The Sports Illustrated Article

[180mmCrank]

I am not sure if you @Polish are being serious or satirical? But I have never read such utter drivel.

Can someone post somethig sensible on the topic before I give up the will to live!

 

[BroDeal]

I am not sure if you @Polish are being serious or satirical? But I have never read such utter drivel.

Can someone post somethig sensible on the topic before I give up the will to live!

You're the moderator. Do something about it.

 

[180mmCrank]

You're the moderator. Do something about it.

I think we have.

 

[Francois the Postman]

You're the moderator. Do something about it.

BroDeal, just to clarify that there are a few post missing that you can no longer see (unless new posts are pinged on to your email), someone has been given some time to rethink, and at least 4 mods have been involved. Please keep the moderation discussion where we are having it, in the about the forum area.

 

[Walshworld]

Don't listen to SI. The definite doing answer is from the ghetto's Nikbag

Do not miss this viral work of genius from Nikbag in the hood. His youtube video summation of the Armstrong doping issue is priceless and dead on.

http://www.atwistedspoke.com/

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Hilarious! Nikbag tells it like it is.

Here's a direct link to the video on YouTube.

 

[180mmCrank]

Hilarious! Nikbag tells it like it is.

Here's a direct link to the video on YouTube.

Wow - it looks like he took speed and pushed play on his video!!

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

What struck me most in the SI article was...

Excellent first post. Welcome to the forum.

Don't make jokes like that. This is a very small country.

How's your mixed martial arts training going, for when the strong armed bully shows up?!

I had posted a story on the "Media" thread about a colleague who was in complete denial about the possibility of LA having done anything wrong...

I think we've all come across many of those. I'm finding now that many of these people, once they get over the shock of the SI article, may accept it's likely he doped, but are taking the "innocent until proven guilty" approach. That it's all just heresy, and doesn't prove he did anything until he's convicted in court on hard evidence. And that talking about it without that evidence is unfairly destroying his reputation, etc.

Usually these people also refuse to look deeper into the issue. If they are willing to read it, I usually first send them the Michael Ashenden interview, the Nightline special, or Walsh's book. But most of them seem to willfully not want to know more. They think they are being impartial, and we are being judgmental, but without saying so directly they refuse to look deeper into the matter, and rationalize reasons for not doing so.

 

[Anonymous]

The article date has changed to 24/1
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180944/1/index.htm

anyone notice any changes? as far as i can see (checking the last word on each page) its identical. dont know why theyve changed the date.

 

[Oldman]

Hilarious! Nikbag tells it like it is.

Here's a direct link to the video on YouTube.

To all the clinging fans: "don't be ig'nant". Classic.

 

[thehog]

The article date has changed to 24/1
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180944/1/index.htm

anyone notice any changes? as far as i can see (checking the last word on each page) its identical. dont know why theyve changed the date.

If my eyes don't decieve me the following quote is new?


A number of insiders, however, were sceptical. "When I saw them together," says Floyd Landis, "it didn't surprise me. Lance knows Catlin well."

 

[Barrus]

If my eyes don't decieve me the following quote is new?


A number of insiders, however, were sceptical. "When I saw them together," says Floyd Landis, "it didn't surprise me. Lance knows Catlin well."

Nope that quote was already in the older article

 

[GoneWithTailWind]

No they don't. I scraped the text of the web and the sentence you quote isn't there.
Will try to do a delta...

 

[GoneWithTailWind]

Scratch that. Barrus is right.

 

[GoneWithTailWind]

Delta says.... "They're identical."

Not just the content - the date on the original was the 24th.

That was exciting. For a while.

 

[andy1234]

Hilarious! Nikbag tells it like it is.

Here's a direct link to the video on YouTube.

Little known fact - Nikbag is a actually Dr Ferrari.

 

[Roninho]

The total lack of interest in an Olympic medal later in his career now makes sense, which I'm sure he would have loved, the IOC are more expensive/trickier/impossible (delete as appropriate) to pay off and bury things than the UCI. Look what happened to Tyler. Do Olympic test samples get kept for longer too?

Tyler Hamilton got suspended for a positive test in the Vuelta. He got away with the olympic medal.

 

[Benotti69]

Tyler Hamilton got suspended for a positive test in the Vuelta. He got away with the olympic medal.

was that a payback for him getting away off the Barcelona Olympic positive...

 

[Kennf1]

The article date has changed to 24/1
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180944/1/index.htm

anyone notice any changes? as far as i can see (checking the last word on each page) its identical. dont know why theyve changed the date.

It was always described as appearing in the 1/24 issue of SI. the "teaser" article posted last week stated the full article would appear in the 1/24 issue. The fact that it was available before that is nothing out of the ordinary for magazines.

 

[thehog]

It was always described as appearing in the 1/24 issue of SI. the "teaser" article posted last week stated the full article would appear in the 1/24 issue. The fact that it was available before that is nothing out of the ordinary for magazines.

The magazines date is always of the coming week. Ie it's published until the 24th. Then a new copy is released.

 

[runninboy]

I think we've all come across many of those. I'm finding now that many of these people, once they get over the shock of the SI article, may accept it's likely he doped, but are taking the "innocent until proven guilty" approach. That it's all just heresy, and doesn't prove he did anything until he's convicted in court on hard evidence. And that talking about it without that evidence is unfairly destroying his reputation, etc.

Usually these people also refuse to look deeper into the issue. If they are willing to read it, I usually first send them the Michael Ashenden interview, the Nightline special, or Walsh's book. But most of them seem to willfully not want to know more. They think they are being impartial, and we are being judgmental, but without saying so directly they refuse to look deeper into the matter, and rationalize reasons for not doing so.

This reminds me so much of peoples political convictions. It is an emotional issue for alot of people rather than a rational discourse based on the facts at hand. One side will present their views with alot of facts to back up their position and the other side will do a slow retreat.
However since it is such an emotional issue they will never admit that they were wrong, or that they made a mistake in judgement.

We are already getting glimpses as to how far the apologists will go to keep LA on a pedestal. I can see them claiming"he's not guilty, if he was the court would have sentenced him to more than 12 years in prison"

Seriously there are still people who will say OJ is innocent. Oprah would not comment directly on that for years, i don't know if she ever has. And not to interject Politics, but just for the purposes of being intellectually honest, she talked about how she was like a teacher and someone asked "what grade would you give President Obama?"
Her response" I haven't been paying close enough attention"
Now she campaigned for the man, does anyone really believe she has no opinion? Of course not. I could have cared less what her position is, but to tell people you have no position because your emotion may effect your bottom line(money)is just sad.

So while it is nice to see the wheels of justice turning to clean up the sport, i don't expect there will ever come a time when LA or his supporters will accept reality. they will always create their own to suit their needs.
If Oprah can do it , so can Lance!

 

[Oldman]

Excellent first post. Welcome to the forum.

How's your mixed martial arts training going, for when the strong armed bully shows up?!


I think we've all come across many of those. I'm finding now that many of these people, once they get over the shock of the SI article, may accept it's likely he doped, but are taking the "innocent until proven guilty" approach. That it's all just heresy, and doesn't prove he did anything until he's convicted in court on hard evidence. And that talking about it without that evidence is unfairly destroying his reputation, etc.

Usually these people also refuse to look deeper into the issue. If they are willing to read it, I usually first send them the Michael Ashenden interview, the Nightline special, or Walsh's book. But most of them seem to willfully not want to know more. They think they are being impartial, and we are being judgmental, but without saying so directly they refuse to look deeper into the matter, and rationalize reasons for not doing so.

I know as the Mod you'll chastise me for mixing herisies but Americans are more in the mood to act on "Faith" and ignore real evidence. How else to explain the current political trend of clutching the US Constitution to the chest of "patriots", most of whom can't spell constitution let alone comprehend it. Those Lance followers cannot face their own lack of sense and will always believe....

 

[180mmCrank]

I know as the Mod you'll chastise me for mixing herisies but Americans are more in the mood to act on "Faith" and ignore real evidence. How else to explain the current political trend of clutching the US Constitution to the chest of "patriots", most of whom can't spell constitution let alone comprehend it. Those Lance followers cannot face their own lack of sense and will always believe....

I am not sure this is just the preserve of Americans AND I think the issue has and continues to be the lack of evidence and facts in the public (popular) domain. The mainstream view is still pretty much the 'fairy tale' version of events. Even if the story breaks... I think many will write off the details as "Drugs they're all doing it... and he still beat cancer and won 7 TdF." I just can't see it hurting him... even if he's prosecuted (which i can't see happening myself) But it would be nice if at least people knew both sides.

 

[lean mean &green]

I am not sure this is just the preserve of Americans AND I think the issue has and continues to be the lack of evidence and facts in the public (popular) domain. The mainstream view is still pretty much the 'fairy tale' version of events. Even if the story breaks... I think many will write off the details as "Drugs they're all doing it... and he still beat cancer and won 7 TdF." I just can't see it hurting him... even if he's prosecuted (which i can't see happening myself) But it would be nice if at least people knew both sides.

not quite. i think you're right about regular folks not caring too much about doping. it will stain his legacy and they'll be disappointed but move on quickly. an indictment for defrauding sponsors, trafficking experimental drugs, forcing drugs on teamates, or whatever charges stick, will not go over easily tho.

 

[dbrower]

It was always described as appearing in the 1/24 issue of SI. the "teaser" article posted last week stated the full article would appear in the 1/24 issue. The fact that it was available before that is nothing out of the ordinary for magazines.

Subscribers got the hardcopy magazine the day after the online version hit.

-dB