• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

What gear is Horner on to make such outrageous statements like this ?

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
There are two goals in pro sports to win and make money, whatever method they use to achieve those goals is acceptable to them as long as they don't get caught. Some of you might be too puritanical to understand this but let's take lance for an example he gets 2 mil to do the giro due to past success in the tour which was a direct result of his doping practices, I wouldn't mind getting two mil to do one race. what Lance and all the other cheaters did is nothing new, the question is would you cheat at a sport if you wouldn't get caught, make massive amount of money, enough to support future generations of your family and become an instant media icon, and please tell the truth . This question is not directed at escarabajo because we know his answer.
 
Mar 16, 2009
176
0
0
Visit site
Escabarajo, its nice to see you are able to see where some of the others here are coming from. See i think most of us have more common ground in this issue than we think.

There has been cheating in sport as long as there has been sport. That the stakes are higher today is complete BS. People cheat at board games with nothing but pride at stake! Frankly it is really hard for me to understand why some of you think this is new news. Doesnt make it right or OK, but I think that is a sadly fundamental part of the human condition. By design, sport sets rules and limitations to enhance the spectacle by evening the playing field. Top competitors will always try to find ways to gain even a microscopic advantage even at the expense of the rules by seeking out those grey areas.

Back to Horner though. Whatever "gear" he is on, Levi loses ToC w/o him, Cadel is not even close to podium in TdF '07. Guy always has a smile on his face and clearly relishes his role. I for one am going to beleive it is the junk food free diet until he tests positive, simply because i like the guy and the way he rides.
 
Snake8 said:
Escabarajo, its nice to see you are able to see where some of the others here are coming from. See i think most of us have more common ground in this issue than we think.

There has been cheating in sport as long as there has been sport. That the stakes are higher today is complete BS. People cheat at board games with nothing but pride at stake! Frankly it is really hard for me to understand why some of you think this is new news. Doesnt make it right or OK, but I think that is a sadly fundamental part of the human condition. By design, sport sets rules and limitations to enhance the spectacle by evening the playing field. Top competitors will always try to find ways to gain even a microscopic advantage even at the expense of the rules by seeking out those grey areas.

Back to Horner though. Whatever "gear" he is on, Levi loses ToC w/o him, Cadel is not even close to podium in TdF '07. Guy always has a smile on his face and clearly relishes his role. I for one am going to beleive it is the junk food free diet until he tests positive, simply because i like the guy and the way he rides.
Point taken.
 
Apr 10, 2009
594
0
0
Visit site
franciep10 said:
There are two goals in pro sports to win and make money, whatever method they use to achieve those goals is acceptable to them as long as they don't get caught. Some of you might be too puritanical to understand this but let's take lance for an example he gets 2 mil to do the giro due to past success in the tour which was a direct result of his doping practices, I wouldn't mind getting two mil to do one race. what Lance and all the other cheaters did is nothing new, the question is would you cheat at a sport if you wouldn't get caught, make massive amount of money, enough to support future generations of your family and become an instant media icon, and please tell the truth . This question is not directed at escarabajo because we know his answer.

no. But you probably knew my answer too. :D

I will say I can understand the pressure, and have some sympathy (only a little but some nonetheless) for them.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
Actually I save my sympathy for the ones who were pressured into it, the ones that I share my sympathy for the young riders over the years that have been shafted by the likes of Kohl who's been doping since he's 19.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Snake8 said:
Escabarajo, its nice to see you are able to see where some of the others here are coming from. See i think most of us have more common ground in this issue than we think.

There has been cheating in sport as long as there has been sport. That the stakes are higher today is complete BS. People cheat at board games with nothing but pride at stake! Frankly it is really hard for me to understand why some of you think this is new news. Doesnt make it right or OK, but I think that is a sadly fundamental part of the human condition. By design, sport sets rules and limitations to enhance the spectacle by evening the playing field. Top competitors will always try to find ways to gain even a microscopic advantage even at the expense of the rules by seeking out those grey areas.

Back to Horner though. Whatever "gear" he is on, Levi loses ToC w/o him, Cadel is not even close to podium in TdF '07. Guy always has a smile on his face and clearly relishes his role. I for one am going to beleive it is the junk food free diet until he tests positive, simply because i like the guy and the way he rides.

I guess the thing you don't understand because I have not articulated the point clearly enough is that I detest Mr Armstrong not for the doping, but for the effects he imposes on the lives of people who speak out against him. Betsy Andreau, Bassons, Simeoni, Dr Steffen, Frankie Andreau, the French. Well, the list is long.

To me there is no nuance to whether he doped or not. He either did or didn't. I think the evidence is clear that he did. That would garner no greater response from me than I have for any other doper were he to have acted like just another member of the peloton who doped. However, he hasn't, and because of his actions, I detest the man. You are allowed your "nuanced" opinion. I feel no need to nuance anything in terms of opinion. I would love to see him taken down by his lies and actions. However, the golden rule generally applies to anything, and in the is case he has the gold, so he makes the rules.

As to the back and forth, for you to suggest that you have been somehow above the fray is laughable. It speaks of either willful dishonesty or a severe deficiency in introspection. I would point to the fact that last night you quoted 4 of my posts in different threads and then posted snide comments. Physician heal thyself.
 
Escarabajo said:
Velofidelis I have a question for you, do you accept "doping" in cycling then? (I am talking abot the enhancers like EPO or blood doping).
I don't. I now it happens but I don't have to accept it.

If I worked for the DEA, I would have to accept that drug trafficking will not stop. If I worked for the FTC, I'd have to accept that insider trading will not stop. But those realizations need not make me quit my job or give up the fight.

I am a cycling fan, former racer, and have been associated with cycling in my professional life. I still tune in to watch. I too like to see dopers get caught. But I have to accept the moral dilemma of drugs in sport as a fact of human nature that will never change.

The irony and frustration I feel for cycling is in the conundrum that extraordinary testing is creating extraordinary results. The most stringent testing in professional sports is catching more offenders than any other. This should be a good thing, but instead it is a public relations nightmare for cycling. At some point you just have ask why it can't be more like FIFA where they test less and catch few, and the fans are happy with that.

I have been close enough to professional cycling to know that the problem is not as endemic as the worst conspiracy theorists on this site believe it to be. But also have to admit that the recent levels of science, organization, and escalation are quite alarming. However to assume this is just happening in cycling is ridiculous. There were 200 professional athletes named in the Operation Puerto investigation. Why have the 56 cyclists been so vilified.

Despite all the controversy the fan base for cycling is growing internationally. As cyclist we all have some insight into pain, struggle, and reward of what the French call, "the most beautiful sport". Part of that struggle has always had a moral component to it. Today the rewards and the consequences are bigger than ever. For a twenty something pro who has the intestinal fortitude to contest a sprint, elbow to elbow at 60kph, or descend an alpine pass at 90kph, the risk of doping looks quite different.

While we can all sit back and judge him far too harshly for making the wrong decision. We can, none of us, truly say what we would do in the same situation.
 
VeloFidelis said:
If I worked for the DEA, I would have to accept that drug trafficking will not stop. If I worked for the FTC, I'd have to accept that insider trading will not stop. But those realizations need not make me quit my job or give up the fight.

I am a cycling fan, former racer, and have been associated with cycling in my professional life. I still tune in to watch. I too like to see dopers get caught. But I have to accept the moral dilemma of drugs in sport as a fact of human nature that will never change.

The irony and frustration I feel for cycling is in the conundrum that extraordinary testing is creating extraordinary results. The most stringent testing in professional sports is catching more offenders than any other. This should be a good thing, but instead it is a public relations nightmare for cycling. At some point you just have ask why it can't be more like FIFA where they test less and catch few, and the fans are happy with that.

I have been close enough to professional cycling to know that the problem is not as endemic as the worst conspiracy theorists on this site believe it to be. But also have to admit that the recent levels of science, organization, and escalation are quite alarming. However to assume this is just happening in cycling is ridiculous. There were 200 professional athletes named in the Operation Puerto investigation. Why have the 56 cyclists been so vilified.

Despite all the controversy the fan base for cycling is growing internationally. As cyclist we all have some insight into pain, struggle, and reward of what the French call, "the most beautiful sport". Part of that struggle has always had a moral component to it. Today the rewards and the consequences are bigger than ever. For a twenty something pro who has the intestinal fortitude to contest a sprint, elbow to elbow at 60kph, or descend an alpine pass at 90kph, the risk of doping looks quite different.

While we can all sit back and judge him far too harshly for making the wrong decision. We can, none of us, truly say what we would do in the same situation.
I appreciate your frank answer.
Thanks.
 
Snake8 said:
Back to Horner though. Whatever "gear" he is on, Levi loses ToC w/o him, Cadel is not even close to podium in TdF '07. Guy always has a smile on his face and clearly relishes his role. I for one am going to beleive it is the junk food free diet until he tests positive, simply because i like the guy and the way he rides.

Damn straight!

Good onya Mate!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloFidelis said:
If I worked for the DEA, I would have to accept that drug trafficking will not stop. If I worked for the FTC, I'd have to accept that insider trading will not stop. But those realizations need not make me quit my job or give up the fight.

I am a cycling fan, former racer, and have been associated with cycling in my professional life. I still tune in to watch. I too like to see dopers get caught. But I have to accept the moral dilemma of drugs in sport as a fact of human nature that will never change.

The irony and frustration I feel for cycling is in the conundrum that extraordinary testing is creating extraordinary results. The most stringent testing in professional sports is catching more offenders than any other. This should be a good thing, but instead it is a public relations nightmare for cycling. At some point you just have ask why it can't be more like FIFA where they test less and catch few, and the fans are happy with that.

I have been close enough to professional cycling to know that the problem is not as endemic as the worst conspiracy theorists on this site believe it to be. But also have to admit that the recent levels of science, organization, and escalation are quite alarming. However to assume this is just happening in cycling is ridiculous. There were 200 professional athletes named in the Operation Puerto investigation. Why have the 56 cyclists been so vilified.

Despite all the controversy the fan base for cycling is growing internationally. As cyclist we all have some insight into pain, struggle, and reward of what the French call, "the most beautiful sport". Part of that struggle has always had a moral component to it. Today the rewards and the consequences are bigger than ever. For a twenty something pro who has the intestinal fortitude to contest a sprint, elbow to elbow at 60kph, or descend an alpine pass at 90kph, the risk of doping looks quite different.

While we can all sit back and judge him far too harshly for making the wrong decision. We can, none of us, truly say what we would do in the same situation.

I agree with much of what you say. The problem for me comes when the culture of doping is aggressively defended by its practitioners. The reason Mr Armstrong comes up most in that is he is the biggest offender. His personal crusade to silence anyone who questions him is the problem. Floyd's actions during the time between testing positive and being found guilty are the point. Tyler Hamilton's denial of any wrong doing, when clearly he doped is the problem. Their insistence and the insistence of their fans that anyone who believes their positives is an uninformed angry person with an irrational vendetta is the problem.

Men like Joe Papp who get caught, admit their guilt and refuse to hide what they know are men I respect greatly. He doped, and I understand why he did so. I have said before, at one point in my life, I would have too. I doped for far different reasons and it was not related to performance enhancement. Because of my experience with that, and the subsequent years of sobriety, I have also realized that people who face their behavior in an honest and open manner are people deserving of respect. It is those who continue to forcefully deny any suggestion of a problem that should be met with abject and direct refutation of their behavior. I have said many, many times that the behavior of cyclists in denial about their doping is STRIKINGLY similar to people who dope with recreational drugs and refuse to see how their actions are detrimental to those around them. I have seen thousands of people who acted EXACTLY like Mr Armstrong, Mr Landis, and Mr Hamilton. The only difference is in the substances (sometimes).

I have my opinion. It has been developed over many years of watching cycling. I was a fan of Mr Armstrong, Mr. Landis, and particularly Mr Hamilton. (I still have my Phonak socks) I can tell you the precise day that I changed with Mr Armstrong, and it was the day I watched him chase down Mr Simeoni. It was clear to me at that point, who Mr Armstrong was as a person. He has done nothing in the years since to alter that opinion. The only thing he could do is come clean. I think I will have to go with Mr Lemond's assessment of that and say that it will never happen. In the absence of that, I hope to see more and more people looking to expose him. It is my hope that sooner or later it his house of cards will crumble.

Strike out at me for my opinion if you want. It will never change the opinion I have of Mr Armstrong. Will he lose sleep over it? Will you? No. That is not the point of my opinion. The point is to unabashedly present that which I believe to be true. I feel neither the need, nor responsibility to do so in a kind manner. That is just who I am both here and in real life.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
Thoughtforfood said:
I agree with much of what you say. The problem for me comes when the culture of doping is aggressively defended by its practitioners. The reason Mr Armstrong comes up most in that is he is the biggest offender. His personal crusade to silence anyone who questions him is the problem. Floyd's actions during the time between testing positive and being found guilty are the point. Tyler Hamilton's denial of any wrong doing, when clearly he doped is the problem. Their insistence and the insistence of their fans that anyone who believes their positives is an uninformed angry person with an irrational vendetta is the problem.

Men like Joe Papp who get caught, admit their guilt and refuse to hide what they know are men I respect greatly. He doped, and I understand why he did so. I have said before, at one point in my life, I would have too. I doped for far different reasons and it was not related to performance enhancement. Because of my experience with that, and the subsequent years of sobriety, I have also realized that people who face their behavior in an honest and open manner are people deserving of respect. It is those who continue to forcefully deny any suggestion of a problem that should be met with abject and direct refutation of their behavior. I have said many, many times that the behavior of cyclists in denial about their doping is STRIKINGLY similar to people who dope with recreational drugs and refuse to see how their actions are detrimental to those around them. I have seen thousands of people who acted EXACTLY like Mr Armstrong, Mr Landis, and Mr Hamilton. The only difference is in the substances (sometimes).

I have my opinion. It has been developed over many years of watching cycling. I was a fan of Mr Armstrong, Mr. Landis, and particularly Mr Hamilton. (I still have my Phonak socks) I can tell you the precise day that I changed with Mr Armstrong, and it was the day I watched him chase down Mr Simeoni. It was clear to me at that point, who Mr Armstrong was as a person. He has done nothing in the years since to alter that opinion. The only thing he could do is come clean. I think I will have to go with Mr Lemond's assessment of that and say that it will never happen. In the absence of that, I hope to see more and more people looking to expose him. It is my hope that sooner or later it his house of cards will crumble.

Strike out at me for my opinion if you want. It will never change the opinion I have of Mr Armstrong. Will he lose sleep over it? Will you? No. That is not the point of my opinion. The point is to unabashedly present that which I believe to be true. I feel neither the need, nor responsibility to do so in a kind manner. That is just who I am both here and in real life.

Man you have a serious hard on for lance, come on he is only one piece of the puzzle that is doping, if lance died in 1996 doping would still be as bad. Then maybe you would find someone else to blame for destroying the good name of cycling. The whole batch is bad we need too group all pros together then drop them on one of the survivor islands, and start over. But I understand where you are coming from, because you actually liked lance and landis and tyler and now you are disappointed and upset because of what they have done, I'm disappointed in all 3 but I let it pass because what you're doing now is reminding yourself of the disappointment, learn to ignore lance in the media like what I have done.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
franciep10 said:
Man you have a serious hard on for lance, come on he is only one piece of the puzzle that is doping, if lance died in 1996 doping would still be as bad. Then maybe you would find someone else to blame for destroying the good name of cycling. The whole batch is bad we need too group all pros together then drop them on one of the survivor islands, and start over

What is it with all of the homoerotic language? Projection maybe?

Again, it is Mr Armstrong's actions in regards to people like Betsy and Frankie Andreau specifically that cause me to single him out. I think.....yes, I am certain that I am allowed to have my opinions. I don't blame Mr Armstrong for doping. I blame Mr Armstrong for exacting revenge upon people who were just telling the truth.

As for the rest of the peloton, again, anyone who mans the fu$k up and comes clean, I have no problem with. As for the rest, I will and have expressed opinions regarding them also.
 
Thoughtforfood said:
I agree with much of what you say. The problem for me comes when the culture of doping is aggressively defended by its practitioners. The reason Mr Armstrong comes up most in that is he is the biggest offender. His personal crusade to silence anyone who questions him is the problem. Floyd's actions during the time between testing positive and being found guilty are the point. Tyler Hamilton's denial of any wrong doing, when clearly he doped is the problem. Their insistence and the insistence of their fans that anyone who believes their positives is an uninformed angry person with an irrational vendetta is the problem.

Men like Joe Papp who get caught, admit their guilt and refuse to hide what they know are men I respect greatly. He doped, and I understand why he did so. I have said before, at one point in my life, I would have too. I doped for far different reasons and it was not related to performance enhancement. Because of my experience with that, and the subsequent years of sobriety, I have also realized that people who face their behavior in an honest and open manner are people deserving of respect. It is those who continue to forcefully deny any suggestion of a problem that should be met with abject and direct refutation of their behavior. I have said many, many times that the behavior of cyclists in denial about their doping is STRIKINGLY similar to people who dope with recreational drugs and refuse to see how their actions are detrimental to those around them. I have seen thousands of people who acted EXACTLY like Mr Armstrong, Mr Landis, and Mr Hamilton. The only difference is in the substances (sometimes).

I have my opinion. It has been developed over many years of watching cycling. I was a fan of Mr Armstrong, Mr. Landis, and particularly Mr Hamilton. (I still have my Phonak socks) I can tell you the precise day that I changed with Mr Armstrong, and it was the day I watched him chase down Mr Simeoni. It was clear to me at that point, who Mr Armstrong was as a person. He has done nothing in the years since to alter that opinion. The only thing he could do is come clean. I think I will have to go with Mr Lemond's assessment of that and say that it will never happen. In the absence of that, I hope to see more and more people looking to expose him. It is my hope that sooner or later it his house of cards will crumble.

Strike out at me for my opinion if you want. It will never change the opinion I have of Mr Armstrong. Will he lose sleep over it? Will you? No. That is not the point of my opinion. The point is to unabashedly present that which I believe to be true. I feel neither the need, nor responsibility to do so in a kind manner. That is just who I am both here and in real life.

Great post, TFF.

Getting off topic here, but the exact moment for me came in the 2003 interview he gave to OLN after the TdF. I was never a fan of his. I knew that he was doping like everyone else. But I thought he made a worthy champion because he trained hard and was obviously extremely dedicated. That interview convinced me that he was a giant d-bag who did not care for anyone but himself.

I remember Phil or Paul softballing him a question about Beloki's crash. It was clear that they were leaving a huge opening for Armstrong to express how tragic it was for a top contender to get taken out like that. Instead Armstrong said it did not matter, if one rider is eliminated then there are always others you have to watch. He had no empathy for Beloki (or anyone else) whatsoever. It was like people were just faceless obstacles that stand between him and what he wants.

That interview revealed what was inside. The half dozen excuses that Armstrong came up with during the Tour to prepare if he lost did not help my opinion either. It was like listening to George Bush justify the Iraq war; the reasons changed daily.
 
franciep10 said:
There are two goals in pro sports to win and make money, whatever method they use to achieve those goals is acceptable to them as long as they don't get caught. Some of you might be too puritanical to understand this but let's take lance for an example he gets 2 mil to do the giro due to past success in the tour which was a direct result of his doping practices, I wouldn't mind getting two mil to do one race. what Lance and all the other cheaters did is nothing new, the question is would you cheat at a sport if you wouldn't get caught, make massive amount of money, enough to support future generations of your family and become an instant media icon, and please tell the truth . This question is not directed at escarabajo because we know his answer.
Hey Franciep10, I know you rode at a high level and as far as I am concerned you chose not to do EPO, right? At least that's what you said in the other posts. So, I guess, you somehow did not accept the use of this substance, and maybe the probability of making thousands of dollars, right?
Are you telling me now that you might be having second thoughts?
because I can use you as your own example of people who chose right over wrong.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
Thoughtforfood said:
What is it with all of the homoerotic language? Projection maybe?

Again, it is Mr Armstrong's actions in regards to people like Betsy and Frankie Andreau specifically that cause me to single him out. I think.....yes, I am certain that I am allowed to have my opinions. I don't blame Mr Armstrong for doping. I blame Mr Armstrong for exacting revenge upon people who were just telling the truth.

As for the rest of the peloton, again, anyone who mans the fu$k up and comes clean, I have no problem with. As for the rest, I will and have expressed opinions regarding them also.

If you read the rest of the post I partly agreed with you. As for Bro deal my mind changed initially at the 2000 tour when I saw Lance drop pantani, vireneque, escartin ullrich on Hautacam when I said that I said to myself that's definetly not natural, and it just got worse fro there.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
Escarabajo said:
Hey Franciep10, I know you rode at a high level and as far as I am concerned you chose not to do EPO, right? At least that's what you said in the other posts. So, I guess, you somehow did not accept the use of this substance, and maybe the probability of making thousands of dollars, right?
Are you telling me now that you might be having second thoughts?
because I can use you as your own example of people who chose right over wrong.

No I didn't do epo, at the time when i was riding epo had alot of health concerns and I had just started a family had I known before hand that it wouldn't have affected my health and make me lots of money, I would've strongly thought about it, but I wasn't that good to turn into a levi or a Bauer, I was a support rider and a good ITT rider but I wasn't going to ride at the tour, funny story I got an offer from Postal in 1996 but my team was better so I stuck with them, little did I know. Basically If I had the potential to be great I would have done it at that time.
 
franciep10 said:
No I didn't do epo, at the time when i was riding epo had alot of health concerns and I had just started a family had I known before hand that it wouldn't have affected my health and make me lots of money, I would've strongly thought about it, but I wasn't that good to turn into a levi or a Bauer, I was a support rider and a good ITT rider but I wasn't going to ride at the tour, funny story I got an offer from Postal in 1996 but my team was better so I stuck with them, little did I know. Basically If I had the potential to be great I would have done it at that time.
I appreciate your frankness.
Thanks.
 
Mar 16, 2009
176
0
0
Visit site
Thoughtforfood said:
You are allowed your "nuanced" opinion. I feel no need to nuance anything in terms of opinion. I would love to see him taken down by his lies and actions. However, the golden rule generally applies to anything, and in the is case he has the gold, so he makes the rules.

As to the back and forth, for you to suggest that you have been somehow above the fray is laughable. It speaks of either willful dishonesty or a severe deficiency in introspection. I would point to the fact that last night you quoted 4 of my posts in different threads and then posted snide comments. Physician heal thyself.

OK. I think this might be the first time you have articulated your view as such. i can understand and agree to disagree, though really I don't disagree that much. I have trouble working myself into a lather about it when there are some truly abhorrent things in this world that deserve such vitriol. However to each his own. I would simply ask that you respect the discussion. This thread is about CHRIS F'in HORNER!

As to the last, I'll admit that last night everywhere I turned it seemed you were there with your Armstrong rant and I decided to be the yin to your yang. Pretty annoying eh? Heal thyself indeed!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Snake8 said:
OK. I think this might be the first time you have articulated your view as such. i can understand and agree to disagree, though really I don't disagree that much. I have trouble working myself into a lather about it when there are some truly abhorrent things in this world that deserve such vitriol. However to each his own. I would simply ask that you respect the discussion. This thread is about CHRIS F'in HORNER!
I
As to the last, I'll admit that last night everywhere I turned it seemed you were there with your Armstrong rant and I decided to be the yin to your yang. Pretty annoying eh? Heal thyself indeed!

But unless you are Armstrong or the guy with the tattooed calves, I wasn't writing to or about you. You chose to write about me, then I responded.

As to the rest, if you think I ignore other issues that are abhorrent to me, then you misjudge me completely. I am one of those people who is passionate about many things, many times overly so. I recognize that, but it is still part of who I am. Have you not been as guilty as I in wandering off course however?
 
franciep10 said:
The question is would you cheat at a sport if you wouldn't get caught, make massive amount of money, enough to support future generations of your family and become an instant media icon, and please tell the truth.

Probably. I probably would. But I think my conscience would catch up with me, and I'd eventually confess. It's hard to say though. Who knows? It's like asking the hypothetical where drug dealers run through your back yard and drop a bag of money. A few hours and miles away you read they are killed in a shootout with the police who consider the case closed. Do you report the money? I probably wouldn't. What about in 10 years when the statute of limitations runs up? Me, probably. But I honestly don't know.

Thoughtforfood said:
The problem for me comes when the culture of doping is aggressively defended by its practitioners. The reason Mr Armstrong comes up most in that is he is the biggest offender. His personal crusade to silence anyone who questions him is the problem

That's a pretty good post TFF. But I think what's happening is that Lance isn't the only offender here. But he's the biggest face, and keeps his mouth open. You must admit that behind the scenes he is definitely not the only one putting pressure on riders, and support, to remain silent. No way. He's the most visible, and unrepentant as I see it, but far from the only one. He's actually in the majority I'm afraid.

As to Chris Horner. I have to admit I'm going to remain suspicious about him, just like the other 75% or so of the peloton. His name just happened to come up. I guess all I can say is that I hope he rides clean, or as clean as possible and stays out of trouble.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
That's a pretty good post TFF. But I think what's happening is that Lance isn't the only offender here. But he's the biggest face, and keeps his mouth open. You must admit that behind the scenes he is definitely not the only one putting pressure on riders, and support, to remain silent. No way. He's the most visible, and unrepentant as I see it, but far from the only one. He's actually in the majority I'm afraid.

Correct. What makes Armstrong unique is that he is still the Patron of the peloton - his media stature from his 7 TDF wins and the respect in the peleton this has earned him makes him a living a representative of the current crop of riders. He is basically the personification of the peleton, or perhaps the President of the peloton. And this is why it is distressing to many and causes such vitriol when he enforces Omerta.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
Probably. I probably would. But I think my conscience would catch up with me, and I'd eventually confess. It's hard to say though. Who knows? It's like asking the hypothetical where drug dealers run through your back yard and drop a bag of money. A few hours and miles away you read they are killed in a shootout with the police who consider the case closed. Do you report the money? I probably wouldn't. What about in 10 years when the statute of limitations runs up? Me, probably. But I honestly don't know.

I would keep the money, my conscience would catch up to me saying that I used drug money to feed my family, but I would still keep it.
 
Snake8 said:
...
Back to Horner though. Whatever "gear" he is on,...Guy always has a smile on his face and clearly relishes his role. ....

Had to parse that down a bit...great thread guys. What does a smile say?

04ct1w.jpg


In this case it's not "Ha ha, that's silly." We were going up one of the hardest climbs of the Tour of CT in 2004...but there are two big smiles on the front of the peloton, one is mine, while to the far left, away from us and a few rows back, you'll see a red-helmeted rider wearing the KOM jersey who is most decidedly not smiling on that ascent. In the center of the group, actually just right of center in the second row, you'll see a rider with a yellow helmet, head cocked slightly to his left, face showing the true effort of the climb. He was a former teammate, one of the few never to touch the needle, and it showed that day.
 

TRENDING THREADS