Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped
Comments
-
Ah - now you've changed it ... you've put the "I think" in front - where as before you were stating it as fact it is now just your opinion ... you're wrong - but you're entitled to be wrong ...rayjay wrote:No you changed it. I think Armstrong was the greatest tour rider. You can't correct it.
I do have a standard - it's not high - I'm just requiring riders not to cheat - does it matter if I, just one person, isn't interested? No, not really - it mattered not before and it certainly doesn't matter now ...rayjay wrote:How many races do you wish had not happened because of drugged riders? There's not really much cycling left for you to watch if that's you standard.
There's plenty of cycling left - it's not all about the professional competitors/cheaters ...
Excellent - please do remember me to him - and remind him that he owes me one chasm just behind me next time I'm in a solo breakaway ...rayjay wrote:Thanks for the pentagram advice. I'll give you a shout out to Satan later once we sorted the granny business out.
0 -
Slowbike My exact words ,,, "Armstrong is the greatest tour ride of all time. He was the best climber. He's ITT was pretty dam good and his skill on a bike was superb etc etc . That's my opinion and nothing else. I don't see a UCI stamp on my quote You was a bit quick to jump in there. Never mind. What exactly is cheating? Does a team like Sky who have a massive budget and endless resources have a big advantage over a smaller team with less resources? I mean some guy in the states tested positive in a sportive
I understand your view and your ethics and I wish you good luck and good cycling ...cheers
Devil worship has been cancelled due to Masterchef, then put the kids to bed and then watch Borgen on the I player.0 -
Ah - that's ok then - counts for as much as mine!rayjay wrote:That's my opinion and nothing else.
You mean you don't know ... ?!rayjay wrote:What exactly is cheating?
They have the advantage in being able to employ the "best" people for the job - but ultimately it comes down to the rider - so yes, they have an advantage, but it's not the be all and end all - otherwise we may as well just forget the action and just take it to an auction on who wants to bid the most for a "win"rayjay wrote:Does a team like Sky who have a massive budget and endless resources have a big advantage over a smaller team with less resources?
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of ppl tested positive for race banned substances - it's my understanding that banned substances are used in medication - I certainly wouldn't not take prescribed medication just so I could enter a sportive - a race is different though ..rayjay wrote:I mean some guy in the states tested positive in a sportive
That's all we all need - good cycling ... none of this "cheating" crap - so stop drafting me ...rayjay wrote:I understand your view and your ethics and I wish you good luck and good cycling ...cheers
Your lord and master is not patient ....rayjay wrote:Devil worship has been cancelled due to Masterchef, then put the kids to bed and then watch Borgen on the I player.0 -
rayjay wrote:Armstrong is the greatest tour ride of all time.
I say deadpan things like this as well sometimes, to cycling buddies when we're discussing cyclists, it usually serves its purpose to move the conversation into talking rubbish for fun with replies like "oh yeah, he was soooooo amazing".0 -
Cheat: definition act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage.
Maurice Garin, now he cheated ...
And good old Greg? Did he act unfairly to get an advantage by using different equipment?
Did Armstrong 'gain an advantage' compared to his competitors, his true competitors? History tells us no ...0 -
Good points Crankbrother. Did Contador cheat when Schleck's chain slipped off and he got that exact winning margin ? No one waited for Evans when he had mech fail's. At least the doped riders of that time waited for each other. I would say that say's something about the respect they had for each other. Mind you Pantani had no respect
Armstrong he attacked him hard and early at every chance.0 -
mfin wrote:rayjay wrote:Armstrong is the greatest tour ride of all time.[/quote]
I say deadpan things like this as well sometimes, to cycling buddies when we're discussing cyclists, it usually serves its purpose to move the conversation into talking rubbish for fun with replies like "oh yeah, he was soooooo amazing".
Quite apart from the fact he is not. Check the records, he has not won any Tours. 8)0 -
rayjay wrote:Good points Crankbrother.
Not really.
Most people understand that any definition of cheating in sport must be made in the context of the rules of that sport. That informs a decision as to what constitutes gaining an unfair advantage.
So for example Sky's budget and LeMond's use of aero equipment wouldn't fall under most people's definition of cheating, even though they provide an advantage. They aren't cheating any more than the act of training hard would be cheating.
Most people also understand that there is a difference between 'cheating' and breaking a rule. So for example a footballer fouling another player may be breaking the rules but wouldn't typically be considered cheating. Similarly Froome's illegal feed via Porte at this year's TDF broke the rules but wouldn't be considered 'cheating' by most people.
Contabdor attacking when Schleck's chain came off wouldn't be considered cheating either - at worst, and this depends on your POV, it would be considered unsporting.
The fact that other riders, maybe even all riders where also using EPO and conspired (for want of a better word) to uphold the Omerta doesn't make it any less cheating.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Aaaaaand 1 or 2 days before he was going to have to appear in court and testify under oath....he settles another lawsuit
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/ ... 0-14-42-500 -
Richmond Racer wrote:Aaaaaand 1 or 2 days before he was going to have to appear in court and testify under oath....he settles another lawsuit
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/ ... 0-14-42-50
Ha, what a surprise. Now he can still say "I have never been found guilty of any wrongdoing" and , In a sense, be telling the truth. Just like the "I have never tested positive, ergo I have never doped" chestnut.0 -
But he's admitted to plenty of wrongdoing.mike6 wrote:
Ha, what a surprise. Now he can still say "I have never been found guilty of any wrongdoing" and , In a sense, be telling the truth. Just like the "I have never tested positive, ergo I have never doped" chestnut.
It's hardly unusual. Court dates are often just seen as a deadline to reach an argeementTwitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
But he's admitted to plenty of wrongdoing.mike6 wrote:
Ha, what a surprise. Now he can still say "I have never been found guilty of any wrongdoing" and , In a sense, be telling the truth. Just like the "I have never tested positive, ergo I have never doped" chestnut.
It's hardly unusual. Court dates are often just seen as a deadline to reach an argeement
^This. 90% of lawsuits in the US never make it to trial but are settled out of court.0 -
mike6 wrote:mfin wrote:rayjay wrote:Armstrong is the greatest tour ride of all time.[/quote]
I say deadpan things like this as well sometimes, to cycling buddies when we're discussing cyclists, it usually serves its purpose to move the conversation into talking rubbish for fun with replies like "oh yeah, he was soooooo amazing".
Quite apart from the fact he is not. Check the records, he has not won any Tours. 8)
Records don't count for Sh%t . IMO he was the best , simple.0 -
TailWindHome wrote:rayjay wrote:Good points Crankbrother.
Not really.
Most people understand that any definition of cheating in sport must be made in the context of the rules of that sport. That informs a decision as to what constitutes gaining an unfair advantage.
So for example Sky's budget and LeMond's use of aero equipment wouldn't fall under most people's definition of cheating, even though they provide an advantage. They aren't cheating any more than the act of training hard would be cheating.
Most people also understand that there is a difference between 'cheating' and breaking a rule. So for example a footballer fouling another player may be breaking the rules but wouldn't typically be considered cheating. Similarly Froome's illegal feed via Porte at this year's TDF broke the rules but wouldn't be considered 'cheating' by most people.
Contabdor attacking when Schleck's chain came off wouldn't be considered cheating either - at worst, and this depends on your POV, it would be considered unsporting.
The fact that other riders, maybe even all riders where also using EPO and conspired (for want of a better word) to uphold the Omerta doesn't make it any less cheating.
Well if everyone is using EPO and cheating then who is cheating? What about the guy who came 15th who took EPO ,
what about the guy who came 25th who took EPO, why is Armstrong more of a cheat than them ? Is it because he won and he was the best rider of his era or was it because he shouted at his masseur?0 -
-
I really cannot be bothered to read the thousands of posts, most of which have been superseded by news.RichN95 wrote:
All of them.rayjay wrote:
Well if everyone is using EPO and cheating then who is cheating?
This really isn't hard to understand.
LA broke the rules.
Others may have, or probably did as well. Depends on who you believe.
He got caught therefore takes the blame for everyone. If he was the only one, then that is just deserts. If he was one of many then that's tough.
Some people who didn't cheat willl feel aggrieved that they didn't get the results or money they deserved.
Some who cheated will make a lot of noise despite their guilt.
As no retrospective comprehensive testing is possible all previous results are suspicious.
The governing body may have colluded, acquiesced or been negligent or foolish.
Bottom line is the sport has been a farce and it is a shame that there was not a level playing field so we can properly admire the many great efforts.
One wonders how many other sports and results have had similar problems, but kept them under a bushel.0 -
He was nothing special but had probably developed the best drugs that not even Telekom could match.rayjay wrote:
why is Armstrong more of a cheat than them ? Is it because he won and he was the best rider of his era
He had the money to stay in front of the developing drug trade.
He had a foundation of doctors and research chemists to keep him in front to the benefit of the foundation.
Everybody else was still buying "Off the Shelf" which was probably made in Germany. (ie Willy Voet)Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720 -
I don't know how to feel about rayjay being a Borgen watcher. I like that show.Correlation is not causation.0
-
Above The Cows wrote:I don't know how to feel about rayjay being a Borgen watcher. I like that show.
Good show, isn't it.
Not on level with the first season of Forbrydelsen and Broen (yep, the one with the epic intro song), though.0 -
rayjay wrote:Records don't count for Sh%t . IMO he was the best , simple.
Do you know, he really was quite super wasn’t he? The way he pedalled that bike past everyone else really was something special. I heard he would sometimes sleep with his bike so he didn’t have to waste time finding it when going out in the morning, now that is dedication. What a guy, what a swell guy. A true hero, perhaps the ultimate example.0 -
Aussie perspective here: http://www.theroar.com.au/category/cycling/'Performance analysis and Froome not being clean was a media driven story. I haven’t heard one guy in the peloton say a negative thing about Froome, and I haven’t heard a single person in the peloton suggest Froome isn’t clean.' TSP0
-
mfin wrote:rayjay wrote:Records don't count for Sh%t . IMO he was the best , simple.
Do you know, he really was quite super wasn’t he? The way he pedalled that bike past everyone else really was something special. I heard he would sometimes sleep with his bike so he didn’t have to waste time finding it when going out in the morning, now that is dedication. What a guy, what a swell guy. A true hero, perhaps the ultimate example.
Well in my opinion, and the records prove it, he is not even in the top 10. So poo to you, with knobs on. 0 -
ThomThom wrote:Above The Cows wrote:I don't know how to feel about rayjay being a Borgen watcher. I like that show.
Good show, isn't it.
Not on level with the first season of Forbrydelsen and Broen (yep, the one with the epic intro song), though.
It is a good show, although I'm not sure anything will ever beat the first series of Forbrydelsen, that was truly EPIC. There's a second series of Broen correct?Correlation is not causation.0 -
deejay you don't know the difference and to what advantage is gained by an individual rider over another taking PED's.
Armstrong may well respond to EPO really well but perhaps Basso responds even better but is just not as good a rider as Armstrong. Did you see what Ulrich was taking? Clutching at straws IMO . Your right deejay, I'm sure you could drop Armstrong on a club run, Ulrich ,Basso, Vino, Pantani couldn't most of the time. Yeah Armstrong was just ordinary Tell me deejay who his an exceptional rider?
Borgen 3 , very good so far and living up to expectations.0 -
Well given that pre cancer, Armstrong's Tour record was rode four, abandoned three, finished 36th, it's a fairly safe bet to assume he was a pretty exceptional responder."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0
-
Above The Cows wrote:ThomThom wrote:Above The Cows wrote:I don't know how to feel about rayjay being a Borgen watcher. I like that show.
Good show, isn't it.
Not on level with the first season of Forbrydelsen and Broen (yep, the one with the epic intro song), though.
It is a good show, although I'm not sure anything will ever beat the first series of Forbrydelsen, that was truly EPIC. There's a second series of Broen correct?
I believe there is and I also thought that it was being filmed last winter so I was expecting it to be the Beeb shortly. All scando drama is compulsory vioewing in the Peril houselhold. I loved the Bridge, absolutely superb.0 -
Blazing Saddles wrote:Well given that pre cancer, Armstrong's Tour record was rode four, abandoned three, finished 36th, it's a fairly safe bet to assume he was a pretty exceptional responder.
So we are to assume anyone with a similar TdF track record who suddenly hits form and runs previously consistent GT contenders ragged can only have done so with PEDs? Or are you saying that is not always the case?0 -
That's a fairly large assumption. The first two abandons were pre-planned (he was only 21/22) and for the third he had cancer. As for the 36th in 1995, it should be noted that he was racing against riders on full blown doping programs, which he obviously didn't have yet, and he was primarily interested in stages rather than GC.Blazing Saddles wrote:Well given that pre cancer, Armstrong's Tour record was rode four, abandoned three, finished 36th, it's a fairly safe bet to assume he was a pretty exceptional responder.
We really don't know what his (or anyone else's) natural standard was.Twitter: @RichN950
