- Jul 6, 2010
- 2,340
- 0
- 0
Man, you guys are exhausitng! I keep coming back to the thread, hoping for news or at least something insightful. No such luck...
python said:again, you are betraying poor knowledge of the case. you need to read more than misinformed cycling media.
when you know it did not happened you can draw conclusions. until then you are the one jumping the gun.
python said:i am not afraid, if you read my posts. don't be afraid to do some searching too.
python said:i am not afraid, if you read my posts. don't be afraid to do some searching too.
I've noticed Publicus even took his contador avatar down. Kinda sad reallyscribe said:Rating the Biggest Hypocrites in the clinic:
1. Python (I LOL every time I see this moran's avatar in a Contador thread)
2. "This couldn't have happened to a nicer guy." - The Hog on Contadoper
3. Publicus - Someone wake him up when the Armstrong indictment goes down. The Armstrong thread in the main forum has died without him around to bump it up.
4.(tied) El Pistolero/Senor Contador/ and about 10 other direvitive user names that all share one brain.....
JMBeaushrimp said:Man, you guys are exhausitng! I keep coming back to the thread, hoping for news or at least something insightful. No such luck...
HoustonHammer said:OK. I'll make it official: BULLSH*T!!
thehog said:Cycling will lose "credibility"? Seriously? You think? What now? Since the Tour has been totally clean since 1999.
Fool.
Cycling will lose credibility if they remove Contador.
Think before you write Junior.
HoustonHammer said:I read the ITTF's rules. Like the UCI's, their rules are basically a carbon copy of the WADA code. Same clauses, same terminology.
Which articles? I've seen a number of quotes from Weikert and from Ovtcharov himself. But nothing that had anywhere the detail you suggest. Can you provide links?
TeamSkyFans said:my understanding when this broke was that AC wasnt the only one tested for plasticizers and that AS also came up dodgy. would make sense. Maybe wiggins did win the tour after all![]()
We don’t treat him differently than the others, but let’s be honest, the fact that it was Alberto Contador means that we have to be certain we take the right decision,” McQuaid said.
fasthill said:What I find interesting in this quote is, apparently, in McQuaid's mind, certainty is afforded to Contador while others can be banned even if UCI isn't certain of their guilt?
scribe said:Rating the Biggest Hypocrites in the clinic:
1. Python (I LOL every time I see this moran's avatar in a Contador thread)
2. "This couldn't have happened to a nicer guy." - The Hog on Contadoper
3. Publicus - Someone wake him up when the Armstrong indictment goes down. The Armstrong thread in the main forum has died without him around to bump it up.
4.(tied) El Pistolero/Senor Contador/ and about 10 other direvitive user names that all share one brain.....
Publicus said:Top 3 without making ANY comments about this subject (or generally participating in the forums for the last few months)? Man that doesn't say much about your rating system.
That's Scribbles for you--who needs facts when you can make sh*t up. Stay classy Scribbles.
he let everyone on his true thoughts recently when he declared he'll drop out of cycling if conta is found not guilty. when asked why did he followe cycling during armstrong years, he said that's speculation and rumour.Publicus said:Top 3 without making ANY comments about this subject (or generally participating in the forums for the last few months)? Man that doesn't say much about your rating system.
That's Scribbles for you--who needs facts when you can make sh*t up. Stay classy Scribbles.
mightymac12 said:Couldn't disagree more. This is not a matter of substance potency, its about punishing those who break the rules. If you get caught taking a banned substance of any kind you should pay the price. Your attitude of "ahhh forgive him its Contador" is bound to create a monster that cannot be controlled. Look at Mr. Armstrongs beginnings...
All I am saying is set a zero-tolerance protocol. Until a zero-tolerance policy is actually enforced you cannot claim that it won't work as a deterrent.
python said:and i will declare it privately, you're a clueless pretender with the limited ability to follow rather well explained issues.
If I may quote myself...Berzin said:Zero tolerance doesn't work in any level of law enforcement, and it won't work in cycling.
What you're saying is, let's keep using this same failed template so it will be easier to mete out fines and punishments without having to consider mitigating circumstances or severity of said doping offense.
To put this amount of clenbutarol on par with the same punishment for an EPO positive is ludicrous, regardless of what the rules say and regardless of what YOU say.
For a substance that appeared at levels which have no performance-enhancing capabilities whatsoever, your stance is not sustainable.
If he were to have gotten caught for one of the major drugs of choice in the peloton (testosterone, HgH, EPO) then an argument could be made for a two-year ban.
The rules have to work in conjunction with the severity of the doping offense.
The problem with this, I think, is that we know dopers don't use a single drug or a single method, and we also know dopers are beating the tests. It follows that even if someone only tested positive for one substance, the most likely possibility is that they used other PEDs and banned methods as well, but managed to avoid a positive. If the tests were more effective I would agree with your reasoning.
arguments require head. the head is where the brains and the eye are located. if you are not capable of reading and following the leads and several times named sources, i can only conclude you have a thick attitude or reading ability impairment. you fail to to do that even now when it's layed out in front of you. that's what i call b..shytHoustonHammer said:Arguments require facts, and facts require sources. If you're not willing to give your sources, I can only conclude they don't exist. Hence: BULLSH*T!!!
Publicus said:Top 3 without making ANY comments about this subject (or generally participating in the forums for the last few months)? Man that doesn't say much about your rating system.
That's Scribbles for you--who needs facts when you can make sh*t up. Stay classy Scribbles.
so you are still obsessed with avatars instead of what's under them ? i'll have to agree with aus, you don't add much to the content of the forum.scribe said:Oh good, you're back. Go ahead and get your contador avatar back on. Python needs you. They are thinking about convicting an innocent man over a measly positive on his doping control.
python said:he let everyone on his true thoughts recently when he declared he'll drop out of cycling if conta is found not guilty. when asked why did he followe cycling during armstrong years, he said that's speculation and rumour.
on the subject: minessa thanks. a picked up a lot of the details from several papers including sz, spiegel. also from the german ping pong federation themselves. some more details, though not as complete, at the ittf
http://www.ettu.org/news_view.php?id=3183
python said:that's why the moment i saw your attitude, i saw the futility of feeding you by the spoon. you are incapable of an open discussion. you are incapable of following sources even after they are put in front of you. you're thick with attitude and thin with reasoning. menessa and myself named at least 6 different sources, yet you're still clueless.