Levi Leipheimer busted for doping.
Comments
-
I would say that Armstrong's 'favoured' position with the UCI is well documented.Pokerface wrote:What you are saying is that the UCI protects Armstrong and Armstrong alone? Or are you saying the UCI protects other riders?
There have been other occasions when the UCI has also turned a blind eye to the doping of other riders when they have considered that doing so was 'in the interests of the sport'. For example, the way they accepted a pre-dated TUE when Laurent Brochard tested positive after he won the World RR championships. (As documented in Willy Voet's book). However, I have not seen any evidence indicating that they are currently protecting anyone, other than Armstrong.
Then again 'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'.
0 -
P.s on the subject of UCI corruption, this interview is interesting.
An interview with Sylvia Schenk, August 10, 2005
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/riders/2 ... _schenk05a
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/riders/2 ... _schenk05b0 -
Right - so this was basically just another one of your long anti-Armstrong rants veiled in the guise of UCI corruption.
So normal service has resumed. I was worried that the UCI was currently protecting big name riders as you seemed to imply.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:Pokerface wrote:What you are saying is that the UCI protects Armstrong and Armstrong alone? Or are you saying the UCI protects other riders?
................
Then again 'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'.
Or vice versa. I think??? :? :?0 -
So, Armstrong is not a 'big name'? Whatever, the UCI do have a track record for this sort of thing.Pokerface wrote:I was worried that the UCI was currently protecting big name riders as you seemed to imply.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
So, Armstrong is not a 'big name'?Pokerface wrote:I was worried that the UCI was currently protecting big name riders as you seemed to imply.
Nope. Only 9 characters.
You have no proof whatsoever that the UCI is currently protecting ANYONE, let alone Armstrong.0 -
'Proof' is a tricky concept not to be confused with 'evidence' or 'good reasons to believe'. I have no 'proof' that the UCI covered for Brochard when he tested positive. I also have no proof that the sun will rise tomorrow, but there are good reasons to believe that both are true.Pokerface wrote:You have no proof whatsoever that the UCI is currently protecting ANYONE, let alone Armstrong.0 -
And I have good reasons to believe that the UCI doesn't cover for any rider. Regardless of what may or may not have happened in the past. As do the majority of people.
Proof is not a tricky concept at all. You either have it or you don't. If you don't - anything you say is pure conjecture. Something which you seem to give people on here a hard time for regularly if their opinions differ from yours.0 -
You have never read anything on the philosophy of science, have you? The sort of black and white 'proof' you talk of only exists in deductive logic and mathematics. To broaden your understanding you could start by reading up on 'The problem of induction'.Pokerface wrote:Proof is not a tricky concept at all. You either have it or you don't.
Such as?Pokerface wrote:And I have good reasons to believe that the UCI doesn't cover for any rider. Regardless of what may or may not have happened in the past.0 -
Q: What's the difference between Lance and Howard?
A: They both hit peak form last July but only one of them got banned...Le Blaireau (1)0 -
DaveyL wrote:Q: What's the difference between Lance and Howard?
A: They both hit peak form last July but only one of them got banned...
I see BB posted a news link from a Cumbrian news source last year, 4 years ago Paggani from Scorton Lancashire-both roughly NW England was abusive and threatening and got locked, then Nicolo registers got locked, then the pre-cursor to BB last summer appears and locked-Aurelio with same catch phrase as pag. Its the walter mitty stories he writes about his career and how he now lives in Switzerland. The person behind BB has been locked 4 times and looks delusional, paranoid-the worlds against me colours many of his posts, schizoid. I think his Leipheimer thread is a total waste of Pro Race, could have been tacked onto the Gila thread to remind folk. I think the forum should go down the cycling forum route, have one big lance thread or a clinic section. I agree with most of his LA views...but he goes on and on and hijacks so many threads and wastes them, turns them into unrelated sociology/politics debates0 -
I am probably wasting my breath, but I can assure you that I have never posted as either 'Paggani' or 'Nicolo'. :roll:Dave_1 wrote:The person behind BB has been locked 4 times0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
I am probably wasting my breath, but I can assure you that I have never posted as either 'Paggani' or 'Nicolo'. :roll:Dave_1 wrote:The person behind BB has been locked 4 times
you are wasting time..stylistically you'd mock with "aw bless" as Aurelio in 2009, which is Pag's catch phrase exactly, and then the Cumbria news link...you kinda pinpoint yourself to Pag again. I remember cause you threatened me with violence as Pag and Nicolo, severe verbal abuse.
I see three of your usernames in a row with a Latin/Italian origin.
If you are such a man, name yourself. But you're a coward. And a bully. You bullied me , threatened me as Pag in 2006, jumped on every post for 6 months till you got locked... I have had to reveal who I am, so I can now hassle you. You're all mouth no trousers. I can prove everything I say about my experience of racing.
You're not needed on here as there's a big group who remind me and others not to believe in LA dream. Ad they are right. So you're pointless. I hope people don't reply to you. I see Wiggo and Cav done too well for you as well0 -
So, following your 'logic'. Paggani, Nicolo and Aurelio are obviously the same person, whilst I am someone completely different...Dave_1 wrote:I see three of your usernames in a row with a Latin/Italian origin.
Your real name is Mr. _1?Dave_1 wrote:I have had to reveal who I am
Yes, they should follow your example instead. Oh hang on a minute.Dave_1 wrote:I hope people don't reply to you.
0 -
Dave_1 wrote:I have had to reveal who I am, so I can now hassle you. You're all mouth no trousers. I can prove everything I say about my experience of racing.
You an ex-pro then Dave_1? Just curious as a relative newbie, that's all.My cycle racing blog: http://cyclingapprentice.wordpress.com/
If you live in or near Sussex, check this out:
http://ontherivet.ning.com/0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
So, following your 'logic'. Paggani, Nicolo and Aurelio are obviously the same person, whilst I am someone completely different...Dave_1 wrote:I see three of your usernames in a row with a Latin/Italian origin.
Your real name is Mr. _1?Dave_1 wrote:I have had to reveal who I am
Yes, they should follow your example instead. Oh hang on a minute.Dave_1 wrote:I hope people don't reply to you.
click on my profile0 -
Which is blank. You're not Laurent Fignon are you?Dave_1 wrote:click on my profile0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Which is blank. You're not Laurent Fignon are you?Dave_1 wrote:click on my profile
I can see it. What's your name?0 -
Nope, can't see anything. By the way my first name is Bernard.Dave_1 wrote:I can see it. What's your name?
If you don't want to say who you are, why not just outline some of the highlights of your racing career?0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Nope, can't see anything. By the way my first name is Bernard.Dave_1 wrote:I can see it. What's your name?
If you don't want to say who you are, why not just outline some of the highlights of your racing career?
its boring and not very good. Others can name me if they wish. I don't know what I've done. This is fun.0 -
I had a look at this thread as I wondered what the latest thoughts were about Levis doping conviction and found that it was really a thread about 2 goons having a d1ck swinging contest. Perhaps one of the mods can re-title it?0
-
There's not much to go on on his profile but it took me all of 30 seconds to work it out. Ex pro and current bike shop owner from my detective skills.0
-
Pross wrote:There's not much to go on on his profile but it took me all of 30 seconds to work it out. Ex pro and current bike shop owner from my detective skills.
Jeepers - not Dave Hinde surely?My cycle racing blog: http://cyclingapprentice.wordpress.com/
If you live in or near Sussex, check this out:
http://ontherivet.ning.com/0 -
No, I don't think BB would be in one piece taking that attitude with DH 0
-
Miss Marple has nothing to fear.
Dave_1 isn't an ex-pro. He was a good amateur who rode some races in Europe but he never made it to the pro ranks.0 -
Right, from the profile I thought he might be http://www.visittheyorkshiredales.co.uk/page71.html0
-
Dave, just let it lie.
Howard. Stop being such a prat.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
RichN95 wrote:BikingBernie wrote:
When they only come to light in the present, yes!Pokerface wrote:I shall we start new threads now rehashing every doping offence from the past?
How has it just come to light? He was disqualified, sanctioned and US cycling issued a press release at the time. I knew about it so it can't have been buried very well.
Joe Papp is bringing it up now because he's a chancer who re-invents himself according to what's best for Joe Papp. First a cheating cyclist, then a drug dealer, now an anti-doping crusader trying to keep himself out of prison. (He was preaching his anti-doping stuff while still dealing).
Ephedrine is found in many medicines and is a pretty rubbish performance enhancer compared with what was undetectable in 1996. There weren't internet drug databases to check back then, so it might have been deliberate cheating or may have been an amateur's mistake.
A 14 year old story about a minor drug. Big deal. If this had been, say, Carlos Sastre, you wouldn't have cared less, but it's not. It involved one of those evil Americans who is close to your own personal Moby Dick.
Joe Papp didn't bring it up. Us readers in the cyclingnews.com "The Clinic" forum did. Papp then posted the text of the sanction announcement to his blog, apparently calling out Taylor Phinney in the process for insulting Vino via Twitter after L-B-L, saying he was a cheat who should leave cycling, to which Papp took offence because either he and Vino are friends or he's a fan of Vino, so Papp told Phinney that if he hated all cheaters he would be well-advised to start writing the same tweets about his pseudo-teammate Leipheimer, who had a doping past.
So Leipheimer wasn't the target.
Papp wasn't the driver of the discussion.
Taylor Phinney was the catalyst, however.
Cheers.0 -
I see Lance has started yet another fight on the forum :roll:0
-
andyp wrote:Miss Marple has nothing to fear.
Dave_1 isn't an ex-pro. He was a good amateur who rode some races in Europe but he never made it to the pro ranks.
Blimey! That is fairly awesome. I don't often agree with dave, but he must be one hard f@cker to make the european scene! Chapeau.Dan0
