The Lance hits the fan...
Comments
-
Alright, if as Davey says, toss out the HemAssist part as fantasy, in looking at this, the Don Catlin part concerning the tests of the 1990s could seem to be on shakey ground too.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/early- ... _back.htmlDon Catlin, the nation's pre-eminent anti-doping scientist, accused the two writers, David Epstein and Selena Roberts, of mischaracterizing key facts and relying on innuendo to suggest that Catlin might have helped cover up a series of Armstrong's drug test results in the 1990s that allegedly showed unusually high levels of testosterone.
And what if this Selena Roberts, one of the authors of the story is someone to beware of as well? As the reader wrote in comments:Sally -- Selena Roberts has a history of sensationalizing stories that are later discredited. She came out hard against the Duke lacrosse players, convicting them in public of stonewalling and covering up, and got the story wrong. Years later, she continues to try to spin her way out of what she wrote, long after it was discredited. Not too long ago, she wrote a book on A-Rod accusing him of pitch-tipping (among other things). THose charges were alter discredited based upon statistical analysis in the New York Times, which revealed that there was no basis to the charge. To this day, she will argue although it was apparent in her interview that she simply despises A-ROd.
The reader "Haunches" above may well be typical of Lance plants on the internet with these nuggets of information. Still, not bad to be aware of all this. Still, I think the odds are against Lance. We'll see. But these points in the SI article are rather crucial if they can be seen as weak links, surely the prosecution will have better evidence.0 -
the SI article is looking very dodgy from an evidence point of view. Would Jeff Novitsky have to admit he and grand jury didn't find sufficient evidence to prosecute or does it just fade away like the 18 month old investigation into alleged transfusion equipment because the finger pointers don't like to lose too much face?
But..I suppose a grand jury trial would be the most exciting trial ever...bikeradar forum would crash daily..0 -
Saw this old advertisement that made me giggle.
0 -
Firecrakka wrote:Saw this old advertisement that made me giggle.
why giggle?0 -
DaveyL wrote:
A drug so "radical" that other ones (HemoPure) were also in circulation? A drug under "development"? Yeah, like one whose efficacy and safety hadn't yet been proved? That fits with LA's meticulous preparation :roll:
We don't know it's it's the meticulous, do we? Look at Fuentes, some of that stuff was positively ghetto.
He may have tried to acquire the stuff but never used it. Cyclists are a superstitious bunch and if they think something will work they'll get it. We're talking about people who wear 13 upside down and think shaving makes you tired.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
0
-
Firecrakka wrote:
I don't find Tour De France wins amusing. Why do you?0 -
Firecrakka wrote:Saw this old advertisement that made me giggle.
Ignore 'the voice of the peloton' - that pic is hilarious!0 -
ratsbeyfus wrote:Firecrakka wrote:Saw this old advertisement that made me giggle.
Ignore 'the voice of the peloton' - that pic is hilarious!
You yet another anti-doping warrior rats?0 -
apparently not.
0 -
Firecrakka wrote:apparently not.
indeed. Care to expand on the point you think I miss?0 -
Dave_1 wrote:Firecrakka wrote:apparently not.
indeed. Care to expand on the point you think I miss?
You seriously don't see anything on that old poster that could be considered amusing?0 -
Dave_1 wrote:ratsbeyfus wrote:Firecrakka wrote:Saw this old advertisement that made me giggle.
Ignore 'the voice of the peloton' - that pic is hilarious!
You yet another anti-doping warrior rats?
Duh yeah! Get doping out of the sport at every opportunity. Expose former drug cheats if possible. You one of those dinosaur doping apologists dave? Get off the speed and take some happy pills.0 -
Firecrakka wrote:Dave_1 wrote:Firecrakka wrote:apparently not.
indeed. Care to expand on the point you think I miss?
You seriously don't see anything on that old poster that could be considered amusing?
NO. I like cycling and have a grudging respect for anyone who was that good. Do you?0 -
ratsbeyfus wrote:Dave_1 wrote:ratsbeyfus wrote:Firecrakka wrote:Saw this old advertisement that made me giggle.
Ignore 'the voice of the peloton' - that pic is hilarious!
You yet another anti-doping warrior rats?
Duh yeah! Get doping out of the sport at every opportunity. Expose former drug cheats if possible. You one of those dinosaur doping apologists dave? Get off the speed and take some happy pills.
Get Indurain, Jaerman, Furlan to confess and then LA is fair game. Until then..ease off Ratsb eyfus0 -
Dave_1 wrote:Firecrakka wrote:Dave_1 wrote:Firecrakka wrote:apparently not.
indeed. Care to expand on the point you think I miss?
You seriously don't see anything on that old poster that could be considered amusing?
NO. I like cycling and have a grudging respect for anyone who was that good. Do you?
Alberto Contador? Not seeing much respect there, grudging or otherwise."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:Dave_1 wrote:Firecrakka wrote:Dave_1 wrote:Firecrakka wrote:apparently not.
indeed. Care to expand on the point you think I miss?
You seriously don't see anything on that old poster that could be considered amusing?
NO. I like cycling and have a grudging respect for anyone who was that good. Do you?
Alberto Contador? Not seeing much respect there, grudging or otherwise.
you are very picky about your dopers..some you are okay with, others you're not.0 -
Dave_1 wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Anyone who still thinks Lance is not a hardcore doper, manipulator and liar...worrying.
Not only is he a huge fraud in the sport, not only has he ruined and corrupted the careers of many others, he is also a fraud in the real World.
what a ridiculous nonsensical comment FF. LanceA has no +s..Berto does. You test + every time on this subject , no need for a counter analysis! Failed!
Dave have you ever heard of Dr Anderson?? is it dark under all that sand?'Do not compare your bike to others, for always there will be greater and lesser bikes'0 -
How about Ricco, then?
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... c&start=20
No, apparently not. Quite the opposite.
Don't think I'm the picky one.
I'd give then all grudging respect, including, but not exclusive, of Armstrong.
If you want to advocate a forgive and forget approach to LA, fine, but given your hard line stance on the rest, it's not surprising some posters will point the fanboy finger at you."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Yep it appears you are the FF that Lance needs right now :roll:'Do not compare your bike to others, for always there will be greater and lesser bikes'0
-
Blazing Saddles wrote:How about Ricco, then?
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... c&start=20
No, apparently not. Quite the opposite.
Don't think I'm the picky one.
I'd give then all grudging respect, including, but not exclusive, of Armstrong.
If you want to advocate a forgive and forget approach to LA, fine, but given your hard line stance on the rest, it's not surprising some posters will point the fanboy finger at you.
NO..I draw a line in the sand. Before and after. You are picky one given the heavy attention you give to LA versus say other absolutely blatant blood modifiers like Indurain0 -
Ah the old Moray: "you are all LA obssessives bar me," deflection approach.
Last thing I commented on LA was that, like you, I thought the SI article was "lightweight" on new material.
I'm not the one constantly banging on about him. I'd rather wait and see if indictments are handed down. You, on the other hand, simply want it all to go away.
I see, you have managed to bring him up on the Contador thread, btw."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Error on my part-I think Rolf Jaerman did admit 5 years back. Who can forget Amstel 93? Anyone who thinks Bugno was a choir boy need only read We Were young and Carefree to see the two approaches that the Gatorade team made to Fignon to get him on EPO in 1992-93.\\\\
\\0 -
Dave_1 wrote:ratsbeyfus wrote:
You yet another anti-doping warrior rats?
Duh yeah! Get doping out of the sport at every opportunity. Expose former drug cheats if possible. You one of those dinosaur doping apologists dave? Get off the speed and take some happy pills.
Get Indurain, Jaerman, Furlan to confess and then LA is fair game. Until then..ease off Ratsb eyfus[/quote]
We've been over this before Dave_1... if there is evidence out there go after them all. You won't find me supporting anyone. Say, for example, there was evidence to suggest Chris Boardman was found to be on smack for his whole career, I would want it to come out into the open no matter how much respect I might have had for him as an athlete.
Your position seems to be that Armstrong (a current professional rider) shouldn't be investigated for doping until previous winners have been? Can't see the feds being too interested in chasing Indurain... that really would be a waste of US taxpayers' dollars. And please don't trot out the 'sweep it all under the carpet line for the good of the sport'... if you do I think the mods should link the 'next page' button to the 'page 1' button 'coz the thread will just go round in circles.0 -
For me, the way LA bullied the comeback 2.0. is much worse than any doping he could be exposed.
The Catlin joke, the UCI bending it's own rules to let him ride the TdU to the "I'm riding for free" when he was in fact getting payed by Astana.
The "faded jerseys" at the Giro, the Tour disaster with Contador, the rip of Astana while creating Radio Shack, and for me, the worse of it all, is that he holds the Livestrong as a shield for any critic. I really, really don't like that at all.
I don't mind the doping part that much, I'm fairly sure all who are successful in cycling are on it more or less, you must be unlucky to get caught.
But no other cyclist have created an empire around them self like LA has, and creating a questionable charity, murking the livestrong.org and .com sides.
I'm ashamed I used to be a fan of him.0 -
Arkibal: This will cheer you up.
Floyd tells all to Paul Kimmage.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/magazine/article524615.ece
Out tomorrow."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:Arkibal: This will cheer you up.
Floyd tells all to Paul Kimmage.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/magazine/article524615.ece
Out tomorrow.
Thanks!
I trust you will quote the best parts?0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:Arkibal: This will cheer you up.
Floyd tells all to Paul Kimmage.
But before anyone gets all worked up, it's about Floyd rather than about Lance.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
