Wiggins, Clinic respect?

[senatorrick]

I have been reading this forum constantly for two years, I never post because it is more entertaining to stand on the sidelines, some of you are great but this Joachim is without 100% TROLLING and is disrupting the clinic please make him go away.

 

[Parker]

I would have liked him to condemn Armstrong since the beginning. His current statements can't erase the past, and I can't just pretend he's consistent when he isn't.

Which rider did condemn him? Sod all of them. Wiggins barely raced against Armstrong until 2009. So why is he special, other than you get a reaction from some people on here? At least he's saying it now. All of Spain, bar Freire, seems to think he's done nothing wrong.

I also suspect that a few of the posters on here criticising now were big Armstrong fans back in 2004.

 

[hrotha]

And for the nth time, you guys fail to see the difference between keeping your mouth shut and ACTUALLY PRAISING ARMSTRONG.

Also, if you ever see me defending the likes of Valverde or Samu, shoot me.

 

[BroDeal]

Whatever folks on here think of Wiggins...and positions seem to be fairly entrenched (natch)...I don't recall any other current high (or medium) profile rider coming out with such strong statements about Armstrong.

His statements are absolutely worthless. They are no different than his contemptible statements about Ricco. Waiting until Armstrong confesses and the media is calling him the Bernie Madoff on wheels shows how cowardly Wiggins is. He could not even bring himself to make a strong statement after Armstrong was banned.

Even worse, now he is claiming that he knew Armstrong was doping because the change in his performance between stages in the Tour. The funny thing is that the same criteria could be used to show that Wiggins is doping, with the difference being that Wiggins change in performance is way more glaring than Armstrong's.

 

[BroDeal]

I have been reading this forum constantly for two years, I never post because it is more entertaining to stand on the sidelines, some of you are great but this Joachim is without 100% TROLLING and is disrupting the clinic please make him go away.

Yup. He has done his best to make this thread [and any other that questions the myth] unreadable.

 

[tam the habbler]

the english are never last

one of those nazis geobels goring himmler said THE BIGGER THE LIE if u truly knew u wernt doping why all this over the top sfuff about not never having tell your kid u were the first BRIT to win the tour ever and was miserable doing it WHY" cant carry his own water" his old man the DOC will turning in his grave it wiill come out

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The beginning?

Well, that would have been the end of his career then

Well then, at least not publicly support Armstrong.

 

[Parker]

And for the nth time, you guys fail to see the difference between keeping your mouth shut and ACTUALLY PRAISING ARMSTRONG.

Also, if you ever see me defending the likes of Valverde or Samu, shoot me.

Maybe he doesn't see him in black and white as you and others do. Maybe he could see some good points. Maybe Armstrong in person is quite an engaging and seductive character (if you don't cross him) - there's far more to him than just drugs. People are complex - it's not simple good or evil like Star Wars.

It's easy to lecture someone who's life you'll never get close to having to live.

 

[The Hitch]

Most here wouldn't, because they are able to sit here, in a priviledged position, smearing and sneering at whoever they want.

You seem to know an awful lot about what type of people we all are and what goes through our heads.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

And for the nth time, you guys fail to see the difference between keeping your mouth shut and ACTUALLY PRAISING ARMSTRONG.

Also, if you ever see me defending the likes of Valverde or Samu, shoot me.

What about Cobo?

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

Which rider did condemn him? Sod all of them. Wiggins barely raced against Armstrong until 2009. So why is he special, other than you get a reaction from some people on here? At least he's saying it now. All of Spain, bar Freire, seems to think he's done nothing wrong.

I also suspect that a few of the posters on here criticising now were big Armstrong fans back in 2004.

And for the nth time, you guys fail to see the difference between keeping your mouth shut and ACTUALLY PRAISING ARMSTRONG.

Also, if you ever see me defending the likes of Valverde or Samu, shoot me.

EXACTLY! How difficult is this to understand? There's a pretty big difference between not condemning someone and going out of your way to praise him.

you mean stronger than stronger statement about Armstrong than

"I thought, 'You lying bast*rd'" ??

well, what about:

"I love him. I think he's great. I don't think this sport will ever realise what he's brought it or how big he's made it."

sounds stronger to me.

The former is what he now claims he was thinking in 2009.
The latter is what he actually came out and said in 2010.

Did he lie in 2010 or now?
Either way, he's another patron not afraid of lying to fans and the media.

File with Lance.

Go away please, mr. brad.

Another gem from 2011.

“I’ve always been a bit of a fan of Lance and have sided on the side of innocent until proven guilty with him. There isn’t an athlete or a cyclist out there that isn’t more tested than he is, certainly since his comeback, he’s probably been the most tested cyclist in the pro peloton and you take that on face value and that he’s never failed a drugs test and until he does he’s clean. That’s how I’ve always had as a stance on Lance.”

“All the other stuff that’s come on with Landis and things like that is one for the courts and whether the truth will ever come out is down to this investigation. I think time will tell with that. As it stands today, with the time I’ve raced with him – and I’ve never raced with him in his era of winning seven Tours – but in his comeback, he’s probably been the most tested athlete and never failed a drugs test.”

“I think you have to question Landis’ credibility because he lied under oath before and the stories that you hear about him drinking and things like that and you know, [making] telephone calls to people I know, threatening them with things, you just think that the guy appears to not all be there. So when you see these kinds of claims in the press you have to question his credibility because it’s almost like it’s coming from a mad man, but at the same time maybe that’s all borne out of frustration and things.

“You just never know but you just look at the way his life has gone over the last five years and you think there’s one person who it would have been so easy to have just admitted it when it happened in 2006, come clean if he did do it and he would have been back racing in a professional team making pretty good money. It’s quite sad how his life has gone away, just dwindled away and now there’s all these claims and counter claims and it’s quite a sad story for him.”

Pretty disgusting comments from someone who knew the truth.

 

[zalacain]

He's British. Most of them have potty mouths

Explain? Why do you say this?

 

[Bat Man]

Even worse, now he is claiming that he knew Armstrong was doping because the change in his performance between stages in the Tour.

He is openly stating this is his hindsight view. I think he is wrong to put so much stock on that - Armstrong tried to follow AC who was in the process of breaking the power record, blowing badly, whereas Wiggins stayed to his now trade mark steady high pace and came back and passed him. Armstrong made a tactical mistake. But you shouldn't misrepresent Wiggins just to maintain him as a sort of punch bag character for you to play with on internet. The truth does matter.

 

[the sceptic]

I have been reading this forum constantly for two years, I never post because it is more entertaining to stand on the sidelines, some of you are great but this Joachim is without 100% TROLLING and is disrupting the clinic please make him go away.

Agreed. The sky thread would be a lot easier to read without him

 

[cineteq]

Have you ever listened to his comments, and thought about the circumstances of someone putting a microphone under his nose?

Yes, I've listened to Sir Bradley Wiggings many times.

Have you ever changed you mind about something?

Yes. So that means he doesn't stand for what he said about doping in 2007?

Or had heros who disappoint you?

Yes, Lance Armstrong.

Talking or riding: Wiggins can't win with some folk: their narrative is already made up, but think about it, what would have liked him to say?

I would've liked him to stand up for what he said in 2007 over and over until today.

 

[hrotha]

Maybe he doesn't see him in black and white as you and others do. Maybe he could see some good points. Maybe Armstrong in person is quite an engaging and seductive character (if you don't cross him) - there's far more to him than just drugs. People are complex - it's not simple good or evil like Star Wars.

It's easy to lecture someone who's life you'll never get close to having to live.

Of course Armstrong is engaging, seductive and charming in person (at first). Everybody agrees on that. But sorry, praising Armstrong when he already knew he was the biggest fraud in the history of the sport is completely incompatible with having a strong position against doping.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

He is openly stating this is his hindsight view. I think he is wrong to put so much stock on that - Armstrong tried to follow AC who was in the process of breaking the power record, blowing badly, whereas Wiggins stayed to his now trade mark steady high pace and came back and passed him. Armstrong made a tactical mistake. But you shouldn't misrepresent Wiggins just to maintain him as a sort of punch bag character for you to play with on internet. The truth does matter.

Yes, because putting so much stock on that would totally screw up his quote about Evans being the first Tour winner in years that we could have faith in, because Evans is more or less the poster boy for going too far into the red trying to stay with the attacks, and blowing up and losing time quite quickly, while Carlos Sastre, the guy that Wiggins intimated was doping by omission, is more or less the poster boy for letting the attackers go and staying at his own pace and coming back and passing the strugglers.

 

[Parker]

Also, if you ever see me defending the likes of Valverde or Samu, shoot me.

From here: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=403018&post403018

Valverde is most likely one of the most naturally talented riders out there, so depending on how "clean" the sport has "become", it's perfectly possible that Valverde would still be winning either clean or cleaner than many of his rivals.

I don't have any annual leave until March and I don't have a gun, so if you could just shoot yourself, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

one of those nazis geobels goring himmler said THE BIGGER THE LIE if u truly knew u wernt doping why all this over the top sfuff about not never having tell your kid u were the first BRIT to win the tour ever and was miserable doing it WHY" cant carry his own water" his old man the DOC will turning in his grave it wiill come out

"All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true within itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."

"The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous."

 

[BroDeal]

The truth does matter.

It does not mention much to Wiggins, mountainrman or BPC or whatever you are calling yourself this week. Wiggins version of the truth seems to change every few weeks. He specializes in brown nosing dopers before they are convicted and kicking those who are down.

 

[hrotha]

From here: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=403018&post403018



I don't have any annual leave until March and I don't have a gun, so if you could just shoot yourself, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

That's not defending Valverde's statements about Lance, which is what we were talking about. That was just me trying to discuss things objectively. Try again.

 

[Cobber]

Armstrong's problem on the Verbier is that he tried to follow Contador's attack and blew up, whereas Wiggins kept his own pace. Though post confession it's easy to put it all down to doping.

There does seem an injustice about singling out Armstrong for having confessed, when the other two guys who pushed him off the podium that year were almost certainly doping.

Or it could be that he's just lying through his teeth like he has done during his entire professional career. For reference, below is a graph of his 2009 blood values. Maybe why some experts believe that the probability he was racing clean during 2009 is extremely low. (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/usa...n-chance-armstrong-rode-2009-2010-tours-clean)

OK, just entered all of LA's blood values from the past year into a spreadsheet and graphed it. Shaded in blue is the normal range (85-95) for OFF-score. Anyone want to bet that LA got transfused immediately before the TdF? Based on how quickly it dropped after 6/16/09, if he was tested a week earlier he may have been above the 133 cutoff. Seems ironic to me that these values were posted by LA as evidence that he doesn't dope...

 

[Bat Man]

It does not mention much to Wiggins, mountainrman or BPC or whatever you are calling yourself this week. Wiggins version of the truth seems to change every few weeks. He specializes in brown nosing dopers before they are convicted and kicking those who are down.

I believe you and some others are now trolling the thread.

 

[The Hitch]

I have been reading this forum constantly for two years, I never post because it is more entertaining to stand on the sidelines, some of you are great but this Joachim is without 100% TROLLING and is disrupting the clinic please make him go away.

amen brother. Remember to report anything you think is trolling so that it gets the mods attention

 

[pmcg76]

From here: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=403018&post403018



I don't have any annual leave until March and I don't have a gun, so if you could just shoot yourself, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

Not putting words in hrotha's mouth but even as somebody not really involved in this debate, I am sure hrotha was referring to the comments made by Valverde in regards to Armstrong, not Valverde the rider. But you already knew that.