Armstrong interview

greasedscotsman

I always thought a chipper was a midweek race of very little importance, maybe seen as training, maybe a league event. But afterwards you went to the chippie for some, err, chips! Hence, chipper!

*edit*
Ahh, I see it's being explained here!

viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12854104

ddraver

greasedscotsman wrote:

I always thought a chipper was a midweek race of very little importance, maybe seen as training, maybe a league event. But afterwards you went to the chippie for some, err, chips! Hence, chipper!

*edit*
Ahh, I see it's being explained here!

viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12854104

That's how it's started, but then it became more derogatory, as in a race that was "below you", then for some reason it became cool to call everything a chipper on here...

Put another way - It was great watching Boonen at "non chipper" P-R, but it was still pretty dull for the last hour. However the "chipper" Het Neuwsblad was a damn sight more fun to watch, so who cares if it's a chipper or not?! All of us would be ecstatic if we were even able to finish it let alone win it.

inkyfingers

ddraver wrote:

greasedscotsman wrote:

I always thought a chipper was a midweek race of very little importance, maybe seen as training, maybe a league event. But afterwards you went to the chippie for some, err, chips! Hence, chipper!

*edit*
Ahh, I see it's being explained here!

viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12854104

That's how it's started, but then it became more derogatory, as in a race that was "below you", then for some reason it became cool to call everything a chipper on here...

Put another way - It was great watching Boonen at "non chipper" P-R, but it was still pretty dull for the last hour. However the "chipper" Het Neuwsblad was a damn sight more fun to watch, so who cares if it's a chipper or not?! All of us would be ecstatic if we were even able to finish it let alone win it.

I don't really want to get into this debate, but I wouldn't call Het Nieuwsblad a chipper, the list of winners from the last 15 years is pretty much a who's who of top classics riders. KBK on the other hand...

iainf72

inkyfingers wrote:

I don't really want to get into this debate, but I wouldn't call Het Nieuwsblad a chipper, the list of winners from the last 15 years is pretty much a who's who of top classics riders. KBK on the other hand...

Quite right. HN is right at the top of my 2nd tier in the world renowned Iainf72 Chipper Chart.

KBK is a fully fledged frite'r

inkyfingers

iainf72 wrote:

inkyfingers wrote:

I don't really want to get into this debate, but I wouldn't call Het Nieuwsblad a chipper, the list of winners from the last 15 years is pretty much a who's who of top classics riders. KBK on the other hand...

Quite right. HN is right at the top of my 2nd tier in the world renowned Iainf72 Chipper Chart.

KBK is a fully fledged frite'r

Before I posted I checked on the laminated copy of your chart which I have on my wall.

dennisn

Well, chipper or not I can't think of any past winners of Olympic Gold who's careers suffered or were hurt by it, let alone anyone who became poorer after winning it.

cycling5280

The global witch hunt has been going on for a decade now. He's good but no one is that good to hide every single piece of evidence that could possibly tie him to doping. It's hard to believe he raced clean given all those guys that got caught doping during his wins but I have to given him the clean status until he's truly proven guilty. I don't blame Armstrong for the way he's now responding because if he's clean it has got to be old and frustrating by now. www.1kmtogo.blogspot.com

TMR

cycling5280 wrote:

The global witch hunt has been going on for a decade now. He's good but no one is that good to hide every single piece of evidence that could possibly tie him to doping. It's hard to believe he raced clean given all those guys that got caught doping during his wins but I have to given him the clean status until he's truly proven guilty. I don't blame Armstrong for the way he's now responding because if he's clean it has got to be old and frustrating by now. http://www.1kmtogo.blogspot.com

Armstrong beat the best athletes in the World during 7 TdFs, several of whom were caught doping. Either their doping program sucked balls, and/or Armstrong was doping as well.

cycling5280

The Mad Rapper wrote:

cycling5280 wrote:

The global witch hunt has been going on for a decade now. He's good but no one is that good to hide every single piece of evidence that could possibly tie him to doping. It's hard to believe he raced clean given all those guys that got caught doping during his wins but I have to given him the clean status until he's truly proven guilty. I don't blame Armstrong for the way he's now responding because if he's clean it has got to be old and frustrating by now. http://www.1kmtogo.blogspot.com

Armstrong beat the best athletes in the World during 7 TdFs, several of whom were caught doping. Either their doping program sucked balls, and/or Armstrong was doping as well.

I agree it's hard to believe he didn't dope but doping program sucked? I don't think so if others got caught. I'm pretty sure the French tried to nail Lance for doping every single day he stepped foot in France and everyday he put on the yellow jersey. He was there every summer for 7 years ready to race. Maybe he raced clean?

BikingBernie

cycling5280 wrote:

The global witch hunt has been going on for a decade now. He's good but no one is that good to hide every single piece of evidence that could possibly tie him to doping.

Oh dear, here we go again. The attempts to bring Armstrong to justice were / are not a 'witch hunt'. The reason Armstrong's acolytes like to use the term witch-hunt' is that witches don't exist. However, there is overwhelming evidence that Armstrong was doped to the gills, so much so that to argue he was clean is, to all intents and purposes, irrational. This evidence includes testimony from seemingly half of the people he has ever raced with, from Stephanie McIllvain to Tyler Hamilton to Stephen Swart:

According to SI, Swart “describes the Texan as the driving force behind some of the team members deciding to use the banned blood booster EPO. “He was the instigator,” Swart tells SI. “It was his words that pushed us toward doing it.” This fits with what Landis had already said, that Armstrong encouraged the PED use on his teams.

http://larrybrownsports.com/cycling/ste ... ping/48084

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/m ... index.html

http://cyclingintro2.webs.com/CyclingIntro6.pdf

http://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/u ... n-2011.pdf

viewtopic.php?p=16193046

cycling5280 wrote:

I have to given him the clean status until he's truly proven guilty.

Ah, now the old equivocation tactic. Armstrong is as guilty as could be, in that he did actually dope. However, it is a common tactic of Armstrong fans to imply that the failure of the UCI to sanction him somehow 'proves' that the alternative meaning of the term 'innocent', that is he did not actually dope, is also true. This is a logical fallacy.

That he hasn't been held to account for that is in no small part due to the undetectable nature of the methods he adopted, with autologous blood doping been undetectable right through the time he was 'winning', the fact the UCI were willing to protect him as their icon of 'global cycling' and so forth.

cycling5280 wrote:

I'm pretty sure the French tried to nail Lance for doping every single day he stepped foot in France and everyday he put on the yellow jersey. He was there every summer for 7 years ready to race.

And now we have the 'anti-French xenophobia' angle that Armstrong has so effectively exploited and encouraged for so many years. When you say The French'? do you actually mean the ASO? Or perhaps the LNDD, whose job it is to catch dopers? (That is, when the UCI does not prevent them from even taking samples.) If so why no say so, unless your real aim is to play on the sort of anti-French xenophobia that is found in the 'Anglo-Saxon' world, in particular the USA and especially in Armstrong's home state?

Of course, at the same time as Armstrong's disciples play the xenophobia card they also like to try argue that Armstrong 'saved' the Tour and that he was the ASO's biggest money spinner - which is no doubt why they wanted to 'kill the goose that laid the golden eggs'. And what the ASO really needed after the Festina scandal was more drug scandals. True enough, there was a period when the ASO, or rather Patrice Clerc, seemed to believe that seriously challenging doping in the Tour was the best way to secure its long term future. However, that didn't lay well with the UCI who ensured that he was sacked in advance of Armstrong's comeback, so allowing them to ensure that nothing 'embarrassing' would happen.

The last of three shoes fell about an hour after the AFLD's invitation hit the wires. L'Equipe published official word that ASO director Patrice Clerc had been fired. The sports conglomerate owns the Tour, numerous other cycling races and sporting events, and L'Equipe itself.

"It's something I shouldn't comment on," McQuaid told ESPN.com Wednesday. "It's an internal Amaury decision. All I would say [to Clerc] is 'goodbye,' and you can read between the lines if you like."

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/c ... id=3621096

cycling5280 wrote:

Maybe he raced clean?

And now the punch line, as though the irrational nonsense and xenophobia that went before actually casts doubt on Armstrong's guilt. :roll:

TheBigBean

BikingBernie - I think people must have great fun winding you up. Cycling5280 has two posts, so is either (i) somone astroturfing (ii) someone on this forum creating a new user simply to wind you up (iii) a sudden new entry to the Armstrong discussion that has appeared after all these years. Only the last one merits much response, and that can be covered in four words: 1999 EPO failed tests.

shinyhelmut

cycling5280 wrote:

Maybe he raced clean?

Maybe.

Maybe I'll win this year's Hawaii Ironman. The odds are about the same.

prawny

ShinyHelmut wrote:

cycling5280 wrote:

Maybe he raced clean?

Maybe.

Maybe I'll win this year's Hawaii Ironman. The odds are about the same.

Pfft, if he's entered the Ironman there's more chance of him winning it than being clean.

TBF even if he hasn't entered it I'd still give longer odds on him being clean.

shinyhelmut

He still has to qualify. He's racing Ironman France in Nice (which to be honest is a bit of a chipper) in July which, along with his 1/2 IM results will be enough to qualify.

He'll be there and I'm looking forward to seeing how he does.

rick_chasey

ShinyHelmut wrote:

He still has to qualify. He's racing Ironman France in Nice (which to be honest is a bit of a chipper)

LeicesterLad

Rick Chasey wrote:

ShinyHelmut wrote:

He still has to qualify. He's racing Ironman France in Nice (which to be honest is a bit of a chipper)

I thought all Ironman, triathalon and the like were Chippers?

rick_chasey

LeicesterLad wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

ShinyHelmut wrote:

He still has to qualify. He's racing Ironman France in Nice (which to be honest is a bit of a chipper)

I thought all Ironman, triathalon and the like were Chippers?

It's certainly not a bike ride.

shinyhelmut

Do one then come back and say that

(we're talking ironman of course, other triathlons are all chippers)

LeicesterLad

ShinyHelmut wrote:

Do one then come back and say that

(we're talking ironman of course, other triathlons are all chippers)

Yeah, i wouldn't last 5 minutes. Especially with the swimming. :oops:

rick_chasey

ShinyHelmut wrote:

Do one then come back and say that

(we're talking ironman of course, other triathlons are all chippers)

Ironman is, for me, literally frighteningly difficult.

shinyhelmut

To be honest just getting round an IM is just a case of pacing yourself well and not getting divorced from the excessive training in the preceding months I have a very understanding wife!

To actually race an IM is another matter entirely, 112 miles at 26mph followed by a 2.42 marathon is just plain crazy.

Anyhow back to the subject....

inkyfingers

I thought you might like to know that I have taken the word chipper into my everyday vocabulary, forwarded an order to a colleague at work and described it as a chipper.

LeicesterLad

inkyfingers wrote:

I thought you might like to know that I have taken the word chipper into my everyday vocabulary, forwarded an order to a colleague at work and described it as a chipper.

I too have done this, yesterday I informed my Fiance that her mother was 'a chipper'.

shinyhelmut

LeicesterLad wrote:

inkyfingers wrote:

I thought you might like to know that I have taken the word chipper into my everyday vocabulary, forwarded an order to a colleague at work and described it as a chipper.

I too have done this, yesterday I informed my Fiance that her mother was 'a chipper'.

What, that you'd do your mother-in-law (to be) then go for chips afterwards?

inkyfingers

LeicesterLad wrote:

inkyfingers wrote:

I thought you might like to know that I have taken the word chipper into my everyday vocabulary, forwarded an order to a colleague at work and described it as a chipper.

I too have done this, yesterday I informed my Fiance that her mother was 'a chipper'.

I'm surprised she didn't slap you.

LeicesterLad

What, that you'd do your mother-in-law (to be) then go for chips afterwards

If there was a 'vomit' smiley...

inkyfingers wrote:

LeicesterLad wrote:

inkyfingers wrote:

I thought you might like to know that I have taken the word chipper into my everyday vocabulary, forwarded an order to a colleague at work and described it as a chipper.

I too have done this, yesterday I informed my Fiance that her mother was 'a chipper'.

I'm surprised she didn't slap you.

She isn't familiar with the phrase 'chipper'. Otherwise she would have.

shinyhelmut

Best hope she doesn't find this forum then....

LeicesterLad

ShinyHelmut wrote:

Best hope she doesn't find this forum then....

The only time she's ever mentioned this forum was when she caught me on the 'Girls in knitwear' thread. Thinking of that night still sends chills down my spine...

dennisn

ShinyHelmut wrote:

To be honest just getting round an IM is just a case of pacing yourself well and not getting divorced from the excessive training in the preceding months I have a very understanding wife!

To actually race an IM is another matter entirely, 112 miles at 26mph followed by a 2.42 marathon is just plain crazy.
/quote]

I'm not so sure. You wake up that morning, in your luxury hotel. Go out and pound yourself for a day. Go back to your luxury hotel and get a massage. Chow down at your luxury hotel. Go to sleep at your luxury hotel in your luxury bed. Sleep till noon and spend the rest of the next day sitting, in the shade, on the beach, at your luxury hotel.I can come up with more than a few things tougher than that.

shinyhelmut

I can't argue with than logic, I guess Paris Roubaix isn't that tough either then?