day to test. He was held the same standard as the other riders.
Podiumed clean.

As to why I believe it.. I don't want start a discussion that would belong in the clinic. With the program in place now they don't even have to find a drug, they can see indirect changes in values and ban you for that.

I haven't been to the clinic in a long time so I don't know what the current thinking on that is but I know from previous discussions there that it's hard to find any reasonable talk about it.

Not to throw this into clinic territory, but perhaps the reason there is "no reasonable talk" about Lance being clean is because no reasonable person can reach that conclusion.

 

[Race Radio]

He was the most tested rider there.

Can you prove this or like most of what you write did you pull it out of your A$$?

 

[Carboncrank]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carboncrank
I stand corrected. You are right.
He was a great rider and it was a great feat.

Lance and Eddy are good friends. I actually heard Eddie call Lance "the greatest".

Just for perspective, if Eddie had been injured on March 23rd of 1970 he would missed the first 3 races you mention so that part of your point is completely moot.

Eddie was 25 years old, Lance was 37. Where was Eddy at age 37. On the podium at the tour de france?

2 words:
Zo Loft

2 more:
Pro Zac

Take a ride around the block, assuming you own a bike.

Lance and his buddy Eddy

http://www.livestrong.com/lance-arm...-merckx/1830cd20-aa3d-4a58-bf13-9b5bca79f7ad/

Eddy seem like a really cool guy. I'd love to be a fly on the wall somewhere and just listen to him. He certainly seems to be full of joie de vivre.