O, Danny Boy

12357…11

Comments

  • The Truth
    The Truth Posts: 161
    rayjay wrote:
    iainf72 wrote:
    Who's seen The Act of Killing? If not, you should.

    And a few people on here seem to want someone to make The Act of Doping.


    No I disagree , I think a few people see riders still getting busted.

    Still see questionable performances.

    I think a few people still wonder why riders still feel the need to dope when the peloton is supposed to be so clean and these are not all GC contenders.

    I don't think that is unreasonable.

    I just find it all very hypocritical.

    Some people are happy to see the ex dopers they like ride again yet are equally happy to compare other doped riders with Hitler, I kid you not. Check the posts, it's there

    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    The Truth wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Its best to no someone's view before saying anything.

    Know what I was taking issue with, now?

    Anyhow, back to DDL.
    90% is well beyond the most pessimistic of previous sceptical "Guesstimates".
    Hiding a half a man power, motor in a frame is something else.

    Do you have any evidence that he is wrong? Vaughters saying everything is clean doesn't count.


    I think 2.625% of riders are dopers.
    Do you have any evidence that I'm wrong.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • PBo
    PBo Posts: 2,493
    rayjay wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Paulie W wrote:
    Why can't we all just love each other? All this bickering needs to stop. Rayjay and The Truth in particular need that love - lonely as they must be sat in their bedrooms, desperately craving human attention.


    Actually I'm sat in my studio [ musician] in my 4 bed house that I own.

    Your not even close and I am not even close to my bedroom, I have to go up another floor :lol: enjoy

    Ah, then you're not a spotty teenager but rather you're a moron. Excellent!

    :lol: well done, another one of your intelligent post's.

    One of his intelligent post's what?
  • The Truth
    The Truth Posts: 161
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Its best to no someone's view before saying anything.

    Know what I was taking issue with, now?

    Anyhow, back to DDL.
    90% is well beyond the most pessimistic of previous sceptical "Guesstimates".
    Hiding a half a man power, motor in a frame is something else.

    Do you have any evidence that he is wrong? Vaughters saying everything is clean doesn't count.


    I think 2.625% of riders are dopers.
    Do you have any evidence that I'm wrong.

    I think you have no clue what you are talking about.
  • Macaloon
    Macaloon Posts: 5,545
    TailWindHome wrote:
    If 90% of the Giro field are doping you'd think he'd be able to name one or two specifically, no?

    Edit

    Maybe he will, and be able to substantiate it. When that happens, the conversation changes.

    A good first step towards credibility would be to describe in detail exactly how he doped, his suppliers and medical enablers. Non-specific allegations against anonymous riders are just one more Jerry Springer moment.
    ...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.
  • rayjay
    rayjay Posts: 1,384
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Its best to no someone's view before saying anything.

    Know what I was taking issue with, now?

    Anyhow, back to DDL.
    90% is well beyond the most pessimistic of previous sceptical "Guesstimates".
    Hiding a half a man power, motor in a frame is something else.

    Being pedantic does not win a debate it just avoids it.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.

    No evidence?
    Di Luca was popped on his first weekend of competition.
    Unlike you, I saw both those races.
    Crazy, crazy rides for first time out.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,695
    The Truth wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Its best to no someone's view before saying anything.

    Know what I was taking issue with, now?

    Anyhow, back to DDL.
    90% is well beyond the most pessimistic of previous sceptical "Guesstimates".
    Hiding a half a man power, motor in a frame is something else.

    Do you have any evidence that he is wrong? Vaughters saying everything is clean doesn't count.


    I think 2.625% of riders are dopers.
    Do you have any evidence that I'm wrong.

    I think you have no clue what you are talking about.

    Whooosh...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • dsoutar
    dsoutar Posts: 1,746
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Maybe he will, and be able to substantiate it. When that happens, the conversation changes.

    Alternatively I can see him backtracking from these allegations faster than the Italian army in WWII
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    edited January 2014
    DiLuca - the Doperati's wet dream

    Half of the Doperati adore Bert and Riis (I know...) so were not best pleased when the Chicken started squawking - 'he lied so much before, nobody should trust a word he says'

    But they're trusting DiLuca as manna from heaven.

    Go figure.


    But anyway...he's going to have to pony up with evidence to back up his accusations, as he's being called to account pretty damn quickly
  • rayjay
    rayjay Posts: 1,384
    The Truth wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    iainf72 wrote:
    Who's seen The Act of Killing? If not, you should.

    And a few people on here seem to want someone to make The Act of Doping.


    No I disagree , I think a few people see riders still getting busted.

    Still see questionable performances.

    I think a few people still wonder why riders still feel the need to dope when the peloton is supposed to be so clean and these are not all GC contenders.

    I don't think that is unreasonable.

    I just find it all very hypocritical.

    Some people are happy to see the ex dopers they like ride again yet are equally happy to compare other doped riders with Hitler, I kid you not. Check the posts, it's there

    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.

    No, a lot of posters on here would need actual facts before making accusations :lol:
  • dsoutar
    dsoutar Posts: 1,746
    The Truth wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Its best to no someone's view before saying anything.

    Know what I was taking issue with, now?

    Anyhow, back to DDL.
    90% is well beyond the most pessimistic of previous sceptical "Guesstimates".
    Hiding a half a man power, motor in a frame is something else.

    Do you have any evidence that he is wrong? Vaughters saying everything is clean doesn't count.


    I think 2.625% of riders are dopers.
    Do you have any evidence that I'm wrong.

    I think you have no clue what you are talking about.

    and some fell on stony ground...
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
    How was it so obvious that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping at the Giro if 90% of the riders were doing likewise? Surely if Di Luca is to believed, they shouldn't have stood out at all?
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    dsoutar wrote:
    TailWindHome wrote:
    Maybe he will, and be able to substantiate it. When that happens, the conversation changes.

    Alternatively I can see him backtracking from these allegations faster than the Italian army in WWII


    Very very :)
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    rayjay wrote:

    I think a few people still wonder why riders still feel the need to dope when the peloton is supposed to be so clean and these are not all GC contenders.

    Some guys are just not that good, some guys can't understand not doping. There's lot of reasons.

    I don't think people who dope are monsters. Back in the 90's / 00's you had a significantly more difficult choice as without doping you'd probably do nothing. Now I believe based on what I've seen, what people inside cycling have told me that this is not the case anymore. I look at what I see in races and don't see it as ridiculous as it used to be. Someone has to win and winning means being better than someone else

    You see something different. That's ok.

    Are there still people doping? Yes, for sure. Is it the rule? No
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • chrisday
    chrisday Posts: 300
    The Truth wrote:
    Some groupthink stuff

    A perfect description of this forum. I would rather have my sanity than being part of that, if that equals being alone in my bedroom so be it.

    Oooh! Are we playing the 'copy and paste' game? Allow me to riposte...
    Clown-Goblin
    The word "troll" is thrown around a lot these days, and personally I find it a little too dignified for the people it describes. Trolls sometimes guard bridges, which seems like honest work. I much prefer the term "clown-goblin" to describe people who put forth intentionally inflammatory views just to get a reaction. This kind of contrarian takes a scorched earth approach, spraying contempt for everything in every direction.

    It's not enough for them to hate what everybody else likes and vice versa, they also have this inmates-running-the-asylum instinct to tell anybody who doesn't agree that they're wrong.

    Clown-Goblins are the human equivalent of that jagged bit of exploded kernel-shrapnel that gets stuck in your teeth when you eat movie popcorn. For them, opinions have less to do with the subject at hand than what this subject reveals about himself, which is the one true subject. Contrarians have abused the notion that everyone is entitled to an opinion. Their rebuttals to ideas or products don't seem to be actual thoughts so much as twisted personality-PR masquerading as opinion.
    @shraap | My Men 2016: G, Yogi, Cav, Boonen, Degenkolb, Martin, J-Rod, Kudus, Chaves
  • The Truth
    The Truth Posts: 161
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
    How was it so obvious that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping at the Giro if 90% of the riders were doing likewise? Surely if Di Luca is to believed, they shouldn't have stood out at all?

    I don't know if 90% are doping, all I know is that Di Luca and Santambrogio both stood out as obvious dopers.
  • slim_boy_fat
    slim_boy_fat Posts: 1,810
    frenchfighter wrote:
    This thread looks like it is going down the pan already.

    --

    Great comments from Valentino Sciotti of Vini Fantini

    "You're not being fair, Danilo. I helped you in one of the most difficult moments of your life and you promised that you'd have nothing to do with doping. But you did it and have refused to help those who investigate the problem. Now you're going on television and firing off about a world that welcomed you back, forgave and supported you, and which can't defend itself against your accusations," he wrote.

    "Why don't you understand the pain you cause every time you say something? I'm really disappointed but I don’t think it's right that other people have to pay for your stupidity or for those who have followed your road.

    "It's time you started to apologise, that you shut up or speak to the right people, so that other Danilos don't damage such a great sport. Despite everything, I think cycling can be a clean sport and offer an ethical message for those who love it, manage it and take part in it."

    Fantastic comments.
  • slim_boy_fat
    slim_boy_fat Posts: 1,810
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
    How was it so obvious that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping at the Giro if 90% of the riders were doing likewise? Surely if Di Luca is to believed, they shouldn't have stood out at all?

    I don't know if 90% are doping, all I know is that Di Luca and Santambrogio both stood out as obvious dopers.
    So therefore the rest of the peleton must have been fairly clean?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
    How was it so obvious that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping at the Giro if 90% of the riders were doing likewise? Surely if Di Luca is to believed, they shouldn't have stood out at all?

    I don't know if 90% are doping, all I know is that Di Luca and Santambrogio both stood out as obvious dopers.
    Well there's your first bit of evidence that what Di Luca says isn't true then.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • andytee87
    andytee87 Posts: 414
    tumblr_m2awy7pPS41rowjlao1_250.gif
  • The Truth
    The Truth Posts: 161
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
    How was it so obvious that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping at the Giro if 90% of the riders were doing likewise? Surely if Di Luca is to believed, they shouldn't have stood out at all?

    I don't know if 90% are doping, all I know is that Di Luca and Santambrogio both stood out as obvious dopers.
    Well there's your first bit of evidence that what Di Luca says isn't true then.

    So what? I never said that Di Luca was right.
  • rayjay
    rayjay Posts: 1,384
    Di Luca still felt the need to dope.

    I think that is quite telling.

    He his not the rider he used to be, but if he still feels the need to dope just to stay with the pack then that cannot be a good sign for a clean peloton.

    He has been around along time and will have a good idea of what's going on.

    It's easy to dismiss is view but he has no reason to lie now.

    He could have said 50% or just the main GC contenders.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    rayjay wrote:
    Di Luca still felt the need to dope.

    I think that is quite telling.
    It's telling about Di Luca's state of mind and dependency rather than the peloton at large.

    He feels the need to dope because he believes the lies he has told himself. Classic addict behaviour.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    rayjay wrote:
    Di Luca still felt the need to dope.

    I think that is quite telling.

    He his not the rider he used to be, but if he still feels the need to dope just to stay with the pack then that cannot be a good sign for a clean peloton.

    He has been around along time and will have a good idea of what's going on.

    It's easy to dismiss is view but he has no reason to lie now.

    He could have said 50% or just the main GC contenders.

    Di Luca's statements have no ring of truth to them. They read like the rantings of a man whose career is behind him and who wants desperately to justify the actions that have led him to that place - they're all at it, some a lot worse than me you know, I would have been a champion without the doping, etc.

    He has every reason to lie as it is apparent that he is really focused on how people see him rather than on any 'truth'.
  • slim_boy_fat
    slim_boy_fat Posts: 1,810
    rayjay wrote:
    Di Luca still felt the need to dope.

    I think that is quite telling.

    He his not the rider he used to be, but if he still feels the need to dope just to stay with the pack then that cannot be a good sign for a clean peloton.

    He has been around along time and will have a good idea of what's going on.

    It's easy to dismiss is view but he has no reason to lie now.

    He could have said 50% or just the main GC contenders.
    No reason to lie? Other than to normalise and excuse his own behaviour?
  • The Truth
    The Truth Posts: 161
    RichN95 wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Di Luca still felt the need to dope.

    I think that is quite telling.
    It's telling about Di Luca's state of mind and dependency rather than the peloton at large.

    He feels the need to dope because he believes the lies he has told himself. Classic addict behaviour.

    Maybe so, but the fact remains that he was still doping, yet he was no match for marginal gains. Same goes for Santambrogio. That is pretty telling.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
    How was it so obvious that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping at the Giro if 90% of the riders were doing likewise? Surely if Di Luca is to believed, they shouldn't have stood out at all?

    I don't know if 90% are doping, all I know is that Di Luca and Santambrogio both stood out as obvious dopers.
    Well there's your first bit of evidence that what Di Luca says isn't true then.

    So what? I never said that Di Luca was right.

    2 pages ago you were defending his claim.
    More flip flopping than Dick Fosbury.
    The Truth wrote:
    Maybe so, but the fact remains that he was still doping, yet he was no match for marginal gains. Same goes for Santambrogio. That is pretty telling.

    That would be Astana's marginal gains, then.
    Flip flop.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • The Truth
    The Truth Posts: 161
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    The Truth wrote:
    2013 really was quite a freakish year in pro cycling. Anyone with half a brain could see that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping (even when there was no evidence, shock and horror), but those two weren't even in the top 3 of the most laughable performances of the year.
    How was it so obvious that Di Luca and Santambrogio were doping at the Giro if 90% of the riders were doing likewise? Surely if Di Luca is to believed, they shouldn't have stood out at all?

    I don't know if 90% are doping, all I know is that Di Luca and Santambrogio both stood out as obvious dopers.
    Well there's your first bit of evidence that what Di Luca says isn't true then.

    So what? I never said that Di Luca was right.

    2 pages ago you were defending his claim.
    More flip flopping than Dick Fosbury.
    The Truth wrote:
    Maybe so, but the fact remains that he was still doping, yet he was no match for marginal gains. Same goes for Santambrogio. That is pretty telling.

    That would be Astana's marginal gains, then.
    Flip flop.

    I was saying you have no evidence he was wrong. I didn't claim to have any evidence he was right either. We simply don't know either way.

    Astana's marginal gains are not on the same level as team sky in my opinion. Do you think Santambrogio would get anywhere near Froome if he was riding the tour?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    The Truth wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    rayjay wrote:
    Di Luca still felt the need to dope.

    I think that is quite telling.
    It's telling about Di Luca's state of mind and dependency rather than the peloton at large.

    He feels the need to dope because he believes the lies he has told himself. Classic addict behaviour.

    Maybe so, but the fact remains that he was still doping, yet he was no match for marginal gains. Same goes for Santambrogio. That is pretty telling.
    He was a 37 year old busted flush who hadn't done a race for six months and Santambrogio was a rider who had dropped down a level after being released by BMC and had never been in the Top 50 of a GT before. Like putting lipstick on a pig, there's only so much doping can do.
    Twitter: @RichN95

Categories