Warning for Lance fans

[Dr. Maserati]

I'm a long time lurker, been reading these forums for a couple of years.
..<snipped for brevity>.... but my default position remains innocent until proven guilty.

I hoping this can become a sticky to warn newcomers.

I am hoping the anti-Lance haters don't descend on this thread and destroy what I am trying to do.
....

Why should you feel the need to warn 'newcomers'?
What are you trying to do?

You site Wiklipedia as having a "neutral view with some degree of editorial standard".
I just checked his page and did a quick check on the V02 max figures it presents: the 'sources' used are clips from magazines, and do not show where these figures came from.


"Armstrong has recorded an aerobic capacity of 83.8 mL/kg/min (VO2 max),[32][33] -
[32]is from a 'RunnersWorld' article

Armstrong knows his max VO2, too. His longtime friend, confidante, and coach, Chris Carmichael, has had his star pupil tested on several occasions. In one, Armstrong jackhammered oxygen into his legs at the astonishing rate of 83 millimeters per kilogram per minute.

[33]is from table of athletes which includes Lance ........ there is no mention of how these figures were attained (maybe from wiki ).

 

[Berzin]

Please don't make this into some kind of troll war or whatever it is called. If you have a contrary view it is fine with me. Don't feel compelled to post your view here. The contrary views are well covered in many many other threads in this forum.

My wish is that this thread remain fairly pristine and be made a sticky (or easily found in a search by a newbie) so that this position can be seen by other Lance fans and they can see a perspective contrary to those views.

 

[Berzin]

Why should you feel the need to warn 'newcomers'?
What are you trying to do?

You site Wiklipedia as having a "neutral view with some degree of editorial standard".
I just checked his page and did a quick check on the V02 max figures it presents: the 'sources' used are clips from magazines, and do not show where these figures came from.


"Armstrong has recorded an aerobic capacity of 83.8 mL/kg/min (VO2 max),[32][33] -
[32]is from a 'RunnersWorld' article


[33]is from table of athletes which includes Lance ........ there is no mention of how these figures were attained (maybe from wiki ).

 

[Willy_Voet]

Take a look at this top 10 list. The 'clinic' run by Dr Fuentes was in FULL effect.

Basso, Ulrich and Mancebo were either found guilty or retired as a result of their involvement.

Vinokourov? Well, he didn't test positive, yet.

1 Lance Armstrong (USA)Yellow jersey Discovery Channel 86h 15' 02"
2 Ivan Basso (ITA) Team CSC + 4' 40"
3 Jan Ullrich (GER) T-Mobile Team + 6' 21"
4 Francisco Mancebo (ESP) Illes Balears-Caisse d'Epargne + 9' 59"
5 Alexander Vinokourov (KAZ) T-Mobile Team + 11' 01"
6 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Gerolsteiner + 11' 21"
7 Michael Rasmussen (DEN)Polkadot jersey Rabobank + 11' 33"
8 Cadel Evans (AUS) Davitamon-Lotto + 11' 55"
9 Floyd Landis (USA) Phonak + 12' 44"
10 Óscar Pereiro (ESP) Phonak + 16' 04

If you still believe after this...I'm not going to spoil the myth. It's like Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or the Easter Bunny for a kid.

 

[Berzin]

Thanks for your question and not flaming.

Ultimately what I am saying is that it is possible and valid to have a view that Lance did not use performance enhancing drugs. That reading this forum you might think that was not the case. A fair (in my opinion) view of the facts is that it is unproven. I acknowledge others have a different view and that too is valid. I'm not out to convince anyone or anything. I am not trying to bait or personalize the argument and I must say (thankfully) all the posters to date have been taken it in that spirit and responded in kind.

I hope that makes sense....I have spent what feels like several hours on this thread now and it is well past my bed-time so I will be signing off soon.

 

[Berzin]

ok i think i got it. pls dont bother responding preemo coz it would be a waste.

after reading another of your posts it's rather clear, you came here to spin the same old crap with nicer rhetoric and 'polite' language.

educate yourself to the facts of armstrong's reality, then i'll give you my ear.

goodbye.

 

[Berzin]

Take a look at this top 10 list. The 'clinic' run by Dr Fuentes was in FULL effect.

Basso, Ulrich and Mancebo were either found guilty or retired as a result of their involvement.

Vinokourov? Well, he didn't test positive, yet.

1 Lance Armstrong (USA)Yellow jersey Discovery Channel 86h 15' 02"
2 Ivan Basso (ITA) Team CSC + 4' 40"
3 Jan Ullrich (GER) T-Mobile Team + 6' 21"
4 Francisco Mancebo (ESP) Illes Balears-Caisse d'Epargne + 9' 59"
5 Alexander Vinokourov (KAZ) T-Mobile Team + 11' 01"
6 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Gerolsteiner + 11' 21"
7 Michael Rasmussen (DEN)Polkadot jersey Rabobank + 11' 33"
8 Cadel Evans (AUS) Davitamon-Lotto + 11' 55"
9 Floyd Landis (USA) Phonak + 12' 44"
10 Óscar Pereiro (ESP) Phonak + 16' 04

If you still believe after this...I'm not going to spoil the myth. It's like Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or the Easter Bunny for a kid.

 

[Preemo]

Berzin,

Do you own the Forum that you feel so compelled to destroy the thread? Anyone reading this thread will see your behaviour for what it is. Anyway I believe I made my points and this is the point to move on, so no more posts from me on this thread.

It's a pity because there are a couple of interesting posts that I would like to respond to.

 

[Cerberus]

Good point but not a slam dunk. The reason I say that is that the test was not an official test. The standards were not the same as for official tests and to date I don’t know that 6 year old samples are still stable for the EPO test to standards of evidence required – I mean the test was certified with current samples I think.

Well we have the word of Ashenden that the test is realiable. On the other hand I have never heard any expert, even one on Armstrongs payroll claim that there was anyway freezing a sample could have cause a false positive.

The Vrijman's report also cleared Armstrong because of improper handling and testing. The report said the tests were conducted improperly and fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest they "constitute evidence of anything.

Yes it said that, but I have actually read the conclusions of the report itself. I could not find any possible explanation for why the test turned out positive. He appears to have simply declared that it didn't constitute evidence.

Remember we are talking about the reputation and future of a living person. Consider as a thought experiment that he used EPO in 1999. Lance would respond exactly as he has – deny the report, claim his innocence and refuse the re-test of old samples.

Now consider in the thought experiment that he did not use EPO. He would react exactly the same way – deny the report, claim his innocence and refuse the re-test of old samples because even 1 positive (for whatever reason) would see him guilty. He would have nothing to win (because the rumours would continue even if all tested negative) and everything to lose.

Well he might consent to a retest if he was innocent to clear his name, but aside from that you're forgetting one thing. He would also, regardless of his guilt or innocence consults expert to help him conjure up a lame excuse/find the real explanation. Do you really think that if there was any possibility that as you suggested freezing the sampled could have caused a false positive that Armstrong wouldn't have been shouting this from the rooftops?

In the end it becomes a personal judgement as to whether the points overall start to become so large that you make a judgement. As I have said, I am of the view of innocent until proven guilty. I think that is fairest to the individual – we are after all talking about a living real person. I keep thinking if this was me on trial for my life and future I would hope that the standard of proof would be fairly high.

That's where I disagree, it is a fact that he tested positive in a doping test, but you objections are not based on anything similarly substantial. If it was known that freezing samples could degrade them then it would be a personal judgement, but there is no reason to think that this could happen. No expert, even one paid by Armstrong has even suggested that it could happen.

 

[M Sport]

If you're sick and tired of trolls, please do not respond to this thread.

Just ignore it.

Responding will give them strength, like zombies chomping on human flesh.

Post of the thread.

Ok, let this be the end.

Put the OP on your ignore list and move along. Nothing more to see here.

 

[alberto.legstrong]

If you're sick and tired of trolls, please do not respond to this thread.

Just ignore it.

Responding will give them strength, like zombies chomping on human flesh.

You mean like these zombies....

I think it's indisputable that Lance doped at least, what, 6 times for certain and after the 1st time, it's sort of like a promiscuous person claiming to be 'almost a virgin.' There's just no knowing if it is 6 times or 6000.

At least this lance thread is in the clinic where it belongs instead of the 5000 post lance thread that ISN'T in the clinic.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'm a long time lurker, been reading these forums for a couple of years. (even though it only started a year ago)

I am not a Lance Armstrong fan who believes Lance is a freak of nature honed by his background and supported by his focus, methods and strong team - I believe Lance uses illegal performance enhancing drugs.

I am writing this as a warning to other Lance fans (genuinely I am).

What is my warning - it is this: ....if you use his Wiki page as defence to ignore that he doped you may well be in for a suprise..

This forum also has plenty of anti-Lance posters and indeed Pro Lance supporters and probably even some from Public Stategies (Hey y'all!).

If you want a neutral view with some degree of editorial standard read this.

Finally, I acknowledge there have been plenty of accusations and circumstantial evidence against Lance... the 6 EPO samples, the corticoids, working with Fearrai, delayed tests, dodgy Passport, the hospital confession, steroids found in his house, strange payments to the UCI....
ok the list goes on and on thats not my point..... if wiki says he is innocent, then thats all you need to know.


I hoping this can become a sticky to warn newcomers.

I am hoping the anti-Lance haters don't descend on this thread and destroy what I am trying to do. ...... like pointing out that an 'anti-Lance haters' would mean you are a fan...

I hope I am not misunderstood and the intent of my post is acceptable.
I hope I have played the issue and not the person. I respect the right to have and argue an anti-Lance viewpoint even if I disagree with it. (but I am going to set the standard that you should not believe this forum and only believe Wiki and twitter and when all else fails I will use the innocent until proven guilty card..)

I think Lance is going for number 8!!... Thats children, not Tdf victories.

 

[BroDeal]

I do not think so Brodeal, BPC tends to quote people like i have quoted you above, without having the posters name in the quote. ie. the quote by part

This looks like classic BPC in the super polite, pretend to be reasonable mode that he uses to draw people into his trolling. It also includes the usual fake surprise that people think that he is trolling.

 

[auscyclefan94]

This looks like classic BPC in the super polite, pretend to be reasonable mode that he uses to draw people into his trolling. It also includes the usual fake surprise that people think that he is trolling.

yes, nice first then plain annoying the next time.

 

[Publicus]

I'm a long time lurker, been reading these forums for a couple of years. (even though it only started a year ago)

I am not a Lance Armstrong fan who believes Lance is a freak of nature honed by his background and supported by his focus, methods and strong team - I believe Lance uses illegal performance enhancing drugs.

I am writing this as a warning to other Lance fans (genuinely I am).

What is my warning - it is this: ....if you use his Wiki page as defence to ignore that he doped you may well be in for a suprise..

This forum also has plenty of anti-Lance posters and indeed Pro Lance supporters and probably even some from Public Stategies (Hey y'all!).

If you want a neutral view with some degree of editorial standard read this.

Finally, I acknowledge there have been plenty of accusations and circumstantial evidence against Lance... the 6 EPO samples, the corticoids, working with Fearrai, delayed tests, dodgy Passport, the hospital confession, steroids found in his house, strange payments to the UCI....
ok the list goes on and on thats not my point..... if wiki says he is innocent, then thats all you need to know.


I hoping this can become a sticky to warn newcomers.

I am hoping the anti-Lance haters don't descend on this thread and destroy what I am trying to do. ...... like pointing out that an 'anti-Lance haters' would mean you are a fan...

I hope I am not misunderstood and the intent of my post is acceptable.
I hope I have played the issue and not the person. I respect the right to have and argue an anti-Lance viewpoint even if I disagree with it. (but I am going to set the standard that you should not believe this forum and only believe Wiki and twitter and when all else fails I will use the innocent until proven guilty card..)

I think Lance is going for number 8!!... Thats children, not Tdf victories.

Now this folks is some quality snark. Bravo sir! Bravo!

 

[buckwheat]

If you want a neutral view with some degree of editorial standard go look at the Wikipedia article on Lance. It objectively lists all the facts able to be collaborated. If you want to see the way the anti-Lance folk are forced to be both factual and logical, have a look at the discussion tab of the Wikipedia article. The Wikipedia editorial community engage with them over 3 or 4 archives worth of discussion. (The same can be said for the Levi controversy) The end result is wins on both sides and the Lance article as it stands emerges.


I hoping this can become a sticky to warn newcomers.

I am hoping the anti-Lance haters don't descend on this thread and destroy what I am trying to do.

You work for Tim?

I think you mean "corroborated" in the first paragraph?

What's the warning and what are you trying to do?

Do you know that the shuttle accidents probably never should have happened?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

http://blogs.saschina.org/oliver01pd2016/files/2009/12/epic-fail-sports-fail-epic-forehead-weak-genius-demotivational-poster-1206344902.jpg

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

 

[Wallace]

I'm a long time lurker, been reading these forums for a couple of years. (even though it only started a year ago)

I am not a Lance Armstrong fan who believes Lance is a freak of nature honed by his background and supported by his focus, methods and strong team - I believe Lance uses illegal performance enhancing drugs.

I am writing this as a warning to other Lance fans (genuinely I am).

What is my warning - it is this: ....if you use his Wiki page as defence to ignore that he doped you may well be in for a suprise..

This forum also has plenty of anti-Lance posters and indeed Pro Lance supporters and probably even some from Public Stategies (Hey y'all!).

If you want a neutral view with some degree of editorial standard read this.

Finally, I acknowledge there have been plenty of accusations and circumstantial evidence against Lance... the 6 EPO samples, the corticoids, working with Fearrai, delayed tests, dodgy Passport, the hospital confession, steroids found in his house, strange payments to the UCI....
ok the list goes on and on thats not my point..... if wiki says he is innocent, then thats all you need to know.


I hoping this can become a sticky to warn newcomers.

I am hoping the anti-Lance haters don't descend on this thread and destroy what I am trying to do. ...... like pointing out that an 'anti-Lance haters' would mean you are a fan...

I hope I am not misunderstood and the intent of my post is acceptable.
I hope I have played the issue and not the person. I respect the right to have and argue an anti-Lance viewpoint even if I disagree with it. (but I am going to set the standard that you should not believe this forum and only believe Wiki and twitter and when all else fails I will use the innocent until proven guilty card..)

I think Lance is going for number 8!!... Thats children, not Tdf victories.

Thanks for the link--an excellent summation of the facts.

 

[pedaling squares]

Yep, I think we have The Arbiter volume XXVII here folks. But at least the guy isn't responding to every post with personal comments and making the thread a mess. This time the 'don't feed the troll' posts are more of a distraction than this guy's posts. But a sarcastic recreation of the original post and fail posters, now that's some good material. I just had a protein shake so I'm going to pee in a bottle and see if it turns to EPO in 6 years. I'll post the results on wiki, then you'll know it is fact.

 

[BikeCentric]

 

[Anonymous]

 

[BikeCentric]

 

[BikeCentric]

One would think that in the midst of this economic downturn Public Strategies could find some at least semi-competent Spin Doctors. This attempt is laughably pathetic.