Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped
Comments
-
disgruntledgoat wrote:Richmond Racer wrote:frenchfighter wrote:I think people may be respecting Millar a lot more now. Was able to tackle the issue, come back and create a great career for himself. Not afraid to speak out. Strong character to do that. Braveheart; Scottish warrior blood, hit em with the Claymore sword.
FF, are you going to be breaking into a rousing chorus of 'Flower of Scotland' soon?
Especially funny as Millar is about as Scottish as me (IE lived there for a bit).
It is about the blood. Strong stuff.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Johan is gonzo.
Race Radio @TheRaceRadio
Johan Bruyneel has been fired from RSNT. Story to come shortly0 -
Oh my:
Twice a fourth-place Tour de France finisher since then, Van Den Broeck continues to praise Armstrong. "Regarding training and commitment, he's still a role model to me. The way in which he prepared for the Tour was impressive," the Belgian said, before criticising the relative immunity of those who testified against the cancer survivor.
"The fact that Armstrong is treated differently than the witnesses is not fair in my opinion. They emphasize their regrets, but they've earned a lot of money during their careers. It's a bit lame I think."Contador is the Greatest0 -
Timoid. wrote:dennisn wrote:
I think the key words in your post are "Sure it was their choice". I also don't recall hearing anyone say "...but mom, he twisted my arm and made me do it". We are talking about grown men here who did all this on a strictly voluntary basis. They all had a choice. In the end it was not a good choice that they made. "forced?" I think not.frenchfighter wrote:Here you go...
I feel very sorry for those young riders who were intimidated into taking the drugs. Sure it was their choice, but damn those who forced them.
It's not much of a choice though is it?
No it's not. Then again neither are the choices between political candidates. Many, many people don't get a whole lot of choices in life. They play the cards they are dealt as best they can. If you dream of being a pro cyclist and find that attaining that dream involves shady dealings then YOU have a choice to make. No one is tying you down to a table and waterboarding you until you comply and take the injections. As for dreams, everyone has them and many get shattered on a daily basis and these people move on. People in the military lose body parts in war, which isn't all that great for your dreams, yet many are able to put it behind them and move on with life.
Your wanna be cyclists are NO different. They will get over the disappointment of not becoming a pro if they needed to take drugs and at least have some comfort in the fact that they made the right choice. Then they move on with their lives.0 -
"Today riders are again paying the price for what went wrong six or seven years ago. That's not fair. Lance has ensured that the early years of my career were wasted years. I hope that this time is finally behind us. It will not happen immediately, it takes time but it should happen.”
-Fabu in full
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report- ... -armstrong
Hushovd. Normally outspoken about doping.
http://www.procycling.no/article3491728.eceContador is the Greatest0 -
dennisn wrote:Timoid. wrote:dennisn wrote:
I think the key words in your post are "Sure it was their choice". I also don't recall hearing anyone say "...but mom, he twisted my arm and made me do it". We are talking about grown men here who did all this on a strictly voluntary basis. They all had a choice. In the end it was not a good choice that they made. "forced?" I think not.frenchfighter wrote:Here you go...
I feel very sorry for those young riders who were intimidated into taking the drugs. Sure it was their choice, but damn those who forced them.
It's not much of a choice though is it?
No it's not. Then again neither are the choices between political candidates. Many, many people don't get a whole lot of choices in life. They play the cards they are dealt as best they can. If you dream of being a pro cyclist and find that attaining that dream involves shady dealings then YOU have a choice to make. No one is tying you down to a table and waterboarding you until you comply and take the injections. As for dreams, everyone has them and many get shattered on a daily basis and these people move on. People in the military lose body parts in war, which isn't all that great for your dreams, yet many are able to put it behind them and move on with life.
Your wanna be cyclists are NO different. They will get over the disappointment of not becoming a pro if they needed to take drugs and at least have some comfort in the fact that they made the right choice. Then they move on with their lives.
Exactly this. Saddest thing about all this is that if I had a child who was a talented cyclist, I would do everything in my power to dissuade them from having a go as a professional.0 -
Lichtblick wrote:Wiki was changed earlier, allegedly (......cheated to win seven titles, etc.). If that was true, it's changed back again. :roll:
Bruyneel. Is he still going to contest this, I wonder.
FBI may re-open their case in view of WASDA file. Is Perjury a jailable offence in USA?
Quick internet search says up to 5 years of eating mainly porridge and not dropping the soap.0 -
The Cancellara stuff is funny. Where's he going, back to Riis?0
-
MrTapir wrote:Lichtblick wrote:Wiki was changed earlier, allegedly (......cheated to win seven titles, etc.). If that was true, it's changed back again. :roll:
Bruyneel. Is he still going to contest this, I wonder.
FBI may re-open their case in view of WASDA file. Is Perjury a jailable offence in USA?
Quick internet search says up to 5 years of eating mainly porridge and not dropping the soap.
Forget perjury, if they prove he spent USPS funds on drugs he's off for a long time.0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Oh my:
Twice a fourth-place Tour de France finisher since then, Van Den Broeck continues to praise Armstrong. "Regarding training and commitment, he's still a role model to me. The way in which he prepared for the Tour was impressive," the Belgian said, before criticising the relative immunity of those who testified against the cancer survivor.
"The fact that Armstrong is treated differently than the witnesses is not fair in my opinion. They emphasize their regrets, but they've earned a lot of money during their careers. It's a bit lame I think."
I know - you can but shake your head in despair.0 -
meagain wrote:As for
"As someone (and I may be doing you a disservice here) who has never been anywhere near the level of a pro sports star and has no idea of the singlemindedness and dedication that involves you have absolutely no idea what it would be like to be faced with the thought of giving up your dreams.
User avatar
Timoid."
Pro sports is only one of many professions where one has to decide whether to sacrifice ones dreams or ones moral beliefs and principles. Pro cyclists may not in general be overly endowed with intelligence but I'm sure they understood the choice before them - cheat and succeed or ...not. Some give up their dreams, many just "compromise" enough to feed their kids. it's called life.
What other professions? And don't say banking. The majority of bankers are decent honest people.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
"Now I understand how US Postal was able to put eight or nine riders in the front on a mountain stage and drop all the others. In the 'golden years' it was all very simple, it was 'training and loading, training and loading. 'Loading', that's the term the riders use when they talk about doping. Nowadays, we work differently, more professionally, with more attention to detail. That's the cycling I believe in, not 'training and loading'.
My CSC brand Irony meter (2008 Version) is going crazy"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
afx237vi wrote:The Cancellara stuff is funny. Where's he going, back to Riis?
Christ, from frying pan into the fire..0 -
So when Hushovd said "I've never seen doping in cycling" (I think about the time he won the World Championshipp RR), you think he was talking tongue-in-cheek?frenchfighter wrote:Hushovd. Normally outspoken about doping.0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:Richmond Racer wrote:frenchfighter wrote:I think people may be respecting Millar a lot more now. Was able to tackle the issue, come back and create a great career for himself. Not afraid to speak out. Strong character to do that. Braveheart; Scottish warrior blood, hit em with the Claymore sword.
FF, are you going to be breaking into a rousing chorus of 'Flower of Scotland' soon?
Especially funny as Millar is about as Scottish as me (IE lived there for a bit).
Ah, reminds me of 'you're about as Scottish as a baguette...'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akhgXpHRHGY0 -
Van Den Broeck rode for Postal and Discovery, so maybe it's to be expected that he shows some allegiance (or that, he was indoctrinated).rickyrider wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Oh my:
Twice a fourth-place Tour de France finisher since then, Van Den Broeck continues to praise Armstrong. "Regarding training and commitment, he's still a role model to me. The way in which he prepared for the Tour was impressive," the Belgian said, before criticising the relative immunity of those who testified against the cancer survivor.
"The fact that Armstrong is treated differently than the witnesses is not fair in my opinion. They emphasize their regrets, but they've earned a lot of money during their careers. It's a bit lame I think."
I know - you can but shake your head in despair.0 -
"We cannot be indifferent to what USADA has unmasked this week, it's a damning picture that's been drawn," Prudhomme said.
"What we want is that there is no winner," Prudhomme said of the seven years between 1999 and 2005 when Armstrong was victorious in the gruelling annual race.
"It's one the difficulties that the current anti-doping battle has built for itself. Cycling, with the UCI (International Cycling Union governing body) as the lead in this battle, have been pioneers," said Prudhomme.
"The biological passport, the number of tests and the increasingly efficient targetting means cheats are caught faster. We must continue down this route. There's no other way possible."Contador is the Greatest0 -
knedlicky wrote:
So when Hushovd said "I've never seen doping in cycling" (I think about the time he won the World Championshipp RR), you think he was talking tongue-in-cheek?frenchfighter wrote:Hushovd. Normally outspoken about doping.
Yeah my mistake.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Crawlinguphills wrote:dennisn wrote:Timoid. wrote:dennisn wrote:
I think the key words in your post are "Sure it was their choice". I also don't recall hearing anyone say "...but mom, he twisted my arm and made me do it". We are talking about grown men here who did all this on a strictly voluntary basis. They all had a choice. In the end it was not a good choice that they made. "forced?" I think not.frenchfighter wrote:Here you go...
I feel very sorry for those young riders who were intimidated into taking the drugs. Sure it was their choice, but damn those who forced them.
It's not much of a choice though is it?
No it's not. Then again neither are the choices between political candidates. Many, many people don't get a whole lot of choices in life. They play the cards they are dealt as best they can. If you dream of being a pro cyclist and find that attaining that dream involves shady dealings then YOU have a choice to make. No one is tying you down to a table and waterboarding you until you comply and take the injections. As for dreams, everyone has them and many get shattered on a daily basis and these people move on. People in the military lose body parts in war, which isn't all that great for your dreams, yet many are able to put it behind them and move on with life.
Your wanna be cyclists are NO different. They will get over the disappointment of not becoming a pro if they needed to take drugs and at least have some comfort in the fact that they made the right choice. Then they move on with their lives.
Exactly this. Saddest thing about all this is that if I had a child who was a talented cyclist, I would do everything in my power to dissuade them from having a go as a professional.
Still, you should support your children in their dreams, All you can do is teach them right from wrong and HOPE they make good decisions in life. I don't think that there is anything inherently wrong with pro cycling. It's simply bike racing on a very high level.
It's not bad in and of itself but PEOPLE in it can run the gamut of everything from very bad to very good. Nothing wrong with dreaming of a pro cycling career. It's a good sport, always has been.0 -
The famous Milgram Experiment showed how skewed people's values get when given direct orders in stressful situations. In that experiment a large proportion of the subjects of the experiment ended up giving what they believed could be lethal electric shocks: it seems that people's innate tendency to obedience over-rode their basic moral principles. People trying to keep and do a good job but being subjected to demands by a forceful superior are likely to exhibit a similar failure of perspective, I'd suspect. And, as the Milgram Experiment showed, once you've crossed that line, the tendency is to keep going with the course of action, even when you originally could not have imagined yourself doing so.Crawlinguphills wrote:I am also baffled by this argument they keep coming out with 'I know that had I competed clean I was never going to be successful'.0 -
I truly cannot answer what choice I would have made in the same circumstances. If we're really honest I'm sure that most of us cant be 100% certain.0
-
Mainstream press has got hold of that thread from yesterday re the challenges for British Cycling and Team Sky:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/others ... -fans.html
The Telegraph just kicking Murdoch? How long until the pick up the Yates, Barry, Possini, Rogers, Julich angles...0 -
Snorebens wrote:Mainstream press has got hold of that thread from yesterday re the challenges for British Cycling and Team Sky:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/others ... -fans.html
The Telegraph just kicking Murdoch? How long until the pick up the Yates, Barry, Possini, Rogers, Julich angles...
Well, Murdoch's own press this morning - Times - devoted a whole article to the challenge facing Sky. Certainly refered to Yates, Barry and Rogers (possibly Julich too, and possibly Possini)0 -
Rogers, Possoni, Barry - all came from HTC. Surely questions need to be asked of Cav, Eisel, Sivtsov, Wiggins, Pate, Lofkvist, Boasson Hagen.0
-
dennisn wrote:Still, you should support your children in their dreams, All you can do is teach them right from wrong and HOPE they make good decisions in life. I don't think that there is anything inherently wrong with pro cycling. It's simply bike racing on a very high level.
It's not bad in and of itself but PEOPLE in it can run the gamut of everything from very bad to very good. Nothing wrong with dreaming of a pro cycling career. It's a good sport, always has been.
DENNISN IN FORUM POST WHICH ACTUALLY MAKES COHERENT SENSE SHOCKER0 -
briantrumpet wrote:
The famous Milgram Experiment showed how skewed people's values get when given direct orders in stressful situations. In that experiment a large proportion of the subjects of the experiment ended up giving what they believed could be lethal electric shocks: it seems that people's innate tendency to obedience over-rode their basic moral principles. People trying to keep and do a good job but being subjected to demands by a forceful superior are likely to exhibit a similar failure of perspective, I'd suspect. And, as the Milgram Experiment showed, once you've crossed that line, the tendency is to keep going with the course of action, even when you originally could not have imagined yourself doing so.Crawlinguphills wrote:I am also baffled by this argument they keep coming out with 'I know that had I competed clean I was never going to be successful'.
I have been wondering if there was a similar thing with the Saville case. Seems ridiculous that nobody should raise an objection. It just seems like it was the accepted behaviour at that time. There must be people all over the country thinking 'my god, why did I not stop it!?'0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:natrix wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Has Wiggins corrected his mistake of forgetting he rode the Tour with Wiggins?
Wiggins rode the tour with Wiggins?? Does EPO give you a dual personality?
I think its being assumed that what he meant was that he didnt ride against Armstrong in any of the 99-05 Tours...
Also everyone is going on about him forgetting 2009. I haven't caught up on all the pages here yet but they also finished one place apart in 2010!0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Oh my:
Twice a fourth-place Tour de France finisher since then, Van Den Broeck continues to praise Armstrong. "Regarding training and commitment, he's still a role model to me. The way in which he prepared for the Tour was impressive," the Belgian said, before criticising the relative immunity of those who testified against the cancer survivor.
"The fact that Armstrong is treated differently than the witnesses is not fair in my opinion. They emphasize their regrets, but they've earned a lot of money during their careers. It's a bit lame I think."
FFS, surely this is worth a thread of its own as it is far worse than anything Dowsett, Cummings, DB or Hammond have said. I truly do despair at that sort of attitude.0 -
Turfle wrote:Rogers, Possoni, Barry - all came from HTC. Surely questions need to be asked of Cav, Eisel, Sivtsov, Wiggins, Pate, Lofkvist, Boasson Hagen.
Shall we just fire the entire peloton? Maybe come back in 20 years time?0
