The Sports Illustrated Article

Page 12 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
13,485
Ferminal said:
Not sure how that's relevant to the SI article?

It's not. He made several innacurate comments that belie his ignorance of the article and it's contents, and when confronted by rational criticisms, resorted to a patently ridiculous straw man.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
stephens said:
So...regarding HemAssit: So Armstrong possibly had access to a substance which didn't work and therefore isn't a PED. Got it. Thanks for the clarification.
True -if only he knew a good hematologist to help him ;)

stephens said:
We all know he doped. We all know they all do. We all know that as my signature says, the thirst is stronger than the rules. But the "proof" is going to have to get a lot, lot better for this investigation to end up with charges and for those charges to succeed. The "proof" against many other athletes was much more obvious and solid and Novitsky hasn't had much luck there (Heck, he hasn't even gotten to Bonds yet).
So even you admit he doped?
Do you not think if you know and a couple of journalists can dig up new information on Armstrong that the Feds will have any difficulty in proving their case?
 
May 30, 2009
32
0
0
Landis Quitting

This at least is the good news. The man has done nothing but tarnish a working man's relaxation and sporting weekend fun and isn't even a pleasant person from the articles read. I hope and pray that nobody decides to do a feature article on his career and wastes pages in the bike magazines.
 
May 26, 2009
377
0
0
redtreviso said:
They didn't deliver on their promise if you arrived at the ER with a gunshot wound or had your arm lopped off in a car accident,,,but as a PED what promises were expected and produced?

Well, there's that, plus years ago when the alleged doping took place there would have been an assumption the drugs worked.
 
May 9, 2009
583
0
0
MacRoadie said:
It's not. He made several innacurate comments that belie his ignorance of the article and it's contents, and when confronted by rational criticisms, resorted to a patently ridiculous straw man.

The only claim I have made is that from one perspective, the one most common around here, we tend to focus on the claims made against Armstrong: But in nearly every case, the article continues to show some counter point against the claim, a way his attorneys and publicists can explain them away. That kind of thing is what will help maintain Armstrong's legend, and you can already see it being played out on twitter and so on. To suggest that all those people are merely paid by Lance is crazy. That's the real public opinion. The one that can't get passed the "never tested positive," until there is real obvious proof that positive tests were covered up by bribes. That's why I keep going back to that point: Novitsky needs to turn up that money!

What straw man are you referring to?
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
10,480
stephens said:
(Heck, he hasn't even gotten to Bonds yet).

And yet Bonds reputation is completely destroyed, he was not re-signed by the Giants despite still playing well at the time of all his bad press, and he was then effectively drummed out of baseball as no other team would sign him. But yeah, the guy who exploited cancer sufferers will come out of this smelling like roses. :rolleyes:
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
10,480
stephens said:
Some are viewing the article as a slam dunk and it reminded me of all their other slam dunk claims that have so far not come to fruition. I'm just attempting to get people to accept a little bit of reality and not let their enthusiasm lead them to keep the blinders on in regards to what all this really looks like to the general public and potential jury.

Sounds like you are also unaware of the reputation of Sports Illustrated. They are the most respected sports magazine in America, bar none. Armstrong's reputation in the US is now officially toast as of the publication of this article. Take it to the bank, or deny reality, I don't care.
 
May 9, 2009
583
0
0
p.s. Dr. Maserati, of course I think he doped. I can't imagine anything I've ever said here that would lead you to believe I'm some sort of believer in the myth. All my comments are about what can be proven legally, what people (other than us) will believe, what will sway the opinions of the general public and cancer victims and all that stuff.
 
May 24, 2010
855
1
0
42coppi said:
This at least is the good news. The man has done nothing but tarnish a working man's relaxation and sporting weekend fun and isn't even a pleasant person from the articles read. I hope and pray that nobody decides to do a feature article on his career and wastes pages in the bike magazines.

Spoken like a true disciple of the cult of St lance.. :rolleyes:

In the end Floyd will be venerated as the man who started the process in bringing down the house of cards that is the Armstrong empire. What Floyd did was FORCE the authorities to look deeper into the Uniballer and see just what a piece of trash he is. Now that Floyd has announced his retirement I hope he can find peace and have a better life.
 
Apr 9, 2009
1,916
0
10,480
42coppi said:
This at least is the good news. The man has done nothing but tarnish a working man's relaxation and sporting weekend fun and isn't even a pleasant person from the articles read. I hope and pray that nobody decides to do a feature article on his career and wastes pages in the bike magazines.

"Look, over there! There is other stuff over there that is not related to Armstrong's doping over there! Please look over there!"
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
13,485
stephens said:
So...regarding HemAssit: So Armstrong possibly had access to a substance which didn't work and therefore isn't a PED. Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

Exactly who said it doesn't work as a doping product?

It was pulled from clinical trials because it didn't work as well as expected in the treatment of emergency room trauma patients (patients suffering from significant loss in blood volume). There is nothing to suggest that HemAssist was not beneficial in increasing oxygen transport in an otherwise healthy individual with normal blood volume.

Medicines don't make to to Phase III trials (human testing) without SIGNIFICANT evidence that the medication works. This stuff was designed for use as a blood substitute in trauma situations where significant blood loss was present (ER's, military combat conditions), not as a PED, or as a medication to increase natural production of RBC's.

By the way, HBOC's are on the WADA banned list and have been for some time...
 
Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
TheComeBackKid said:
Well, there were lots of tests during the tours. Maybe he could fool a few of them, but all of them?

Yes, all of them. It should be evident by now a couple of things are going on.

1. WADA's tests aren't foolproof. From what I've understood reading plainer English info on testing protocols, they are complex. There are false negatives.

2. UCI consistently runs interference on the tests. Lance was/is one of Pat's chosen stars, so he certainly has gotten special treatment in just about every way. Go no further than BALCO's track star, Marion Jones. An entire career doped and not one positive. Same thing happened at the UCI.

3. There are claims that testing schedules and protocols were known to Armstrong almost as soon as WADA made them.

TheComeBackKid said:
I don't see anything to suggest he had an advantage over the other guys...

Michele Ferrari. As the SI article points out worked with Armstrong and co. through sometime 2009. The SI article also mentions an experimental drug perfect for cycling.
 
Jul 3, 2009
18,948
5
22,485
House08

Damn you #LanceArmstrong. How can I LiveSTRONG when I know you were on steroids. You jerk...

34 minutes ago

Rofl... mythbusters.
 
Oct 7, 2010
123
0
0
@juanpelota “That’s it?”


Wait just a minute here.

Did Lance's lawyers verify any of what was published with him? A reaction to the article, in part, or in full isnt that's it. That indicates he hadn't been asked, confirmed, or denied anything there. It is as if he hadn't been following the Clinic at all.

Wouldn't a proper response be, "we have denied these accusations since we were first contacted with them"?
 
May 9, 2009
583
0
0
Not that crap again. I am no one's alias. I've been here as long as you have. Stephens is my real name. I'll provide a first name and phone number for anyone who PMs me. Please do not get me banned by making false accusations that I am a previously banned member.
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
13,485
stephens said:
Uhh...Dr. Michael Ashenden? As quoted on the last page. Thought his word was god around here.

You mean this one?

It turns out they’re likely not. Dr. Michael Ashenden, founder of the Science and Industry Against Blood Doping consortium and member of the UCI bio-passport panel, told me two years ago that HBOCs never delivered the kind of oxygen-transport capacity they seemed to offer.

Again, we need another lesson in comprehension. This time, it's distinguishing the difference between "never delivered the kind of oxygen-transport capacity they seemed to offer" from "they did not offer any oxygen-transport capacity at all" (which he more than likely would have said had that been what he meant).

To put it very simply (as it seems necessary), he said they didn't measure up to their advertised potential, he didn't say they offered no benefit. When other means of blood boosting became available, they became less attractive.

Hence his further comment:

As a result of that and their scarcity, they fell out of favor compared to less exotic regimens like blood doping and micro-dosing EPO.

If they flat-out didn't work, then why was it a combination of reasons and not simply that it didn't work?
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
13,485
stephens said:
Not that crap again. I am no one's alias. I've been here as long as you have. Stephens is my real name. I'll provide a first name and phone number for anyone who PMs me. Please do not get me banned by making false accusations that I am a previously banned member.

That, and he'll send you $100 too...
 
May 26, 2009
377
0
0
Ferminal said:
For the same reason Lance kept charging on EPO after being warned by Ferrari. Why he walked through customs with a bag full of gear, why Astana threw IVs out in the garbage.

They are delusional and think that they are invincible.

Not saying it's not true, but if he and the team were that incredibly insouciant about doping, it's surprising they weren't busted years ago like the others.

I always thought that if any of the allegations were true, the reason he stayed clear had to be a much more discreet and professional regime than this sort of thing.
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,035
0
0
All BPC discussion regarding the user "stephens" is to stop right now.

Further acusations against this user will be addressed severely by moderators.