• 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!

Why I will always be a "fanboy" and proud of it

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
gillan1969 said:
everyone erned more as both a result of doping and as a rsult of armstrong's media profile which raised the stakes for everyone

correction: everyone willing to play along earned more. that's not everyone.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
The above is a reply to my post - where did I ever mention anything about "cadence"?

If you wish to debate, then debate there is no need to make up something that I did not say. You called me deluded - yet did not put forth a different opinion - or is that you can't come up with one?

Nor indeed is my position a 'moralistic' one - if you want to know then ask, do not assume - it makes your position questionable - not mine/.

You admire dopers - so what?

Apologies....the cadence response was to someone else not you....read further back into the thread for clarity....as to not reading "Rough Ride" too well....no dice....I had the misfortune to read it twice....it's called getting as much information as possible to form an opinion....not just rehash myths or someone else's rant....and I am sorry your idea that it was a grand outing of cycling's dirty culture is a cop out....he made his name from it....(incidentally at the behest of one David Walsh who first got him writing pieces on his experiences at the tour)....He was asked directly by Gay Byrne about naming names....and refused...why because he hero worshipped Roche and Kelly....someone ask him directly now if he knows or thinks if either of them doped and see his response....or lack of it....

To Andy and Gillan....glad to hear a few braver voices saying what quite a few of us think....not popular....but relevant to the debate never the less.

Ok let me say this....the public display of hatred here for Armstrong smacks me of purely emotive knee jerk reactionism....and might I say it posturing....it's like saying " I am a good person....a really damn good person....see how good I am...I hate that cheat Armstrong.....that's how thoroughly good and decent I am"....without actually really examining what it is that is making you so angry....and Freud would have a field day with Kimmage's motivation that led him to "the cancer has returned" comments....misguided remorse....self loathing....bitterness....impotence....(Possibly literal as well as figurative)

It must be wonderful to be so pure....to be so certain that the world is only black and white....no shades of grey....no human fallibility

Well I wish you a good nights sleep in your happy little dream world, where you can feel very superior that you yourself would never sin or cheat or bend rules, and know that anyone who is successful probably doesn't deserve it.
Hey guess what.... I lied on an income tax return once too....

And since when has it been up Hugh Januss that anyone who admires Armstrong can't post a new thread?....and am i posting e-bombs?.....damn right....but do me a favour....if you want to insult me, at least have the decency to answer some of the specific arguements I have raised (as some have done)...rather than just making yourself look incapable of thought by throwing out the insults....

Who was Lemond's Doctor in the 80's by the way?....Any one of his fanboys know?
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
straydog said:
.....as to not reading "Rough Ride" too well....no dice....I had the misfortune to read it twice....it's called getting as much information as possible to form an opinion....not just rehash myths or someone else's rant....and I am sorry your idea that it was a grand outing of cycling's dirty culture is a cop out....he made his name from it....(incidentally at the behest of one David Walsh who first got him writing pieces on his experiences at the tour)....He was asked directly by Gay Byrne about naming names....and refused...why because he hero worshipped Roche and Kelly....someone ask him directly now if he knows or thinks if either of them doped and see his response....or lack of it....

what absolute pish. kimmage was doing a tour diary written by David Walsh for a small Sunday Newspaper in Ireland at the time. The following year he was writing it himself. He then quit then TdF and decided to write his own personal experience as a pro cyclist. He told it as he saw it. So what if he did not name names. He got a job with the The Sunday Tribune ( a small Sunday newspaper) on the back of the book and guess what, he didn't write about cycling, he wrote about other sports and news items.


straydog said:
Ok let me say this....the public display of hatred here for Armstrong smacks me of purely emotive knee jerk reactionism....and might I say it posturing....it's like saying " I am a good person....a really damn good person....see how good I am...I hate that cheat Armstrong.....that's how thoroughly good and decent I am"....without actually really examining what it is that is making you so angry....and Freud would have a field day with Kimmage's motivation that led him to "the cancer has returned" comments....misguided remorse....self loathing....bitterness....impotence....(Possibly literal as well as figurative)

I dont see it as a knee jerk reaction as that would presume that the allegations against LA were this year only, but they have been around the last 9 years. Now maybe you cant get you knee up so quick, but LA has been shouting down those who dared look hard at his performances for a long time.

straydog said:
It must be wonderful to be so pure....to be so certain that the world is only black and white....no shades of grey....no human fallibility

Oh the true blindness of a fanboy, lots of former winners have been discussed on here, Indurain the most recent. the difference between those proceeding the 7 EPO filled TdF's of LA is that most of those riders were cyclists and the glory of a TdF win was enough to satisfy their EGOs, they did not need to build myths, they went about the business of cycling in their manner, without the rasmatazz, with the entourages, without rock and roll girlfriends, without bullying other riders etc....and they are respected for that and not hated for being cheats who used to blind the foolish into thinking they were something they are not, but dont let us take that away from you.

straydog said:
Well I wish you a good nights sleep in your happy little dream world, where you can feel very superior that you yourself would never sin or cheat or bend rules, and know that anyone who is successful probably doesn't deserve it.
Hey guess what.... I lied on an income tax return once too....

Congrats, i bet you went to your local bar and gained mythical status too.


straydog said:
Who was Lemond's Doctor in the 80's by the way?....Any one of his fanboys know?

Wizard of Oz.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
straydog said:
Apologies....the cadence response was to someone else not you....read further back into the thread for clarity....as to not reading "Rough Ride" too well....no dice....I had the misfortune to read it twice....it's called getting as much information as possible to form an opinion....not just rehash myths or someone else's rant....and I am sorry your idea that it was a grand outing of cycling's dirty culture is a cop out....he made his name from it....(incidentally at the behest of one David Walsh who first got him writing pieces on his experiences at the tour)....He was asked directly by Gay Byrne about naming names....and refused...why because he hero worshipped Roche and Kelly....someone ask him directly now if he knows or thinks if either of them doped and see his response....or lack of it....

To Andy and Gillan....glad to hear a few braver voices saying what quite a few of us think....not popular....but relevant to the debate never the less.

Ok let me say this....the public display of hatred here for Armstrong smacks me of purely emotive knee jerk reactionism....and might I say it posturing....it's like saying " I am a good person....a really damn good person....see how good I am...I hate that cheat Armstrong.....that's how thoroughly good and decent I am"....without actually really examining what it is that is making you so angry....and Freud would have a field day with Kimmage's motivation that led him to "the cancer has returned" comments....misguided remorse....self loathing....bitterness....impotence....(Possibly literal as well as figurative)

It must be wonderful to be so pure....to be so certain that the world is only black and white....no shades of grey....no human fallibility

Well I wish you a good nights sleep in your happy little dream world, where you can feel very superior that you yourself would never sin or cheat or bend rules, and know that anyone who is successful probably doesn't deserve it.
Hey guess what.... I lied on an income tax return once too....

And since when has it been up Hugh Januss that anyone who admires Armstrong can't post a new thread?....and am i posting e-bombs?.....damn right....but do me a favour....if you want to insult me, at least have the decency to answer some of the specific arguements I have raised (as some have done)...rather than just making yourself look incapable of thought by throwing out the insults....

Who was Lemond's Doctor in the 80's by the way?....Any one of his fanboys know?

You need to reread Rough Ride - Kimmage was asked by Gay Byrne about Roche & Kelly - to which Kimmage replied: "What about them? This is my story,it has nothing to do with them."
Also - Kimmage was writing for a little known publication called (IIRC) 'Irish Cycling Review' long before he wrote for the Sunday Tribune.

The only person bringing up 'purity' and 'morality'....is you.

Most here who are against PED's in the sport make no distinction from Armstrong and any other doper - what distinguishes Lance is Lance, by playing the cancer card, or the 'most tested' card, or saying he feels sorry for "the cynics and skeptics" - which includes you as you already said he doped.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
"what absolute pish. kimmage was doing a tour diary written by David Walsh for a small Sunday Newspaper in Ireland at the time. The following year he was writing it himself. He then quit then TdF and decided to write his own personal experience as a pro cyclist. He told it as he saw it. So what if he did not name names. He got a job with the The Sunday Tribune ( a small Sunday newspaper) on the back of the book and guess what, he didn't write about cycling, he wrote about other sports and news items.
blah blah blah etc"

A small Irish Newspaper....The Sunday Tribune????...really...growing up in Ireland.....that was not a small paper my friend....and kimmage going on the late late show to publicise the book....I can't believe i am arguing with someone who clearly knows nothing abut Ireland about this....but trust me it was big news....I think you overestimate Irelands size and underestimate it's love of salacious gossip.


"Oh the true blindness of a fanboy, lots of former winners have been discussed on here, Indurain the most recent. the difference between those proceeding the 7 EPO filled TdF's of LA is that most of those riders were cyclists and the glory of a TdF win was enough to satisfy their EGOs, they did not need to build myths, they went about the business of cycling in their manner, without the rasmatazz, with the entourages, without rock and roll girlfriends, without bullying other riders etc....and they are respected for that and not hated for being cheats who used to blind the foolish into thinking they were something they are not, but dont let us take that away from you."

So you hate him because his girlfriend was better looking that Indurains?...And Lemond doesn't think he is a myth...have you seen his website?....and Lemond wasn't a bully.....remember the worlds?.....or Hinault with Lemond

And Pantani was soooooo retiring and shy and so honest about how he won

As to my tax evasion.... sarcasm really is wasted on the stupid isn't it?

And keep avoiding the Doctor question if it makes you feel better


And please can people stop telling me to read Rough Ride again!!!!....suddenly it all makes sense.....this is why you are the way you are...this is the only book you have ever read....I have a new name for you boys: the Church of Paul Kimmage....and that is your bible...and like most bible bashers you will find any way you can to use it to prove anything you want to believe....

Once and for all a third sitting of his dreary crxp isn't going to suddenly make me enjoy it....or miraculously make me stop believing kimmage is a hypocrite....and Dr Maserati.....watch kimmage on the late late show....and then make up your mind....or are you only basing this on what he wrote?

Peace and may Paul be with you where ever you go
 
You already got serious replies from some of us as for why we don't like Lance. If you don't like them or disagree with them, more power to you, but that's no excuse to act like those replies don't exist and to take off your mask and go on full troll mode.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
You need to reread Rough Ride - Kimmage was asked by Gay Byrne about Roche & Kelly - to which Kimmage replied: "What about them? This is my story,it has nothing to do with them."
Also - Kimmage was writing for a little known publication called (IIRC) 'Irish Cycling Review' long before he wrote for the Sunday Tribune.

The only person bringing up 'purity' and 'morality'....is you.

Most here who are against PED's in the sport make no distinction from Armstrong and any other doper - what distinguishes Lance is Lance, by playing the cancer card, or the 'most tested' card, or saying he feels sorry for "the cynics and skeptics" - which includes you as you already said he doped.

straydog said:
Bassons WAS treated very badly....he spat in the soup as the french say....and was very brave to do so. As did Kimmage....and as you say this doesn't prove either of them were ever going to amount to much as a cyclist...but as you said that isn't your point...and I suppose my point isn't that cheating should be admired but rather this....why is such vitriol reserved for Armstrong and not the countless others?....because he was more succesful?

Bassons also said "I'm not the only clean rider but there aren't many who can say 'I don't take drugs'. For most riders, their health is the last of their concerns."

I did reply to you....and I am not sure that I understand what constitutes behaving like a troll?....is it liking Armstrong....or arguing in his favour....ok....guilty as charged
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
straydog said:
A small Irish Newspaper....The Sunday Tribune????...really...growing up in Ireland.....that was not a small paper my friend....and kimmage going on the late late show to publicise the book....I can't believe i am arguing with someone who clearly knows nothing abut Ireland about this....but trust me it was big news....I think you overestimate Irelands size and underestimate it's love of salacious gossip.

Dr Maserati has more or less answered your *****ing. I bow to his excellent responses.

You know you sound like a McQuaid, an old straydog with an old bone...
 
May 27, 2010
5
0
0
Visit site
Now this is finally getting interesting. I love it when people reply with anger and no substance, it proves they are driven by emotion and not information.

There are plenty of times legitimate questions about LA have been overshadowed by the rantings of people who rattle off incoherent prose. Possibly these 'power' posters have been passed on a climb by a fat guy and scream to themselves "EPO!!" In this forum less is more. The more the responses are angry and contrived the less credit I put to the poster.

Personally, I could care less about whether LA doped or not. I dislike him because of what he does off of the bike, not on. GQ got it right. He is an arrogant *** who is out for himself. His idea of a team is a group of people to follow and remain quiet. He has delusions of grandeur that will soon be tested in a court of law. Regardless of the outcome his star will slowly fade, new books will be written, his true colors will show.

Haters just need to chill and have patience, and don't always think those who pass you on the road are anything other than better cyclists.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
I think you will find the Sunday Independent, Sunday World and the Sunday Press(now defunct)had a much bigger and wider readership than the Tribune ever had and for a population of what nearly 5 million, hardly world reaching.

Kimmage did not write about salacious gossip of others in his book and when pressed by Byrne the master of gossip to get some he failed. Byrne wanted to hear the names Kelly and Roche, but as Kimmage did not ride on the same team as he could not give it without litigating himself as he would not have seen as witnessed by the threat from Roche even though he spoke glowingly about Roche in the book.

You know you sound like a McQuaid, an old straydog with an old bone...


Fagor.....not the same team as Roche????...did you miss that bit?....It appears maybe your reading of your bible is not as devout as a true missionary's should be....And Kimmage was exceptionally good friends with Roche from when they were juniors...in fact it was Roche who set up his start as a neo pro in France...and all three rode for the Irish National Team....

The one thing I find funny is that I have never actually met a Kimmage Fanboy before....Lemond fans.....Armstrong haters....yes lots.....but kimmage.....you should start a website....


While you are there....have a look at Lemonds...."Legend....Innovator"....God I hate humility like that
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
rafifi said:
Now this is finally getting interesting. I love it when people reply with anger and no substance, it proves they are driven by emotion and not information.

There are plenty of times legitimate questions about LA have been overshadowed by the rantings of people who rattle off incoherent prose. Possibly these 'power' posters have been passed on a climb by a fat guy and scream to themselves "EPO!!" In this forum less is more. The more the responses are angry and contrived the less credit I put to the poster.

Personally, I could care less about whether LA doped or not. I dislike him because of what he does off of the bike, not on. GQ got it right. He is an arrogant *** who is out for himself. His idea of a team is a group of people to follow and remain quiet. He has delusions of grandeur that will soon be tested in a court of law. Regardless of the outcome his star will slowly fade, new books will be written, his true colors will show.

Haters just need to chill and have patience, and don't always think those who pass you on the road are anything other than better cyclists.

Well said.....finally someone can disagree with me in a coherent fashion ...rather than (and I really don't mean to sound uncharitable) foaming at the mouth with indignation that someone actually likes Armstrong

His Star will fade....as his accomplishments are matched or bettered....I honestly don't think he will end up in the hot water many would like to see...time will tell....and I think the perceived arrogance goes with the territory...Cavendish...Even Contador...That's what makes ths sport so compelling....as someone said before...it is a circus and a new ringmaster will be along soon
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
straydog said:
Fagor.....not the same team as Roche????...did you miss that bit?....It appears maybe your reading of your bible is not as devout as a true missionary's should be....And Kimmage was exceptionally good friends with Roche from when they were juniors...in fact it was Roche who set up his start as a neo pro in France...and all three rode for the Irish National Team....

The one thing I find funny is that I have never actually met a Kimmage Fanboy before....Lemond fans.....Armstrong haters....yes lots.....but kimmage.....you should start a website....


While you are there....have a look at Lemonds...."Legend....Innovator"....God I hate humility like that


i edited my post before your post then read Dr Maserati and decided his eloquence was better than mine and i will leave it at that. I am a fan of those who have done wrong, admit they were wrong and try to right those wrongs. You cannot say fairer than that. I dont recall Kimmage making astronomical riches from what he does now or what he did as a pro, and neither was it fraudulent back then as he was not winning races and neither now as a journalist.

As for responding to you further, i decline, you stated on your 12th post that you were out of here, but obviously your trolling has got the better of you and you cannot let go of your bone, but it seems it is an old bone long buried, 9 years old i imagine and now dug up to play with. happy gnawing.
 
Jul 6, 2010
99
0
0
Visit site
Who was Lemond's Doctor in the 80's by the way?....Any one of his fanboys know?
As surprising as it may sound, he didn't have one personal doctor (He may have had one family practitioner though, close to home, for when he was sick... but I guess you meant sport related :rolleyes:)
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
callac said:
As surprising as it may sound, he didn't have one personal doctor (He may have had one family practitioner though, close to home, for when he was sick... but I guess you meant sport related :rolleyes:)

Yup...that was what I was referring to
 
Race Radio said:
Any physician will tell you that all humans respond differently to Pharmacology. EPO is a great example of this. Some see a 2% gain others 15%. Which one was Lance? Riis? Ulrich?

Alright, alright, alright. Here's my new fanboy line, for those who can't ignore the evidence anymore and therefore have to ditch the cadence/recon/wind tunnel/determination/weight loss/etc. argument.

Lance is the best ever because he only had a 2% gain from the EPO he used, and STILL beat those other guys who had a much better benefit from them!
 
May 21, 2010
581
0
0
Visit site
straydog said:
1. Paul Kimmage....why oh why anyone uses him as the barometer of clean cycling I will never know.....himself a confessed doper who has never had the balls to name anyone of substance who doped with him...and yet has consistently criticised Millar, Kohl etc for also not naming names

2. Greg Lemond...ok I don't want to start any crazy conspiracy theories without any substance....but I think his "he said ....she said" rhetoric is pretty irresponsible to say the least....and I would love someone to ask him who his Doctor was in the 80's and if any of the medical help he received then has since become a banned practice...cos frankly Fignon...Bernard " I never tested positive" Hinault and Delgado don't put him in exactly angelic company.

3. Landis...all the haters love him now....even Adam Myerson would shake his hand....why?....what is there to admire? I feel genuinely sorry for the guy....I am afraid the one thing history may remember from this is his name and reputation being totally shot. And honestly that would be sad. I really hope someone looks out for him. It seems the most futile gesture. I don't think anyone will serve time or be "brought down" by anything he has said....he hasn't said anything new....other than name some names that it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure might have been involved....the only concrete thing he has provided is an admission of perjury.

4. Ferrari....trying to undermine his credentials as a coach, despite whether you agree with any of his supposed ethics is nonsense. Baby and bathwater springs to mind. Kilos/watts....VAM....high revolution pedalling techniques....all commonly accepted in todays cycling parlance and all developed in part by his work. And actually his hill climbing interval training is brilliant....genuinely brilliant....don't believe me....just join his site and get them.

Ok....finally...let me say this.....i love cycling....I really do. It changed my life. I am not trying to be an apologist for any kind of untoward behaviour. I am just being a realist. The thing I hate is cycling fans and some "commentators" seemingly trying to tear the sport apart by having meaningless imflammtory debates on the ethics of the past. Let the past be the past....dark or otherwise....no matter what anybody says, I won't stop admiring Tom Simpson....or Eddy Mercxx....or Jacgues Antequill.

Ok, I'll bite.

1. Didn't read "Rough Ride".

2. Agree with the first part. Lemond needs to tone down the he said/she said rhetoric (and to be honest I always thought he was a bit of a whiner and so is his wife Kathy). However, at the beginning of this brouhaha I think it's pretty clear that the Armstrong camp was doing most of the sliming and Greg was forced into survival (heavy whine) mode.

3. Also agree about Landis although time will tell if the allegations bear fruit.

4. Agreed! Although like all good self-promoters through the ages he tries to convince everyone that he and he alone was responsible for all this "new thinking" about training when in actuality he probably appropriated most of his material from programs already begun by others at CONI.

I love cycling too! I just think Lance should come clean*. That's it.

*If things get bad for him he should probably go on Oprah. Tearfully admit to doping in the 1999 Tour and say that he did because he was unsure of himself after cancer but that he didn't to any more after 1999 (and that whole thing with Landis? well, Landis is full of sh!t). That would take care of the EPO positives and the Hospital room confession, people would snicker and guffaw but I believe he could probably defuse the whole situation. Oh, and then he would have the last laugh on Landis as well. It's win, win!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
scribe said:
With some skimming, I made it to the part where Ferrari developed cadence.

I scrolled down to ..."peace"

I figured ...good enough. I can not read that much crah errr stuff because it takes to much time.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
skidmark said:
Alright, alright, alright. Here's my new fanboy line, for those who can't ignore the evidence anymore and therefore have to ditch the cadence/recon/wind tunnel/determination/weight loss/etc. argument.

Lance is the best ever because he only had a 2% gain from the EPO he used, and STILL beat those other guys who had a much better benefit from them!

This is a response only to RR's comments...

People react differently to Pharmacology...you don't say....which is precisley why people's dosages differ...do you really think that they all were just told 10,000 iu and you are good to go?

The salient point here isn't the differing effect of EPO on individuals...it is the parameters that were set...50% Haematocrit and 18 Haemoglobin...those are the magic numbers that were aimed for....as these were the highest possible without posting a fail or non negative test, that would have an effect on your bloods ability to transport oxygen to your muscles....thus aiding performance. It is very easy to monitor your blood profile thus ensuring you you have gained as much advantage as possible....and blood doping (transfusions) was a much safer and more predictable way of doing that.

A Haematocrit of 49% with a Lactate threshold of 220 wasn't going to win anyone even a Cat 3 crit on a wet saturday morning let alone the tour.

Low Body weight (HGH)....High Lactate threshold (Roids, Testosterone)....High RBC, Haematocrit and Haemaglobin (Blood etc) is what improved the holy grail of watts/kilo
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Elagabalus said:
Ok, I'll bite.

1. Didn't read "Rough Ride".

2. Agree with the first part. Lemond needs to tone down the he said/she said rhetoric (and to be honest I always thought he was a bit of a whiner and so is his wife Kathy). However, at the beginning of this brouhaha I think it's pretty clear that the Armstrong camp was doing most of the sliming and Greg was forced into survival (heavy whine) mode.

3. Also agree about Landis although time will tell if the allegations bear fruit.

4. Agreed! Although like all good self-promoters through the ages he tries to convince everyone that he and he alone was responsible for all this "new thinking" about training when in actuality he probably appropriated most of his material from programs already begun by others at CONI.

I love cycling too! I just think Lance should come clean*. That's it.

*If things get bad for him he should probably go on Oprah. Tearfully admit to doping in the 1999 Tour and say that he did because he was unsure of himself after cancer but that he didn't to any more after 1999 (and that whole thing with Landis? well, Landis is full of sh!t). That would take care of the EPO positives and the Hospital room confession, people would snicker and guffaw but I believe he could probably defuse the whole situation. Oh, and then he would have the last laugh on Landis as well. It's win, win!!
Sorry only just read this...

Ha Ha....can you imagine the viewing figures for that episode?....And do you know what? I think he'd change some of Church of Kimmage boys' minds too.


One thing though....Lemond started it....twice....first with the "greatest sporting fraud" comment in 2001...and second time round after they made up when Landis decided he needed to clear his conscience/ write another book.

And actually.....had all this not blown up....I somehow think in twenty years time Armstrong would have come clean....kind of like Fignon and Riis and (I reserve the right to add to this list)....and said....well who wasn't doing it?


Time will tell

Oh and Ferrari is very open about working with Cecchini and Conconi whilst he and the former studied under the latter....sorry it's late...
 
straydog said:
And since when has it been up Hugh Januss that anyone who admires Armstrong can't post a new thread?....and am i posting e-bombs?.....damn right....but do me a favour....if you want to insult me, at least have the decency to answer some of the specific arguements I have raised (as some have done)...rather than just making yourself look incapable of thought by throwing out the insults....

Never said you couldn't start a new thread about anything you might want. I am only pointing out that the reception you are getting is not because everyone here is so overwhelmed by the cleverness of your points that they have no comeback, but rather they have been heard so many times before that frankly very few want to rehash them all again.
I'll say it one more time and then I'm done. Responses to every point you have raised are in numerous threads, search them. Otherwise I'll just assume that you are only here to fight and I'm not in the mood (today).
 
Dr. Maserati said:
You need to reread Rough Ride - Kimmage was asked by Gay Byrne about Roche & Kelly - to which Kimmage replied: "What about them? This is my story,it has nothing to do with them."
Also - Kimmage was writing for a little known publication called (IIRC) 'Irish Cycling Review' long before he wrote for the Sunday Tribune.

The only person bringing up 'purity' and 'morality'....is you.

Most here who are against PED's in the sport make no distinction from Armstrong and any other doper - what distinguishes Lance is Lance, by playing the cancer card, or the 'most tested' card, or saying he feels sorry for "the cynics and skeptics" - which includes you as you already said he doped.

Hugh Januss said:
Never said you couldn't start a new thread about anything you might want. I am only pointing out that the reception you are getting is not because everyone here is so overwhelmed by the cleverness of your points that they have no comeback, but rather they have been heard so many times before that frankly very few want to rehash them all again.
I'll say it one more time and then I'm done. Responses to every point you have raised are in numerous threads, search them. Otherwise I'll just assume that you are only here to fight and I'm not in the mood (today).

As far as I can see, the poster is getting a reasonable response. This time...

Are you honestly saying that no one should post a topic that has already been discussed elsewhere? Maybe the poster is looking for a discussion, not answers?
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
andy1234 said:
As far as I can see, the poster is getting a reasonable response. This time...

Are you honestly saying that no one should post a topic that has already been discussed elsewhere? Maybe the poster is looking for a discussion, not answers?

The poster did not start out that way and is going the time-honored route of previous Proponents of the same argument. I was seriously asking about the number of new OP that cropped up suddenly and seemingly using the same format of argument. The subject matter comes from discussions ongoing for over a year. I am honestly interested in calling out direct employees or volunteers for Lance Armstrong.
 
Jul 11, 2010
50
0
0
Visit site
sars1981 said:
Yr about here ...

7 Stages of Greif:

1 Shock and Denial
2 Pain and Guilt
3 Anger
4 Bargaining
5 Depression and Sorrow
6 Testing and Reconstruction
7 Acceptance


it seems like a lot of you fanboys/trolls are on bargaining lately. yr all sorta comming through like in a group therapy session *hugs*

Haha that made reading 1/5 of his poorly argued points worth it.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Oldman said:
The poster did not start out that way and is going the time-honored route of previous Proponents of the same argument. I was seriously asking about the number of new OP that cropped up suddenly and seemingly using the same format of argument. The subject matter comes from discussions ongoing for over a year. I am honestly interested in calling out direct employees or volunteers for Lance Armstrong.

I didn't start out that way?


Really? I know it was a long post....but Jeez....did you miss the bit about talking about the future....talking as in discussing...but then, that's right, you guys are only interested in hearing opinions that line up with yours

as for the same format of argument....it's called a consensus....ie...I am not the only one....somehow believing that I trawled through these myriad similar arguments that you and Hugh, and the other latter day kimmage saints think I have before posting, would indicate I have as much free time as you do....which i take umbrage with.

And again I point out the very first paragraph of my original post as to my employment status....original thought really does bypass fools.


And here it is....if you can only resort to questioning my employment status....my identity....or anything else to divert from serious discussion then I thoroughly underline calling you a fool....because that is what you are