I don't believe Lance Armstrong doped and never will

DonDaddyD

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19365234

I'm beginning to feel sorry for Lance Armstrong and this ridiculous witch hunt. Innocent until proven guilty, and to prove someone guilty you need the evidence. Where is the pee filled cup that proves without any measure of reasonable doubt that he doped!

Sure it is likely he did, it's probably likely - as i have always said - that he took extra doses of EPO under the guise of his cancer treatments.

In any case the none of the above matters, the fact remains that unless there is hard evidence - in the form of a sample - any number of people can say he doped or have claimed to have seen him dope, if you cannot prove it then he didn't.

#LeaveLanceAlone

bompington

Best trolling of this forum ever

rjsterry

Now if you were really brave, DDD, you would have posted this in Pro Race

Anonymous

"It's amazing isn't it? Even when effectively admitting that his guilt can be proved he still surreptitiously puts enough doubt into the non-cycling public's mind that this is all a big witch hunt and he can't continue to defend himself because of his family."

(Milton50 in pro race)

daviesee

All i have to say on the subject is research Gene Therapy.
Add Lance Armstrong and Livestrong to your research and come to your own conclusion.

DonDaddyD

Done, as I feel strongly about this!

viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12874142

iPete

The Lance PR machine has you by the ball.

Widgey

DDD is very brave, he posted the same thread at 9:31 in Pro Race..

spasypaddy

my issue is he might have doped, he might not. however stripping him of his titles and giving them to someone else is pathetic as EVERYONE back then was a doper.

iPete

spasypaddy wrote:

my issue is he might have doped, he might not. however stripping him of his titles and giving them to someone else is pathetic as EVERYONE back then was a doper.

It'll just say no winner. Pretty much everyone has been banned already.

I dont think pro race are going to bite on DDDs trolling...

rick_chasey

spasypaddy wrote:

my issue is he might have doped, he might not. however stripping him of his titles and giving them to someone else is pathetic as EVERYONE back then was a doper.

http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/wp-conte ... 1150px.jpg

Was done before he got banned, so you can turn him into grey too.

JamesB5446

iPete wrote:

The Lance PR machine has you by the ball.

bigmat

Will be interesting to see who gets taken down with Bruyneel - presumably Lance's teammates who have testified, Contador, Schlecks? If they retrospectively reward the highest placed unblemished riders, Wiggins will potentially have a 2nd tour win on his palmares. I suspect they won't bother though, just scrub Lance's wins. Its a sad day for the sport, but in UK at least I think the good news from the Tour / Olympics is enough to keep the interest of the public / sponsors. It'll be the US cycling market that hurts the most from this.

gabriel959

spasypaddy wrote:

my issue is he might have doped, he might not. however stripping him of his titles and giving them to someone else is pathetic as EVERYONE back then was a doper.

They should leave them blank but not everyone was a doper though.

Not Christopher Bassons at least whose career was destroyed by LA.

Widgey

That graph is awesome, on numerous years 7/10 of the top ten have had doping allegations/suspensions

gabriel959

DonDaddyD wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19365234

I'm beginning to feel sorry for Lance Armstrong and this ridiculous witch hunt. Innocent until proven guilty, and to prove someone guilty you need the evidence. Where is the pee filled cup that proves without any measure of reasonable doubt that he doped!

Sure it is likely he did, it's probably likely - as i have always said - that he took extra doses of EPO under the guise of his cancer treatments.

In any case the none of the above matters, the fact remains that unless there is hard evidence - in the form of a sample - any number of people can say he doped or have claimed to have seen him dope, if you cannot prove it then he didn't.

#LeaveLanceAlone

You are such a sad troll.

tailwindhome

I thought you believed but didn't care.

gabriel959

BigMat wrote:

Will be interesting to see who gets taken down with Bruyneel - presumably Lance's teammates who have testified, Contador, Schlecks? If they retrospectively reward the highest placed unblemished riders, Wiggins will potentially have a 2nd tour win on his palmares. I suspect they won't bother though, just scrub Lance's wins. Its a sad day for the sport, but in UK at least I think the good news from the Tour / Olympics is enough to keep the interest of the public / sponsors. It'll be the US cycling market that hurts the most from this.

I don't think we will know, that is why Lance has made the decision of throwing the towel so it doesn't have to break the omerta.

I am more interested about the systematic doping that happened during 2009 and 2010 than the old stuff. There is still organised doping in cycling...

mudcow007

god damn this subject is like a cock-a-roach that just wont die

Strith

DonDaddyD wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19365234

I'm beginning to feel sorry for Lance Armstrong and this ridiculous witch hunt. Innocent until proven guilty, and to prove someone guilty you need the evidence. Where is the pee filled cup that proves without any measure of reasonable doubt that he doped!

Sure it is likely he did, it's probably likely - as i have always said - that he took extra doses of EPO under the guise of his cancer treatments.

In any case the none of the above matters, the fact remains that unless there is hard evidence - in the form of a sample - any number of people can say he doped or have claimed to have seen him dope, if you cannot prove it then he didn't.

#LeaveLanceAlone

I don’t believe for one minute you really think that. Tygart has stated that all the evidence will eventually come out, so you’ll get it don’t worry.
A bad day for the sport, but good in the sense that a dirty cheating bully has finally had his comeuppance.
And he’s taken the coward’s way out, even though it’s just a publicity exercise. The guys a joker.

bigmat

gabriel959 wrote:

BigMat wrote:

Will be interesting to see who gets taken down with Bruyneel - presumably Lance's teammates who have testified, Contador, Schlecks? If they retrospectively reward the highest placed unblemished riders, Wiggins will potentially have a 2nd tour win on his palmares. I suspect they won't bother though, just scrub Lance's wins. Its a sad day for the sport, but in UK at least I think the good news from the Tour / Olympics is enough to keep the interest of the public / sponsors. It'll be the US cycling market that hurts the most from this.

I don't think we will know, that is why Lance has made the decision of throwing the towel so it doesn't have to break the omerta.

I am more interested about the systematic doping that happened during 2009 and 2010 than the old stuff. There is still organised doping in cycling...

Do you genuinely believe Sky have an organised doping programme, or do you just have a healthy cynicism about any team doing well? I found the recent Vaughters interview interesting, he was basically saying that there may still be doping (probably always will) but the testing, passport etc have made it impossible to get the same extreme advantage that used to be possible, to the extent that the accumulation of marginal gains can now mean that a clean rider (he quoted Hesjedal) can win even against dopers. I'd like to think he's right.

rick_chasey

Something about It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.

Or something.

spasypaddy

i read an article a few weeks back by dwayne chambers doctor who described how easy it is to dope and avoid testing. cant find it now

gabriel959

BigMat wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

BigMat wrote:

Will be interesting to see who gets taken down with Bruyneel - presumably Lance's teammates who have testified, Contador, Schlecks? If they retrospectively reward the highest placed unblemished riders, Wiggins will potentially have a 2nd tour win on his palmares. I suspect they won't bother though, just scrub Lance's wins. Its a sad day for the sport, but in UK at least I think the good news from the Tour / Olympics is enough to keep the interest of the public / sponsors. It'll be the US cycling market that hurts the most from this.

I don't think we will know, that is why Lance has made the decision of throwing the towel so it doesn't have to break the omerta.

I am more interested about the systematic doping that happened during 2009 and 2010 than the old stuff. There is still organised doping in cycling...

Do you genuinely believe Sky have an organised doping programme, or do you just have a healthy cynicism about any team doing well? I found the recent Vaughters interview interesting, he was basically saying that there may still be doping (probably always will) but the testing, passport etc have made it impossible to get the same extreme advantage that used to be possible, to the extent that the accumulation of marginal gains can now mean that a clean rider (he quoted Hesjedal) can win even against dopers. I'd like to think he's right.

I wasn't speaking about Team Sky here? I was just speaking about his return in 2009 and 2010 when the passport was then present he came back with some decent results but with a network of organised doping (where Ferrari was still present) and other doctors and managed to fool the passport and everyone else once more.

bigmat

spasypaddy wrote:

i read an article a few weeks back by dwayne chambers doctor who described how easy it is to dope and avoid testing. cant find it now

I remember that one, read it when Ohuruogu was in trouble. The one with stuff about letting your mobile phone answerphone get full and stuff like that?

gabriel959

Rick Chasey wrote:

Something about It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.

Or something.

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. Mark Twain"

gabriel959

BigMat wrote:

spasypaddy wrote:

i read an article a few weeks back by dwayne chambers doctor who described how easy it is to dope and avoid testing. cant find it now

I remember that one, read it when Ohuruogu was in trouble. The one with stuff about letting your mobile phone answerphone get full and stuff like that?

Ohuruogu, the one who got away. Oh I forgot, apparently british athletes don't do doping!

clarkey cat

I like:

Learn to ride a bicycle. You will not regret it if you live.

~Mark Twain

jonginge

BigMat wrote:

spasypaddy wrote:

i read an article a few weeks back by dwayne chambers doctor who described how easy it is to dope and avoid testing. cant find it now

I remember that one, read it when Ohuruogu was in trouble. The one with stuff about letting your mobile phone answerphone get full and stuff like that?

Victor Conte "duck and dodge" method
http://uk.askmen.com/sports/bodybuildin ... rview.html

DonDaddyD

The next stage in doping is gene theraphy and dna tweaking. BBC touched on it just before the 100m final at the Olympics. They said that a person has to have the right DNA sequence to have the right fast kind of twitch muscles.

If we see a non African-Caribbean in the 100m final at the next Olympics then we will know that I am right.

There it's been said.

And no, I don't think I'm being racist or predujice, there hasn't been a white guy (there have been those from mixed ethnic backgrounds) in a 100m final that I've seen in my lifetime.

bigmat

gabriel959 wrote:

BigMat wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

BigMat wrote:

Will be interesting to see who gets taken down with Bruyneel - presumably Lance's teammates who have testified, Contador, Schlecks? If they retrospectively reward the highest placed unblemished riders, Wiggins will potentially have a 2nd tour win on his palmares. I suspect they won't bother though, just scrub Lance's wins. Its a sad day for the sport, but in UK at least I think the good news from the Tour / Olympics is enough to keep the interest of the public / sponsors. It'll be the US cycling market that hurts the most from this.

I don't think we will know, that is why Lance has made the decision of throwing the towel so it doesn't have to break the omerta.

I am more interested about the systematic doping that happened during 2009 and 2010 than the old stuff. There is still organised doping in cycling...

Do you genuinely believe Sky have an organised doping programme, or do you just have a healthy cynicism about any team doing well? I found the recent Vaughters interview interesting, he was basically saying that there may still be doping (probably always will) but the testing, passport etc have made it impossible to get the same extreme advantage that used to be possible, to the extent that the accumulation of marginal gains can now mean that a clean rider (he quoted Hesjedal) can win even against dopers. I'd like to think he's right.

I wasn't speaking about Team Sky here? I was just speaking about his return in 2009 and 2010 when the passport was then present he came back with some decent results but with a network of organised doping (where Ferrari was still present) and other doctors and managed to fool the passport and everyone else once more.

I was picking up on your comment in bold really, and I remember you airing suspicions re Sky a while back. Just curious.