Questions for Lance haters

aurelio_-_banned

rockmount wrote:

Moomaloid wrote:

Is this STILL going?? :roll:

.. I'm surprised the mods haven't considered the libellous nature of the opinions expressed (it's their responsibility, not the poster's) ... :shock: :shock:

I think that the mods know that if Armstrong was interested in pursuing a libel case, there a few much bigger targets he could go after. For example...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lance-Landis-In ... 547&sr=8-1

Of course Armstrong is never going to go to court over this book because he knows that so much new evidence has entered the public arena in the last few years, he would lose. (In the Times case a few years back no evidence which became public after they printed their article could be used in defence, which included, for example, those Epo 'positives' from 1999.)

Then again, perhaps you were actually referring to those riders who have been 'accused' of doping on here without there being the sort of evidence that exists against Armstrong, such as Pantani.

feersumendjinn

rapid_uphill wrote:

i give up

does anyone here love marmite? apparently its really good for you. i personally hate the stuff.

and so on.

Vegemite & Marmite are both horrible yeasty salt laden nastiness Bovril now there's a spread

afx237vi

Moomaloid wrote:

Is this STILL going?? :roll:

I know, it's unbelievable. Even after all these years, people STILL haven't realised that Marmite is the Devil's diarrhea

Moomaloid

i love reading the arguments, but i haven't been on here since the post started and am shocked its still going.. lol

aurelio_-_banned

colint wrote:

micron wrote:

I thought this was a perfectly civilised thread with some well thought out arguments. The only 'vitriol' seems to be coming from one camp...

Glad we agree

Micron, I think that colint is trying to imply that you were referring to myself or at the very least the 'Lance haters'. :roll: If you were not perhaps you might like to say who you actually had in mind.

colint

Nice job as the thought police, after a job with Lance ?

DaveyL

aurelio wrote:

Then again, perhaps you were actually referring to those riders who have been 'accused' of doping on here without there being the sort of evidence that exists against Armstrong, such as Pantani.

What, like this?

http://au.cyclingnews.com/results/2000/ ... news.shtml

"Pantani

Pantani's "sporting fraud" case recommenced last week in Forli, northern Italy, however the Pirate was not in attendance to give evidence. Judge Luisa Del Bianco wants to know why Marco Pantani's hematocrit was measured at 60.1% when he was hospitalised after his accident in Milan-Turin on October 18, 1995. In June, it had been measured at 45, and its substantial rise over the next four months was considered suspicious by the prosecution, who are accusing Pantani of falsifying sports results through EPO (or other blood boosting) drug use.

Sante Tura, a hematologist speaking in Pantani's defence, explained that Pantani was training at 2,500 m altitude in Colombia in September, to prepare for the World Championships in that country where he finished third in the road race. This could have raised it by 4 points to 49 in time for the World's, according to Tura. With Milan-Turin immediately following the World's, Pantani's "starting value" for that race should have also been 49.

Tura went on to explain that dehydration during that race could have further raised Pantani's hematocrit by 4-5 points, bringing it to 54 (citing Roberto Rempi, Pantani's team doctor in 1999). Combining this with the trauma of his accident (multiple fractures, contusions and bruises) may have elevated it another 4 points to 58 percent. "Regarding the 60% value, there is a 2% error margin that is considered normal for the sampling method," he finished."

Or are hematocrits only suspicious when they belong to an American and are 49.9%?

I'm sure you could dig up plenty of anti-Pantani links to paste over and over again if you really put your mind to it.

colint

aurelio wrote:

colint wrote:

aurelio wrote:

cadenza wrote:

aurelio wrote:

rockmount wrote:

Pantani was a victim.

I'd tend to agree. It could be argued that he was a victim of the culture that the likes of Armstrong create. As David Walsh said, quoting a former team mate of Armstrong, (I paraphrase) some people are dragged into doping in order to survive in a sport riddled with doping, and others, by virtue of the degree they are prepared to push the doping envelope, drag others into the doping arena. Armstrong was one of the 'draggers' not one of the 'dragged'.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=11208251

Brilliant. Not only does the guy get convicted without evidence...he's now to shoulder the blame for the whole history of doping in cycling. Priceless!

I think that if you look up the meaning of the terms 'likes of', 'others' and 'one of' you will find that what I said makes it perfectly clear that many other people, other than Armstrong, can also be held to be accountable for the doping culture in cycling. :roll:

Nice attempt at back tracking but I think even you must realise your vitriol has gone a tad to far this time

Perhaps you should also take a look in a dictionary. You appear to be rather confused about the difference between 'backtracking' and 'explaining what I actually said for the benefit of those with limited English comprehension skills'. :roll:

Aaarrr, personal attacks, always a last resort when you've nowhere else to go I suppose. Your baseless attack was clearly aimed at Armstrong, whether you included " likes of" or anything else. Did you mention any other riders ? Have you accused any other riders of being responsible for Pantanis downfall ? Nope, just admit you either made a mistake, or are wrong, either will suffice. Alternatively continue with the personal attacks or pathetic attempts to wriggle out of what you said. I'm sure a career in politics beckons

dave_1

am also surprised moderation has not happened yet...some of what's been said is defamatory. The wording of some of the opinions is well beyond "I don't believe it can be done clean, he could n't do it clean " type opinon which is totally fair...

rapid_uphill

i bet i could go faster if i included marmite in my diet.

colint wrote:

It's par for course I'm afraid, I'll do my bit and make this my last post on the thread

aurelio_-_banned

DaveyL wrote:

aurelio wrote:

Then again, perhaps you were actually referring to those riders who have been 'accused' of doping on here without there being the sort of evidence that exists against Armstrong, such as Pantani.

What, like this?

http://au.cyclingnews.com/results/2000/ ... news.shtml

Or are hematocrits only suspicious when they belong to an American and are 49.9%?

Ok, so as we all know, Pantani's had some 'suspicious' haemocrit readings. However, did any samples of Pantani's show positive for Epo, even as part of a research program? Have numerous former team members of his 'come clean' about the doping practices he employed etc etc?

I am not arguing that Pantani was clean, but how can anyone defend Armstrong on the basis that there is insufficient evidence to prove this, whilst also implying that Pantani's haemocrit levels indicate that he doped? I had thought that for the supporters of Armstrong, only confirmed UCI-approved tests can be held to provide evidence of doping? Perhaps these 'rules' only apply to American riders. (And it is clear that some believe that not even these rules apply to American riders, if the case of Fraud Landis is anything to go by).

aurelio_-_banned

colint wrote:

[Aaarrr, personal attacks, always a last resort when you've nowhere else to go I suppose. Your baseless attack was clearly aimed at Armstrong, whether you included " likes of" or anything else. Did you mention any other riders ? Have you accused any other riders of being responsible for Pantanis downfall ? Nope, just admit you either made a mistake, or are wrong, either will suffice. Alternatively continue with the personal attacks or pathetic attempts to wriggle out of what you said. I'm sure a career in politics beckons

For God's sake, chill out before all that 'vitriol' coursing through your veins does you some permanent harm. :roll:

dave_1

colint wrote:

aurelio wrote:

colint wrote:

aurelio wrote:

cadenza wrote:

aurelio wrote:

rockmount wrote:

Pantani was a victim.

I'd tend to agree. It could be argued that he was a victim of the culture that the likes of Armstrong create. As David Walsh said, quoting a former team mate of Armstrong, (I paraphrase) some people are dragged into doping in order to survive in a sport riddled with doping, and others, by virtue of the degree they are prepared to push the doping envelope, drag others into the doping arena. Armstrong was one of the 'draggers' not one of the 'dragged'.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=11208251

Brilliant. Not only does the guy get convicted without evidence...he's now to shoulder the blame for the whole history of doping in cycling. Priceless!

I think that if you look up the meaning of the terms 'likes of', 'others' and 'one of' you will find that what I said makes it perfectly clear that many other people, other than Armstrong, can also be held to be accountable for the doping culture in cycling. :roll:

Nice attempt at back tracking but I think even you must realise your vitriol has gone a tad to far this time

Perhaps you should also take a look in a dictionary. You appear to be rather confused about the difference between 'backtracking' and 'explaining what I actually said for the benefit of those with limited English comprehension skills'. :roll:

Aaarrr, personal attacks, always a last resort when you've nowhere else to go I suppose. Your baseless attack was clearly aimed at Armstrong, whether you included " likes of" or anything else. Did you mention any other riders ? Have you accused any other riders of being responsible for Pantanis downfall ? Nope, just admit you either made a mistake, or are wrong, either will suffice. Alternatively continue with the personal attacks or pathetic attempts to wriggle out of what you said. I'm sure a career in politics beckons

indeed....play the ball not the man... the mature way to disagree

colint

aurelio wrote:

colint wrote:

[Aaarrr, personal attacks, always a last resort when you've nowhere else to go I suppose. Your baseless attack was clearly aimed at Armstrong, whether you included " likes of" or anything else. Did you mention any other riders ? Have you accused any other riders of being responsible for Pantanis downfall ? Nope, just admit you either made a mistake, or are wrong, either will suffice. Alternatively continue with the personal attacks or pathetic attempts to wriggle out of what you said. I'm sure a career in politics beckons

For God's sake, chill out before all that 'vitriol' coursing through your veins does you some permanent harm. :roll:

Hilarious, thanks for that, really gave me a chuckle. Being told to chill out by you, especially after you've found the bile to make personal attacks, superb.

Rolling eyes emoticon anyone ?

aurelio_-_banned

Dave_1 wrote:

am also surprised moderation has not happened yet...some of what's been said is defamatory. The wording of some of the opinions is well beyond "I don't believe it can be done clean, he could n't do it clean " type opinon which is totally fair...

And yet you think that stuff like the following is fair comment?

Dave_1 wrote:

Hell on wheels likewise rings hollow...remember Zabel saying how he could never repay his EPOd up mate for all the domestique work he did? ...you'd at least think Zabel would have injected the same shite into his veins that Rolf A did to do his job for Zabel? Imagine havign your best mate dope to get you wins and you not doping yourself...and of course roomates for years...and Eric Z knew nothing, never touched EPO. Hell on Wheels is Liars on Wheels

edit-I see Zabel rode his last race a week ago...this retirment has now gone on for 6 months, wee-wee off Eric!!

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... highlight=

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

dave_1

aurelio wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

am also surprised moderation has not happened yet...some of what's been said is defamatory. The wording of some of the opinions is well beyond "I don't believe it can be done clean, he could n't do it clean " type opinon which is totally fair...

And yet you think that stuff like the following is fair comment?

Dave_1 wrote:

Hell on wheels likewise rings hollow...remember Zabel saying how he could never repay his EPOd up mate for all the domestique work he did? ...you'd at least think Zabel would have injected the same shite into his veins that Rolf A did to do his job for Zabel? Imagine havign your best mate dope to get you wins and you not doping yourself...and of course roomates for years...and Eric Z knew nothing, never touched EPO. Hell on Wheels is Liars on Wheels

edit-I see Zabel rode his last race a week ago...this retirment has now gone on for 6 months, wee-wee off Eric!!

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... highlight=

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Yes, pls be mature enough to play ball not the man, you take a bullying tone at times e.g. previous page

blazing_saddles

Perhaps TheDrunkMonk could and should remove "Lance" from this threads title, in the spirit of fairness and accuracy?

Oh and personally, I hate Marmite.

rapid_uphill

he should remove "haters" aswell, it implies someone is disliked.

don key

micron wrote:

I thought this was a perfectly civilised thread with some well thought out arguments. The only 'vitriol' seems to be coming from one camp...

Of course the lines are drawn and nobody is going to change their minds because of this thread. Sure, some of the old arguments are getting rehashed again, but it's interesting that doping plays a relatively small part in reactions to Armstrong and that, while many posters may have a strong visceral reaction to him they can also admit his qualities as a rider.

Besides, isn't it better to have one thread on HWSNBN at a time, rather than a proliferation?

camp... ness locks monster. I have in relation to this argument had a rain brave, it goes like piss.... into the jar and if you can follow the argument so far you are either A or B, which I cannot C.

finchy

Pity that it all descended into an argument about doping, when the OP asked 1 question about doping, and 3 on other topics, but I suppose that this is the most contentious issue.

My own personal take on the issue is that I couldn't care less whether he doped or not. If he didn't, then all the better. If he did, then he did it at a time in which he would have been competing against the likes of Ullrich, Vino, Basso, etc, etc. I put more blame on the authorities - if they don't enforce doping rules, then a lot of cyclists will naturally take the attitude that they need to dope to win, and anyway it isn't really cheating because everyone else is doing it. It's not that I see cyclists as victims, rather that I don't see them as the main culprits.

The only thing I hold against Armstong on the doping question is that he seemed happy to enforce the law of silence.

cadenza

colint wrote:

aurelio wrote:

colint wrote:

[Aaarrr, personal attacks, always a last resort when you've nowhere else to go I suppose. Your baseless attack was clearly aimed at Armstrong, whether you included " likes of" or anything else. Did you mention any other riders ? Have you accused any other riders of being responsible for Pantanis downfall ? Nope, just admit you either made a mistake, or are wrong, either will suffice. Alternatively continue with the personal attacks or pathetic attempts to wriggle out of what you said. I'm sure a career in politics beckons

For God's sake, chill out before all that 'vitriol' coursing through your veins does you some permanent harm. :roll:

Hilarious, thanks for that, really gave me a chuckle. Being told to chill out by you, especially after you've found the bile to make personal attacks, superb.

Rolling eyes emoticon anyone ?

It's normal for a teenager. My 13yr old does the same...loses argument...hissy fit...tells everyone else to calm down. Predictable, but always amusing.

Chubby on a compact

I've enjoyed taking part in several different sports over the years football, golf and over the last few years I've become a keen cyclist. They all have one thing in common. Basically when a sports person is at the top of their game there will always be someone trying to shoot them down. When Jack Nicholas first came on the golf scene he was not liked either. Nick Faldo was slated in the press and by other golfers when he was the worlds No 1 and it appears that Lance is still getting it in the neck. All these top sports stars have one thing in common, bloody mindedness to do what it takes to be the No 1 in their particular sport. Over the years I've seen loads of talented kids excel in sport only to give up because they can't be bothered. I even know one kid who turned down the chance to join Talent Team even though they were going to give him a couple of bikes to train on. Basically because he preferred playing X box to riding a bike. What I'm trying to say is sit back, chill out and just enjoy what Lance Armstrong has achieved. It maybe a few years before you see anyone like him again.

Chubby on a compact

I've enjoyed taking part in several different sports over the years football, golf and over the last few years I've become a keen cyclist. They all have one thing in common. Basically when a sports person is at the top of their game there will always be someone trying to shoot them down. When Jack Nicholas first came on the golf scene he was not liked either. Nick Faldo was slated in the press and by other golfers when he was the worlds No 1 and it appears that Lance is still getting it in the neck. All these top sports stars have one thing in common, bloody mindedness to do what it takes to be the No 1 in their particular sport. Over the years I've seen loads of talented kids excel in sport only to give up because they can't be bothered. I even know one kid who turned down the chance to join Talent Team even though they were going to give him a couple of bikes to train on. Basically because he preferred playing X box to riding a bike. What I'm trying to say is sit back, chill out and just enjoy what Lance Armstrong has achieved. It maybe a few years before you see anyone like him again.

Chubby on a compact

I've enjoyed taking part in several different sports over the years football, golf and over the last few years I've become a keen cyclist. They all have one thing in common. Basically when a sports person is at the top of their game there will always be someone trying to shoot them down. When Jack Nicholas first came on the golf scene he was not liked either. Nick Faldo was slated in the press and by other golfers when he was the worlds No 1 and it appears that Lance is still getting it in the neck. All these top sports stars have one thing in common, bloody mindedness to do what it takes to be the No 1 in their particular sport. Over the years I've seen loads of talented kids excel in sport only to give up because they can't be bothered. I even know one kid who turned down the chance to join Talent Team even though they were going to give him a couple of bikes to train on. Basically because he preferred playing X box to riding a bike. What I'm trying to say is sit back, chill out and just enjoy what Lance Armstrong has achieved. It maybe a few years before you see anyone like him again.

finchy

Chubby - I see you're new to these forums. Bit of advice, if everything seems painfully slow, that's normal, and no need to press submit again.

finchy

Chubby - I see you're new to these forums. Bit of advice, if everything seems painfully slow, that's normal, and no need to press submit again.

davleweua

Its only recently that I've got into mountain biking having given up mx for injury reasons, anyways i bought a specialized 08 fsr xc comp but have found that the suspension is not that great. I am considering upgrading the existing forks (rock shox tora sl 302) but I am unsure what to go for in terms of bike compatibility, size, cost etc.
I would greatly appreciate advice / feedback on this subject.

deejay

Blazing Saddles wrote:

I was not going to post on a thread that baits so blatently.
However, it is great to see that a thread, directed at a perceived group of biased individuals, has actually generated a constructive debate.
Indeed, it is the Lance fans that let the thread down.
Q1 Remove the term greatest, which is confusing, as you have to look at the bigger picture when judging. Replace with "most successful" and you will get a consesus.

I would also suggest there is probably nobody around here, who is a position, age wise, to have first hand experience of all the contenders for the title of greatest.
While Merckx stands above the rest, I wonder upon Coppi and Bartali.

Both lost 7 of their prime years to WW2, yet still have fantastic palmares. How many Tours might they have won?

With due respect to LA fans, I don't think his years out, due to cancer, had a negative effect on his Tour record!

Seen the lot Blazer except for Bartali.
Coppi, I saw at Herne Hill Track and from that you can see that the "Greatest" Title is even more than 3 GT's and a full season of Road Racing. (food for thought I think).
The "Greatest" also rode Track & 6 Day Events, but the Greatest of them all has his "Hour" Bike on the Platform of a Station on the Brussels Metro, which is called Eddy Merckx. There is also a Plaque/Monument of him on the Top of the Cote de Stockeu Hill on the Liege-Bastogne Course. (doh what's that)
Can any "FOOL" argue with who is the Greatest Racing Cyclist, I think not.

However the thread says the French Race and in that context we all don't agree with all the arguments made, but how about we settle for the time being on "The Greatest TDF Rider of the 21st Century" and that he just wouldn't qualify for the 20th Century.
I mean fairs fair but the US public hadn't heard of him till he had won the 3rd French Race and then only as a Cancer Sportsman making good.
(I know that for a fact as I go there for another sport)

He was only out of Racing for 25 months, July 96 - August 98 and he Finished 4th in the 1998 VUELTA.

Hi ..Huw, (and others maybe) recognise this next bit.
I'm the guy that stood next to the World Champion in 1994 after the Liege Race Presentation and me leaning on the Mechanics Truck with him arriving and sitting on the top step talking to the mechanics. He bemoaned the fact that no one in the crowd of about 15 or so recogised him and in the end he said that he would go back to his room.
Their conversation along the lines of, whoops that has not pleased him at all

The whole of this thread has been about "Blood" etc, so what the hell is Cancer all about. It surely is about research into "Blood" and who would know more than the Livestrong Researchers.

I don't "Hate" him as such (well he's just a mumies boy) but I get annoyed by all the media Hype that he plays up to and as a sports person he Rates about the same as John Mcinroe .

We in Europe have a rest from him this week but next week as Eurosport puts it, we have "Planet Armstrong" and poor little Levi is going to struggle. (even if he wins it again on his home ground).