| |
Main
Date: 25 May 2007 23:14:01
From: Crescentius Vespasianus
Subject: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
the century called pro-cycling.
|
|
| |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 06:48:34
From:
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
On Jun 1, 6:23 am, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org >
wrote:
> As Chung likes to imply
"Imply?" Dude, I may be fond of the subjunctive voice but I've been
pretty indicative about this. Either Ressiot was the most clueless
sports reporter ever to write about doping, or else there was four
months of Machiavellian negotiations going on in the background.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jun 2007 21:53:13
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
<rechungREMOVETHIS@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1180680514.449706.99680@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 1, 6:23 am, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org>
> wrote:
>> As Chung likes to imply
>
> "Imply?" Dude, I may be fond of the subjunctive voice but I've been
> pretty indicative about this. Either Ressiot was the most clueless
> sports reporter ever to write about doping, or else there was four
> months of Machiavellian negotiations going on in the background.
I just got a Time VX from a Canadian guy. I received the frame and fork
yesterday about 5 pm and finished the build about 8:30 including cooking
dinner etc.
I went out today with a couple I know and we put in 40 miles with about 2500
feet of climbing.
Both of the people I was with have had cancer, both went through
chemotherapy and both are "cured". The husband went through it about 10
years ago and they didn't give him EPO. He had a lot of trouble eating, he
certainly couldn't even think of riding and his recovery was slow and
painful. He has a permanent shake in his hands. That's what he has to pay
for living longer.
His wife went through it about 5 years ago and she was using EPO and other
drugs to modify the body's response to the chemo. She RODE with us on the
same ride we did today while she was recieving chemo. She was slower then
but could nevertheless handle it.
EPO is a miracle come true. Abuse of it should be stopped but let's remember
that for every EPO cheat there are 10,000 lives saved.
|
| |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 04:23:44
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
On May 31, 1:40 pm, Simon Brooke <s...@jasmine.org.uk > wrote:
> in message <465cd852$0$27190$426a7...@news.free.fr>, Tom Grosman
> ('gros...@aonix.fr') wrote:
>
> > #5 Most riders, including Lance, doped and Lance won because he was the
> > better doper.
>
> I am not saying this is the case, but...
>
> #6 Many riders, including Lance, doped, but Lance was the only one being
> treated for cancer.
>
> Many of the drugs used in cancer recovery are performance enhancing.
>
> I think it's undoubted that Armstrong had exceptional motivation,
> exceptional will to win - was hungrier than most of the competition and
> stayed hungrier longer. But in itself that isn't enough, any more than a
> superb physique is enough. He also had a superb physique... but I don't
> honestly believe he was 'clean', except in the special sense that I think
> all his dope/medication was very probably clinically justified by his
> condition.
>
As Chung has pointed out several times, the whole
L'Equipe-LNDD-1999 retroactive test business made
it into the papers because: Ressiot, the L'Equipe
reporter, asked Armstrong to let him see his UCI
files to show whether or not LA had a TUE
(therapeutic use exemption) for EPO, and presumably
other PEDs. Armstrong did not, (which I guess is
why he felt free to let Ressiot look in the file)
so one has to assume that if he was doping, he was
doping on the same playing field as the others, not
with a secret TUE get-out-of-dope-jail-free card.
He may have had the best doctors money could buy,
but that is a different issue.
To my knowledge, after his cancer went into remission
there would not be medical justification for
continued EPO treatment.
Another question is whether the TUEs were really
what Ressiot was interested in; since he appears to
have had the LNDD documents with the sample codes
already. As Chung likes to imply, if Ressiot had
been thinking, he shouldn't have needed the UCI
numbers since IIRC all of the tests from the first
stage were positive. That he wanted the numbers
perhaps suggests he wanted confirmation, he was
specifically after LA, he didn't know what he was
doing, or some combination thereof.
Ben
|
| |
Date: 31 May 2007 00:36:31
From: hizark21@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
Riis's admission that he did dope has damaged the sport, but has by no
means killed it. But so long as cycling allows riders who have been
found positive to race again then more sponsors will leave the sport.
This is why it's so important for cycling to adopt a first offence
lifetime ban policy. Also this whole WADA drug testing body issue has
to be resolved. I am beginning to believe that a new anti-doping
organization needs to be formed and UCI should disassociate it.self
from WADA
On May 25, 4:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com >
wrote:
> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> the century called pro-cycling.
|
| | |
Date: 31 May 2007 10:12:39
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On 31 May 2007 00:36:31 -0700, "hizark21@yahoo.com" <hizark21@yahoo.com > wrote:
>Riis's admission that he did dope has damaged the sport, but has by no
>means killed it. But so long as cycling allows riders who have been
>found positive to race again then more sponsors will leave the sport.
As in that's why no company buys ads or makes sponsorship deals with football,
futbol, baseball? Because they only suspend players for a few months on a first
offense. Get it through your head, it ain't the dope that disgusts them it's the
drama, confusion and internecine legal battles.
>This is why it's so important for cycling to adopt a first offence
>lifetime ban policy. Also this whole WADA drug testing body issue has
>to be resolved. I am beginning to believe that a new anti-doping
>organization needs to be formed and UCI should disassociate it.self
>from WADA
For all the wrong reasons you come to the right conclusion.
Ron
>
>
>
>On May 25, 4:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
>> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
>> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
>> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
>> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
>> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
>> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
>> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
>> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
>> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
>> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
>> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
>> the century called pro-cycling.
>
|
| | |
Date: 31 May 2007 08:30:22
From: Bob Schwartz
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
hizark21@yahoo.com wrote:
> But so long as cycling allows riders who have been
> found positive to race again then more sponsors will leave the sport.
> This is why it's so important for cycling to adopt a first offence
> lifetime ban policy.
Pussy. I'm in favor of the death penalty. If we want to clean up
the sport we need to stop screwing around.
Bob Schwartz
|
| | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 21:38:45
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
hizark21@yahoo.com wrote:
>> But so long as cycling allows riders who have been
>> found positive to race again then more sponsors will leave the sport.
>> This is why it's so important for cycling to adopt a first offence
>> lifetime ban policy.
Bob Schwartz wrote:
> Pussy. I'm in favor of the death penalty. If we want to clean up
> the sport we need to stop screwing around.
You could always go the moslem route and cut off the testicles of anybody
caught with patches on.
|
| | |
Date: 31 May 2007 10:14:21
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
hizark21@yahoo.com wrote:
> Riis's admission that he did dope has damaged the sport, but has by no
> means killed it.
Dumbass,
It must be dead. There was hardly a soul on the Zoncolan yesterday.
|
| | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 23:31:55
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"Donald Munro" <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:465e83db$0$4864$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
> hizark21@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> Riis's admission that he did dope has damaged the sport, but has by no
>> means killed it.
>
> It must be dead. There was hardly a soul on the Zoncolan yesterday.
Well, I suppose that settles that misunderstanding.
|
| |
Date: 30 May 2007 19:48:30
From: SLAVE of THE STATE
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
On May 30, 7:55 am, "amit.gh...@gmail.com" <amit.gh...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> plus you have the rumoured valencia blood bank and the blue cooler
> with lafferty's soul.
Since LANCE has retired, we can call the blue cooler "Dead Man's
Chest."
|
| |
Date: 30 May 2007 07:55:42
From: amit.ghosh@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
> I doubt that's the case; it's probably very difficult to be the "better
> doper" and not leave a trail of crumbs for others to follow.
dumbass,
two weeks ago you could've said the same thing about riis, zabel,
aldag.
in the case of armstrong you also have the words of swart, the
connection to ferrari and LNDD results and admission of doping on his
team.
plus you have the rumoured valencia blood bank and the blue cooler
with lafferty's soul.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 14:42:39
From: paolo
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 25, 4:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com >
wrote:
> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> the century called pro-cycling.
In 2045 they'll still be racing Milan-San Remo and the Pogio will
still play prominantly into the final results.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 14:04:14
From: paolo
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 25, 4:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com >
wrote:
> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> the century called pro-cycling.
In 2045 they'll still be racing Milan-San Remo and the Pogio will
still play prominantly into the final results. OP, Riis, Birillo et
al. will fade much faster then the insitition of professional
cycling.
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2007 09:57:23
From: SLAVE of THE STATE
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 27, 5:15 pm, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com > wrote:
> ... merely pointing
> out that being a sanctimonious a-hole who can't, or won't,
> differentiate between entertainment and vital matters,...
Speaking of "the need" to attend to vital matters and not waste time
with trivia and simple entertainment (bike racing), how many "dope
posts" have been made to rbr in the last month?
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 19:31:33
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 27, 7:14 pm, "benjo maso" <benjo.m...@chello.nl > wrote:
>
> I DO believe in Lance, Tyler, Floyd, Ullrich and Basso. Great riders. And
> I'm serious.
>
> Benjo- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Agreed Benjo. They were all playing by the unwritten rules and all
performed great feats. In another era none of the doping would've
mattered much. The quality of the competition, the event, and the
great performances would've set them apart in any era.
Many of the great artists, composer and writers were NOT great
people, and not above some cheating here and there, but that doesn't
diminish the beauty, importance, and power of their works.
The event, as it unfolds, is unique a unique and seperate entity from
the other concerns which may influence it as do a million other
factors. Those factors also make each event individual despite the
same participants.
If you see cycling, or athletics as nothing more than a cut throat
business then doping and every other nasty trick is par for the
course, as it is in big business. Seems to have worked well for
Microsoft, Barry Bonds, and others.
I see an art, story, and beauty to the sport that really isn't all
that related to the results. Results are what they race for, but doing
it well and beautifully is important to those of us watching.
That's not a Protestant work ethic, North American attitude though.
More French, Italian, and European I'd say.
For the most part they live better than we do, and by choice. I was
thrilled to see Wal-Mart fail miserably in Germany.
Bill C
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 17:15:06
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 27, 12:40 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
>
> Oh, your sarcasm is devastating. How will I ever go on?!
Much like a broken record.
> I'll wager that
> you still believe in Lance, Tyler, Floyd, Ullrich and Basso. You are such a
> wanker. LOL
What exactly am I not supposed to believe in? Which ones weren't
supremely gifted athletes whether they, or anyone else in the peloton,
doped? In the first place, I never believed that random people with a
gift for cycling are somehow paragons of moral erectness. They ride
fookin' bicycles, you maroon. Surprisingly enough, I also don't care
what Rosie O'Donnell or Charlie Sheen have to say about 9/11.
Society periodically goes through such expansion and contraction of
social mores. Popping pills for whatever ailed you was typical in the
50's and 60's. Your mom did it. Your mom, if she had any common
sense, smacked your ass when you were just a little complainer that
got out of hand. If she did those same things nowadays, your mom
would be in rehab, up on child endangerment charges and Child
Protection would have put you in a foster home. I'm not saying that
would have necessarily been a bad thing in your case, merely pointing
out that being a sanctimonious a-hole who can't, or won't,
differentiate between entertainment and vital matters, and is obsessed
with a retired rider, is detrimental to your mental health.
Now the question becomes, do you call the cops on your own mom because
she spanked you, or do you realize that even a mom is human and can
make mistakes, and move past it? You could always tell yourself that
you were helping her and it was for her own good if it would make it
easier to make the call.
We're in a similar transition period in cycling.
Plan B. Seriously. You'll thank me.
R
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 09:13:26
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 27, 11:58 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
>
> This is funny. You DO still believe.
I believe in "I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of
a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that
the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I
believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a
constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated
hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening
your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I
believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days."
I believe baseball is a stupid sport, but fun to watch in person (had
to straighten out Kevin Costner's errors).
I also believe that you'll have a big empty hole in your life when
Lance goes away. That would be normal for a ten year old boy, it's
just sad for a fifty year old man (I'm being charitable).
Ever consider not mentioning Lance for a week or two to see what
positive things fill in? If not, do.
Now, on your way...
R
|
| | |
Date: 27 May 2007 16:40:12
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com > wrote in message
news:1180282406.223600.72410@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 27, 11:58 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> This is funny. You DO still believe.
>
> I believe in "I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of
> a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that
> the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I
> believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a
> constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated
> hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening
> your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I
> believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days."
> I believe baseball is a stupid sport, but fun to watch in person (had
> to straighten out Kevin Costner's errors).
>
> I also believe that you'll have a big empty hole in your life when
> Lance goes away. That would be normal for a ten year old boy, it's
> just sad for a fifty year old man (I'm being charitable).
>
> Ever consider not mentioning Lance for a week or two to see what
> positive things fill in? If not, do.
>
> Now, on your way...
Oh, your sarcasm is devastating. How will I ever go on?! I'll wager that
you still believe in Lance, Tyler, Floyd, Ullrich and Basso. You are such a
wanker. LOL
|
| | | |
Date: 28 May 2007 01:14:18
From: benjo maso
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"B. Lafferty" <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net > wrote in message
news:Mvi6i.160$2v5.57@trndny06...
>
> "RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
> news:1180282406.223600.72410@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> On May 27, 11:58 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is funny. You DO still believe.
>>
>> I believe in "I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of
>> a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that
>> the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I
>> believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a
>> constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated
>> hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening
>> your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I
>> believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days."
>> I believe baseball is a stupid sport, but fun to watch in person (had
>> to straighten out Kevin Costner's errors).
>>
>> I also believe that you'll have a big empty hole in your life when
>> Lance goes away. That would be normal for a ten year old boy, it's
>> just sad for a fifty year old man (I'm being charitable).
>>
>> Ever consider not mentioning Lance for a week or two to see what
>> positive things fill in? If not, do.
>>
>> Now, on your way...
>
> Oh, your sarcasm is devastating. How will I ever go on?! I'll wager that
> you still believe in Lance, Tyler, Floyd, Ullrich and Basso. You are such
> a wanker. LOL
I DO believe in Lance, Tyler, Floyd, Ullrich and Basso. Great riders. And
I'm serious.
Benjo
|
| | | |
Date: 27 May 2007 18:53:53
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On Sun, 27 May 2007 16:40:12 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
>
>"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>news:1180282406.223600.72410@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> On May 27, 11:58 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is funny. You DO still believe.
>>
>> I believe in "I believe in the soul, the cock, the pussy, the small of
>> a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that
>> the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I
>> believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a
>> constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated
>> hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening
>> your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I
>> believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days."
>> I believe baseball is a stupid sport, but fun to watch in person (had
>> to straighten out Kevin Costner's errors).
>>
>> I also believe that you'll have a big empty hole in your life when
>> Lance goes away. That would be normal for a ten year old boy, it's
>> just sad for a fifty year old man (I'm being charitable).
>>
>> Ever consider not mentioning Lance for a week or two to see what
>> positive things fill in? If not, do.
>>
>> Now, on your way...
>
>Oh, your sarcasm is devastating. How will I ever go on?! I'll wager that
>you still believe in Lance, Tyler, Floyd, Ullrich and Basso. You are such a
>wanker. LOL
Whatever is there to believe in or not? I believe those guys are brilliant bike
racers who regularly produced marvels of athletic performance with which to
amaze and entertain. My own opinion is that some reasonable and undetectible
quantity of any of the currently available PEDs is far more natural and
appealing than what Lance did to his life in order to win.
Pretty much every race I've ever been in has involved a critical gut check at
some point. Whether it's a bunch of fat yahoos like me slogging around a muddy
park or Floyd trying to fight back 15 minutes, it's a gut check. Dope doesn't
change that.
Ron
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 07:49:03
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 27, 10:38 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>
> > I get the fact that you have a bug up your ass about Armstrong, and
> > your view/opinions are seriously skewed due to said bug. You cherry
> > pick facts, create virtual facts, whatever it takes to support your
> > viewpoint.
>
> > When Lance finally croaks you'll be blubbering more than anyone else -
> > your personal windmill will be getting buried along with him.
> > Probably time to invest in a "Plan B" so you're not caught short.
>
>
> So you still believe the Lance return from the dead, lose weight, hard
> training/efficiency myth. ROTFL!
Doesn't this feel good? I'm so happy for you. Just like old times!
You can take any opportunity to twist things into being about Lance
doping. Cycling is bigger than Lance. Cycling is bigger than
doping. Well...maybe not in your world.
I'm serious. Plan B time. Don't be the grasshopper, grasshopper.
R
|
| | |
Date: 27 May 2007 15:58:57
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com > wrote in message
news:1180277343.231369.275150@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On May 27, 10:38 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> > I get the fact that you have a bug up your ass about Armstrong, and
>> > your view/opinions are seriously skewed due to said bug. You cherry
>> > pick facts, create virtual facts, whatever it takes to support your
>> > viewpoint.
>>
>> > When Lance finally croaks you'll be blubbering more than anyone else -
>> > your personal windmill will be getting buried along with him.
>> > Probably time to invest in a "Plan B" so you're not caught short.
>>
>>
>> So you still believe the Lance return from the dead, lose weight, hard
>> training/efficiency myth. ROTFL!
>
> Doesn't this feel good? I'm so happy for you. Just like old times!
> You can take any opportunity to twist things into being about Lance
> doping. Cycling is bigger than Lance. Cycling is bigger than
> doping. Well...maybe not in your world.
>
> I'm serious. Plan B time. Don't be the grasshopper, grasshopper.
>
> R
This is funny. You DO still believe.
|
| | | |
Date: 27 May 2007 18:42:55
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On Sun, 27 May 2007 15:58:57 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
>
>"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>news:1180277343.231369.275150@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> On May 27, 10:38 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
>> wrote:
>>> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> > I get the fact that you have a bug up your ass about Armstrong, and
>>> > your view/opinions are seriously skewed due to said bug. You cherry
>>> > pick facts, create virtual facts, whatever it takes to support your
>>> > viewpoint.
>>>
>>> > When Lance finally croaks you'll be blubbering more than anyone else -
>>> > your personal windmill will be getting buried along with him.
>>> > Probably time to invest in a "Plan B" so you're not caught short.
>>>
>>>
>>> So you still believe the Lance return from the dead, lose weight, hard
>>> training/efficiency myth. ROTFL!
>>
>> Doesn't this feel good? I'm so happy for you. Just like old times!
>> You can take any opportunity to twist things into being about Lance
>> doping. Cycling is bigger than Lance. Cycling is bigger than
>> doping. Well...maybe not in your world.
>>
>> I'm serious. Plan B time. Don't be the grasshopper, grasshopper.
>>
>> R
>
>This is funny. You DO still believe.
And what in hell is it that you believe?
That Lance has some magic pill he won't pass on to his team or friends?
What?
You can't just say that he doped. THe rest of them doped, so why's he beating
them?
Did he dope better? Perhaps, then why are there no successors showing up. Is it
your theory that Lance is a super genius endocrinologist who knows things about
doping nobody else does and he'll take it to his grave?
He didn't dope more because he would've been busted.
Whether or not he doped, he beat the other guys for the same reasons he would
have beaten them if nobody ever doped. Most of those reasons are pretty well
known and are significant.
Ron
Ron
Effect pedal demo's up at http://www.soundclick.com/ronsonicpedalry
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 May 2007 02:02:59
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"RonSonic" <ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com > wrote in message
news:io1k53tmdeh9hvqtdnsrv9qom11khdqp1v@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 27 May 2007 15:58:57 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
> <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1180277343.231369.275150@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> On May 27, 10:38 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> > I get the fact that you have a bug up your ass about Armstrong, and
>>>> > your view/opinions are seriously skewed due to said bug. You cherry
>>>> > pick facts, create virtual facts, whatever it takes to support your
>>>> > viewpoint.
>>>>
>>>> > When Lance finally croaks you'll be blubbering more than anyone
>>>> > else -
>>>> > your personal windmill will be getting buried along with him.
>>>> > Probably time to invest in a "Plan B" so you're not caught short.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So you still believe the Lance return from the dead, lose weight, hard
>>>> training/efficiency myth. ROTFL!
>>>
>>> Doesn't this feel good? I'm so happy for you. Just like old times!
>>> You can take any opportunity to twist things into being about Lance
>>> doping. Cycling is bigger than Lance. Cycling is bigger than
>>> doping. Well...maybe not in your world.
>>>
>>> I'm serious. Plan B time. Don't be the grasshopper, grasshopper.
>>>
>>> R
>>
>>This is funny. You DO still believe.
>
> And what in hell is it that you believe?
>
> That Lance has some magic pill he won't pass on to his team or friends?
Hardly. I believe he followed the training preparation of Dr. Ferrari to
the letter.
>
> What?
>
> You can't just say that he doped. THe rest of them doped, so why's he
> beating
> them?
Because his dope and doctor (Ferrari) combined with his work ethic made him
just slightly better than guys like Ullrich?
>
> Did he dope better? Perhaps, then why are there no successors showing up.
> Is it
> your theory that Lance is a super genius endocrinologist who knows things
> about
> doping nobody else does and he'll take it to his grave?
No successors yet. But please do consider that Lance looks very much like
Indurain's successor. Do you believe Indurain was clean, coming from a team
that came out of the old Reynolds team that had a history of drug use dating
back to Delgado and the use of a former team doctor from the old Peugeot
team--the one who pumped Thevenet up with corticoids to the point where he
pretty much fell off his bike during the 1978 Giro?
The on the record statements and findings of a WADA lab, the statements,
under oath, of the former heart and soul of Postal (Emma per mark Gorski),
statements of former teammates about drug discussions, the backdating of a
steroid prescription (for a different drug than the one found in his
system), the moto riders delivering blue ice chests to the Postal hotel in
the middle of the night, the statement of a former Postal soigneur
(Dutch--not Belgian mafia) that Spanish doctors followed Postal staying in
the same hotels but on different floors-----there's more but you may recall
it----all tends to make me rather skeptical of your super genius
endocrinologist theory. He may take it to his grave unless people who no
longer owe their jobs to him, continue to come forward to tell what they
know.
>
> He didn't dope more because he would've been busted.
Interesting but strange statement. Oh, well.
>
> Whether or not he doped, he beat the other guys for the same reasons he
> would
> have beaten them if nobody ever doped. Most of those reasons are pretty
> well
> known and are significant.
You have absolutely no way of knowing that any more than what riders such as
Hampsten and Motet (as examples) might have done without the drug culture in
cycling.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 May 2007 23:08:46
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Why did Lance win?
|
>> Whether or not he doped, he beat the other guys for the same reasons he
>> would
>> have beaten them if nobody ever doped. Most of those reasons are pretty
>> well
>> known and are significant.
>
> You have absolutely no way of knowing that any more than what riders such
> as Hampsten and Motet (as examples) might have done without the drug
> culture in cycling.
I see a few options here-
#1: Nobody doped, and Lance won because he was the better rider.
#2: Many other riders doped but not Lance, who won because he was the better
rider.
#3: Lance doped but none of his rivals did, so Lance won because he doped.
#4: Most riders, including Lance, doped... and Lance won because he was the
better rider.
Does that pretty much sum things up? Of is it the case that, *if* Lance had
been doping, it was somehow more insidious, more evil than the rest of them?
Perhaps because he won?
Near as I can tell, Lance didn't have a monopoly on anything but the state
of his mind and body. Those are the two things, probably the only two
things, that nobody else could have had during those 7 years he won the TdF.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"B. Lafferty" <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net > wrote in message
news:nLq6i.1644$J76.1617@trndny03...
>
> "RonSonic" <ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:io1k53tmdeh9hvqtdnsrv9qom11khdqp1v@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 27 May 2007 15:58:57 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
>> <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1180277343.231369.275150@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On May 27, 10:38 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> > I get the fact that you have a bug up your ass about Armstrong, and
>>>>> > your view/opinions are seriously skewed due to said bug. You cherry
>>>>> > pick facts, create virtual facts, whatever it takes to support your
>>>>> > viewpoint.
>>>>>
>>>>> > When Lance finally croaks you'll be blubbering more than anyone
>>>>> > else -
>>>>> > your personal windmill will be getting buried along with him.
>>>>> > Probably time to invest in a "Plan B" so you're not caught short.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So you still believe the Lance return from the dead, lose weight,
>>>>> hard
>>>>> training/efficiency myth. ROTFL!
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't this feel good? I'm so happy for you. Just like old times!
>>>> You can take any opportunity to twist things into being about Lance
>>>> doping. Cycling is bigger than Lance. Cycling is bigger than
>>>> doping. Well...maybe not in your world.
>>>>
>>>> I'm serious. Plan B time. Don't be the grasshopper, grasshopper.
>>>>
>>>> R
>>>
>>>This is funny. You DO still believe.
>>
>> And what in hell is it that you believe?
>>
>> That Lance has some magic pill he won't pass on to his team or friends?
>
> Hardly. I believe he followed the training preparation of Dr. Ferrari to
> the letter.
>
>>
>> What?
>>
>> You can't just say that he doped. THe rest of them doped, so why's he
>> beating
>> them?
>
> Because his dope and doctor (Ferrari) combined with his work ethic made
> him just slightly better than guys like Ullrich?
>>
>> Did he dope better? Perhaps, then why are there no successors showing up.
>> Is it
>> your theory that Lance is a super genius endocrinologist who knows things
>> about
>> doping nobody else does and he'll take it to his grave?
>
> No successors yet. But please do consider that Lance looks very much like
> Indurain's successor. Do you believe Indurain was clean, coming from a
> team that came out of the old Reynolds team that had a history of drug use
> dating back to Delgado and the use of a former team doctor from the old
> Peugeot team--the one who pumped Thevenet up with corticoids to the point
> where he pretty much fell off his bike during the 1978 Giro?
>
> The on the record statements and findings of a WADA lab, the statements,
> under oath, of the former heart and soul of Postal (Emma per mark Gorski),
> statements of former teammates about drug discussions, the backdating of a
> steroid prescription (for a different drug than the one found in his
> system), the moto riders delivering blue ice chests to the Postal hotel in
> the middle of the night, the statement of a former Postal soigneur
> (Dutch--not Belgian mafia) that Spanish doctors followed Postal staying in
> the same hotels but on different floors-----there's more but you may
> recall it----all tends to make me rather skeptical of your super genius
> endocrinologist theory. He may take it to his grave unless people who no
> longer owe their jobs to him, continue to come forward to tell what they
> know.
>>
>> He didn't dope more because he would've been busted.
>
> Interesting but strange statement. Oh, well.
>>
>> Whether or not he doped, he beat the other guys for the same reasons he
>> would
>> have beaten them if nobody ever doped. Most of those reasons are pretty
>> well
>> known and are significant.
>
> You have absolutely no way of knowing that any more than what riders such
> as Hampsten and Motet (as examples) might have done without the drug
> culture in cycling.
>
>
>
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 03:50:09
From: Tom Grosman
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com > a écrit dans le message de
news: 2o27i.6601$5j1.5906@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 21:40:43
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
in message <465cd852$0$27190$426a74cc@news.free.fr >, Tom Grosman
('grosman@aonix.fr') wrote:
> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com> a écrit dans le message de
> news: 2o27i.6601$5j1.5906@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 14:24:09
From: Dan Connelly
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
Simon Brooke wrote:
>>
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 21:08:40
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
in message <Z1H7i.6859$C96.4187@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net >, Dan Connelly
('d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m') wrote:
> If my hematocrit is normally 38, and I boost it to 49.9, while yours is
> normally 47, and you boost it to 49.9, this may convert me from a
> relatively weaker, to a relatively stronger, rider. There's no basis to
> claim "if they all dope, the better rider still wins".
I take warfarin; I take is specifically because I have recurring deep vein
thrombosis due to poor drainage of my left leg. Am I entitled to take EPO
to balance the decrement done to my blood's oxygen carrying capacity
caused by the warfarin? Or should I be banned from taking warfarin because
it alters (specifically, reduces) my performance?
The more you look at these questions, the less straightforward they become.
--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; 99% of browsers can't run ActiveX controls. Unfortunately
;; 99% of users are using the 1% of browsers that can...
[seen on /. 08:04:02]
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 23:30:41
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
"Dan Connelly" <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m > wrote in message
news:Z1H7i.6859$C96.4187@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
> Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>>>
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 18:20:04
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
On Thu, 31 May 2007 14:24:09 -0700, Dan Connelly
<d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m > wrote:
>Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>>>
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2007 22:08:31
From: Bob Schwartz
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
Dan Connelly wrote:
> God knows what someone of Ferrari's reputation would have
> charged.
I believe Rominger, at the time the world's #1 ranked cyclist,
was paying 10%.
Bob Schwartz
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 29 May 2007 22:32:52
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
>
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 06:10:14
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
On Tue, 29 May 2007 22:32:52 -0700, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
<mikej1@ix.netcom.com > wrote:
>I doubt that's the case; it's probably very difficult to be the "better
>doper" and not leave a trail of crumbs for others to follow.
Au contraire. Just as better and more meticulous coaching can help a
rider, so can very carefully designed doping that really tailors the
medication to the riders form.
And in terms of crumbs, doing doping better only requires one or two
more people -- mainly a dedicated doctor and a soigneur working only
for you. In some ways, that makes it less likely to be caught,
because if other riders/docotrs/soigneurs are caught and start
spilling beans, they won't have anything to do with your program.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 08:54:20
From: Jim Boyer
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
"John Forrest Tomlinson" <usenetremove@jt10000.com > wrote in message
news:m7jq53togdob5t0jldeqa68c23ppfu7p37@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 29 May 2007 22:32:52 -0700, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
> <mikej1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>>I doubt that's the case; it's probably very difficult to be the "better
>>doper" and not leave a trail of crumbs for others to follow.
>
> Au contraire. Just as better and more meticulous coaching can help a
> rider, so can very carefully designed doping that really tailors the
> medication to the riders form.
>
> And in terms of crumbs, doing doping better only requires one or two
> more people -- mainly a dedicated doctor and a soigneur working only
> for you. In some ways, that makes it less likely to be caught,
> because if other riders/docotrs/soigneurs are caught and start
> spilling beans, they won't have anything to do with your program.
> --
> JT
I agree, if Lance doped, like the rest of the peleton, he would be the best
at it. There has been a lot written about his total control of all aspects
of this training, every calorie measured, every watt of output accounted
for, he drove the efforts of TREK engineering, every thread of his Nike
reduced-drag clothing. It's been said that he set new standards in all
aspects of training/racing. And although being the most drug tested athlete
ever, I think his amazing machine-like ability to micro manage all these
aspects of his body and environment could allow him to get by. That is...if
he doped. :-)
jb
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 01 Jun 2007 03:38:18
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
In article <f3k01u$cj5$1@newshost.mot.com >,
"Jim Boyer" <james.boyer@motorola.com > wrote:
> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <usenetremove@jt10000.com> wrote in message
> news:m7jq53togdob5t0jldeqa68c23ppfu7p37@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 29 May 2007 22:32:52 -0700, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
> > <mikej1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I doubt that's the case; it's probably very difficult to be the "better
> >>doper" and not leave a trail of crumbs for others to follow.
> >
> > Au contraire. Just as better and more meticulous coaching can help a
> > rider, so can very carefully designed doping that really tailors the
> > medication to the riders form.
> >
> > And in terms of crumbs, doing doping better only requires one or two
> > more people -- mainly a dedicated doctor and a soigneur working only
> > for you. In some ways, that makes it less likely to be caught,
> > because if other riders/docotrs/soigneurs are caught and start
> > spilling beans, they won't have anything to do with your program.
> > --
> > JT
> I agree, if Lance doped, like the rest of the peleton, he would be the best
> at it. There has been a lot written about his total control of all aspects
> of this training, every calorie measured, every watt of output accounted
> for, he drove the efforts of TREK engineering, every thread of his Nike
> reduced-drag clothing. It's been said that he set new standards in all
> aspects of training/racing. And although being the most drug tested athlete
> ever, I think his amazing machine-like ability to micro manage all these
> aspects of his body and environment could allow him to get by. That is...if
> he doped. :-)
> jb
So when do you think his book "If I did it..." comes out?
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 12:23:29
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> And in terms of crumbs, doing doping better only requires one or two
> more people -- mainly a dedicated doctor and a soigneur working only
> for you. In some ways, that makes it less likely to be caught,
> because if other riders/docotrs/soigneurs are caught and start
> spilling beans, they won't have anything to do with your program.
So having a Ferrari is like banking at a Swiss bank.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2007 07:29:32
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Why did Lance win?
|
On Wed, 30 May 2007 12:23:29 +0200, Donald Munro
<fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > wrote:
>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> And in terms of crumbs, doing doping better only requires one or two
>> more people -- mainly a dedicated doctor and a soigneur working only
>> for you. In some ways, that makes it less likely to be caught,
>> because if other riders/docotrs/soigneurs are caught and start
>> spilling beans, they won't have anything to do with your program.
>
>So having a Ferrari is like banking at a Swiss bank.
Having a Ferrari, your own mechanic and your own garage.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 07:30:10
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 27, 9:25 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
> > On May 26, 4:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
> > wrote:
>
> >> So, really, the results aren't "unequal." With the seeming exception of
> >> Armstrong and the Tour, since 1995 or 1996, when virtually all the top
> >> teams
> >> had comparable doping programs, no one or a few teams or riders dominated
> >> as
> >> in the pre-1990s.
>
> > ...except for seven years out of twelve...
>
> > Is that your version of a virtual fact?
>
>
> Reread the first part of the post that you snipped. You just don't get it
> or want to get it.
I get the fact that you have a bug up your ass about Armstrong, and
your view/opinions are seriously skewed due to said bug. You cherry
pick facts, create virtual facts, whatever it takes to support your
viewpoint.
When Lance finally croaks you'll be blubbering more than anyone else -
your personal windmill will be getting buried along with him.
Probably time to invest in a "Plan B" so you're not caught short.
R
|
| | |
Date: 27 May 2007 14:38:17
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com > wrote in message
news:1180276210.445645.35980@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 27, 9:25 am, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>> > On May 26, 4:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> So, really, the results aren't "unequal." With the seeming exception
>> >> of
>> >> Armstrong and the Tour, since 1995 or 1996, when virtually all the top
>> >> teams
>> >> had comparable doping programs, no one or a few teams or riders
>> >> dominated
>> >> as
>> >> in the pre-1990s.
>>
>> > ...except for seven years out of twelve...
>>
>> > Is that your version of a virtual fact?
>>
>>
>> Reread the first part of the post that you snipped. You just don't get
>> it
>> or want to get it.
>
> I get the fact that you have a bug up your ass about Armstrong, and
> your view/opinions are seriously skewed due to said bug. You cherry
> pick facts, create virtual facts, whatever it takes to support your
> viewpoint.
>
> When Lance finally croaks you'll be blubbering more than anyone else -
> your personal windmill will be getting buried along with him.
> Probably time to invest in a "Plan B" so you're not caught short.
>
> R
So you still believe the Lance return from the dead, lose weight, hard
training/efficiency myth. ROTFL!
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 06:04:40
From: RicodJour
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 26, 4:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
>
> So, really, the results aren't "unequal." With the seeming exception of
> Armstrong and the Tour, since 1995 or 1996, when virtually all the top teams
> had comparable doping programs, no one or a few teams or riders dominated as
> in the pre-1990s.
...except for seven years out of twelve...
Is that your version of a virtual fact?
R
|
| | |
Date: 27 May 2007 13:25:49
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com > wrote in message
news:1180271080.900537.92590@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> On May 26, 4:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> So, really, the results aren't "unequal." With the seeming exception of
>> Armstrong and the Tour, since 1995 or 1996, when virtually all the top
>> teams
>> had comparable doping programs, no one or a few teams or riders dominated
>> as
>> in the pre-1990s.
>
> ...except for seven years out of twelve...
>
> Is that your version of a virtual fact?
>
> R
>
Reread the first part of the post that you snipped. You just don't get it
or want to get it.
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2007 04:44:19
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 25, 5:57 pm, VeloMel...@gmail.com wrote:
> On May 25, 7:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> > Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> > were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> > interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> > this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> > cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> > guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> > Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> > had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
> > shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> > to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
> > We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> > the century called pro-cycling.
>
> I hope your wrong...but after all that's transpired the last couple of
> weeks, I sure ain't gonna argue!!!
>
> One of the really sad parts is that this quote from Riis:
>
> "When I was a rider in the 1990s, I worked extremely hard to get my
> results. I worked extremely hard, day in day out and I sacrificed a
> lot just even to be part of the best."
>
> is basically true. Just as it is for every other member of the
> peleton
PelOton, please, please......
(even Floyd). Those guys are super-human athletes without EPO
> or any other drugs. A lot of the non-cycling public now thinks that
> these guys are just no-talent, average-joe lazy bums that are just
> willing to take a needle. This slight probably even carries down to
> amateurs and wanna-bes who are out there paying their dues at their
> own level. I think whoever said drugs can't turn a donkey into a
> racehorse got it right. Too bad the talented men and women of future
> peletons will have an even tougher fight against an already-jaded
> public.
|
| | |
Date: 28 May 2007 14:00:18
From: Curtis L. Russell
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On 27 May 2007 04:44:19 -0700, Qui si parla Campagnolo
<peter@vecchios.com > wrote:
>> is basically true. Just as it is for every other member of the
>> peleton
>
>PelOton, please, please......
>
Different sprot.
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 18:27:55
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 26, 6:03 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com >
wrote:
> On 26 May 2007 17:49:27 -0700, Kurgan Gringioni
>
> <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >The most talented riders benefit from performance enhancing drugs just
> >as much as average riders.
>
> It depends on the drug.
Dumbass -
Ya, but the point was that very talented riders can benefit from PEDs
as much as average riders.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 18:26:23
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 26, 5:57 pm, RonSonic <ronso...@tampabay.rr.com > wrote:
> On 26 May 2007 17:49:27 -0700, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 26, 1:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
> >wrote:
>
> >> The problem with doping is that it brings many riders to the top level when
> >> they would be just below that tier without the boost of drugs. Boosting a
> >> natural hematocrit in the low to mid-40s up to 50+ (even with the 50% limit
> >> that we know was routinely exceeded), can allow a rider to stay with a
> >> better rider. As an example, Cunego has a natural hematocrit of 53%.
> >> Would a rider of equal size and weight with a hematocrit 10% below his be
> >> expected to beat him in the mountains and content for a tour winners
> >> position. I think not. Drugs may not turn draft horses into thoroughbred
> >> stallions, but they will allow a good thoroughbred to compete with the best.
>
> >Dumbass -
>
> >You've had your head up your ass for years about this.
>
> >The most talented riders benefit from performance enhancing drugs just
> >as much as average riders. If you take a rider on the far end of the
> >bell curve and one from the middle of the same curve and shovel an
> >equal amount of PEDs into their bodies, the guy at the far end of the
> >bell curve is still going to be that much better than the average one.
>
> Dumbass, the exception would be some freak like Cunego who wouldn't benefit from
> EPO like the other guys because he's already at a higher HCT than the rules
> allow.
Dumbass -
EPO isn't the only PED.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 18:15:48
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
bummer
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 17:49:27
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 26, 1:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
> The problem with doping is that it brings many riders to the top level when
> they would be just below that tier without the boost of drugs. Boosting a
> natural hematocrit in the low to mid-40s up to 50+ (even with the 50% limit
> that we know was routinely exceeded), can allow a rider to stay with a
> better rider. As an example, Cunego has a natural hematocrit of 53%.
> Would a rider of equal size and weight with a hematocrit 10% below his be
> expected to beat him in the mountains and content for a tour winners
> position. I think not. Drugs may not turn draft horses into thoroughbred
> stallions, but they will allow a good thoroughbred to compete with the best.
Dumbass -
You've had your head up your ass for years about this.
The most talented riders benefit from performance enhancing drugs just
as much as average riders. If you take a rider on the far end of the
bell curve and one from the middle of the same curve and shovel an
equal amount of PEDs into their bodies, the guy at the far end of the
bell curve is still going to be that much better than the average one.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
|
| | |
Date: 27 May 2007 01:13:29
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1180226967.418859.237850@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> On May 26, 1:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>
>> The problem with doping is that it brings many riders to the top level
>> when
>> they would be just below that tier without the boost of drugs. Boosting
>> a
>> natural hematocrit in the low to mid-40s up to 50+ (even with the 50%
>> limit
>> that we know was routinely exceeded), can allow a rider to stay with a
>> better rider. As an example, Cunego has a natural hematocrit of 53%.
>> Would a rider of equal size and weight with a hematocrit 10% below his be
>> expected to beat him in the mountains and content for a tour winners
>> position. I think not. Drugs may not turn draft horses into
>> thoroughbred
>> stallions, but they will allow a good thoroughbred to compete with the
>> best.
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
>
> You've had your head up your ass for years about this.
>
> The most talented riders benefit from performance enhancing drugs just
> as much as average riders. If you take a rider on the far end of the
> bell curve and one from the middle of the same curve and shovel an
> equal amount of PEDs into their bodies, the guy at the far end of the
> bell curve is still going to be that much better than the average one.
>
>
> thanks,
>
> K. Gringioni.
>
You truly are ignorant.
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 21:03:19
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On 26 May 2007 17:49:27 -0700, Kurgan Gringioni
<kgringioni@hotmail.com > wrote:
>The most talented riders benefit from performance enhancing drugs just
>as much as average riders.
It depends on the drug. A former US Postal rider told a friend of
mine (so this is second-hand) that Tyler Hamilton benefited a lot from
the 50 hematocrit limit -- he supposedly had a low natural value and
could go up a lot and still not go over the limit. The rider who was
talking had a naturally high value and had nowhere to go with EPO or
blood doping.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 20:57:04
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On 26 May 2007 17:49:27 -0700, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringioni@hotmail.com > wrote:
>On May 26, 1:56 pm, "B. Lafferty" <blaffer...@verizon.nospam.net>
>wrote:
>
>> The problem with doping is that it brings many riders to the top level when
>> they would be just below that tier without the boost of drugs. Boosting a
>> natural hematocrit in the low to mid-40s up to 50+ (even with the 50% limit
>> that we know was routinely exceeded), can allow a rider to stay with a
>> better rider. As an example, Cunego has a natural hematocrit of 53%.
>> Would a rider of equal size and weight with a hematocrit 10% below his be
>> expected to beat him in the mountains and content for a tour winners
>> position. I think not. Drugs may not turn draft horses into thoroughbred
>> stallions, but they will allow a good thoroughbred to compete with the best.
>
>
>
>Dumbass -
>
>
>You've had your head up your ass for years about this.
>
>The most talented riders benefit from performance enhancing drugs just
>as much as average riders. If you take a rider on the far end of the
>bell curve and one from the middle of the same curve and shovel an
>equal amount of PEDs into their bodies, the guy at the far end of the
>bell curve is still going to be that much better than the average one.
Dumbass, the exception would be some freak like Cunego who wouldn't benefit from
EPO like the other guys because he's already at a higher HCT than the rules
allow. He should just take speed.
Ron
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 19:49:25
From: Morphy-New Orleans
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyboss@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:Z4K5i.13579$Ut6.6888@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized
> them
> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know
> about
> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what
> he
> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being
> a
> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of
> it.
> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> the century called pro-cycling.
>
>
Actually, this could be the best thing to help cycling clean up and recover
some measure of credibility. At least I hope so. It was a beautiful sport
to watch prior to the 1990s.
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 17:09:21
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On Sat, 26 May 2007 19:49:25 GMT, "Morphy-New Orleans"
<Morphy@morphy.com > wrote:
>Actually, this could be the best thing to help cycling clean up and recover
>some measure of credibility. At least I hope so. It was a beautiful sport
>to watch prior to the 1990s.
You're delusional if you think doping was not widespread in the sport
before the 1990s.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
| | | |
Date: 26 May 2007 22:41:23
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"John Forrest Tomlinson" <usenetremove@jt10000.com > wrote in message
news:6f8h531kb6qrc767bno66i79jiiluvf73p@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 19:49:25 GMT, "Morphy-New Orleans"
> <Morphy@morphy.com> wrote:
>
>>Actually, this could be the best thing to help cycling clean up and
>>recover
>>some measure of credibility. At least I hope so. It was a beautiful
>>sport
>>to watch prior to the 1990s.
>
> You're delusional if you think doping was not widespread in the sport
> before the 1990s.
>
> --
> JT
Doping has always been endemic to cycling, but 1990 with the advent of EPO
took doping to an entirely different performance level. But you know that.
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 10:56:24
From:
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 26, 12:28 am, William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> agn...@yahoo.com wrote innews:1180153227.004635.97010@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:
>
> > I think it's time for Armstrong to come clean and admit he doped, just
> > like everyone else. I think Hincapie needs to come clean, as does the
> > rest of the Motorola/Discovery team. Former teammates like Landis,
> > Hamilton, and Heras all doped. It's impossible to believe that
> > Armstrong could have been so dominating without "help", especially
> > when seemingly everyone else was doping. Hincapie was a classics
> > rider/sprinter, and suddenly he becomes a super-domestique hanging
> > with LA in the lead group over the mountains and wins a mountain stage
> > in the TDF? It's too good to be true.
>
> I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3yamjb
>
> --
> Bill Asher
Just who were those two guys on the podium with Lance? :-)
|
| |
Date: 25 May 2007 21:29:26
From: Andre
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 26, 12:20 am, agn...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On May 25, 5:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> > Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> > were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> > interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> > this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> > cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> > guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> > Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> > had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
> > shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> > to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
> > We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> > the century called pro-cycling.
>
> I think it's time for Armstrong to come clean and admit he doped, just
> like everyone else. I think Hincapie needs to come clean, as does the
> rest of the Motorola/Discovery team. Former teammates like Landis,
> Hamilton, and Heras all doped. It's impossible to believe that
> Armstrong could have been so dominating without "help", especially
> when seemingly everyone else was doping. Hincapie was a classics
> rider/sprinter, and suddenly he becomes a super-domestique hanging
> with LA in the lead group over the mountains and wins a mountain stage
> in the TDF? It's too good to be true.
>
> Rick H
Lance will never admit it. Just like O.J will never admit culpability.
If they think they have a chance of getting away with it, that is all
they need.
Andre
|
| |
Date: 25 May 2007 21:20:27
From:
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 25, 5:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com >
wrote:
> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> the century called pro-cycling.
I think it's time for Armstrong to come clean and admit he doped, just
like everyone else. I think Hincapie needs to come clean, as does the
rest of the Motorola/Discovery team. Former teammates like Landis,
Hamilton, and Heras all doped. It's impossible to believe that
Armstrong could have been so dominating without "help", especially
when seemingly everyone else was doping. Hincapie was a classics
rider/sprinter, and suddenly he becomes a super-domestique hanging
with LA in the lead group over the mountains and wins a mountain stage
in the TDF? It's too good to be true.
Rick H
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 19:44:23
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
<agn742@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1180153227.004635.97010@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On May 25, 5:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
>> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized
>> them
>> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
>> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know
>> about
>> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
>> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
>> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
>> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what
>> he
>> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being
>> a
>> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee
>> team
>> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of
>> it.
>> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
>> the century called pro-cycling.
>
> I think it's time for Armstrong to come clean and admit he doped, just
> like everyone else. I think Hincapie needs to come clean, as does the
> rest of the Motorola/Discovery team. Former teammates like Landis,
> Hamilton, and Heras all doped. It's impossible to believe that
> Armstrong could have been so dominating without "help", especially
> when seemingly everyone else was doping. Hincapie was a classics
> rider/sprinter, and suddenly he becomes a super-domestique hanging
> with LA in the lead group over the mountains and wins a mountain stage
> in the TDF? It's too good to be true.
>
> Rick H
>
Not true, Rick. According to Dr. Eddie Coyle (supported by our own Dr.
Coggan), it is possible with years of training to develope the efficiency
needed to climb mountains at 26 kph. Lose weight as Armstrong and George
are alleged to have done, and you can climb even though you're a classics
man. Look at Indurain. All he had to do was lose weight and suddenly his
climbing and time trialing became world class. It's all hard work, diet and
the efficiency created by years of selfless training. You believe me, don't
you? ;-)
|
| | | |
Date: 26 May 2007 15:53:31
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On Sat, 26 May 2007 19:44:23 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net >
wrote:
>
><agn742@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1180153227.004635.97010@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>> On May 25, 5:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
>>> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized
>>> them
>>> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
>>> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know
>>> about
>>> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
>>> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
>>> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
>>> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what
>>> he
>>> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being
>>> a
>>> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee
>>> team
>>> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of
>>> it.
>>> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
>>> the century called pro-cycling.
>>
>> I think it's time for Armstrong to come clean and admit he doped, just
>> like everyone else. I think Hincapie needs to come clean, as does the
>> rest of the Motorola/Discovery team. Former teammates like Landis,
>> Hamilton, and Heras all doped. It's impossible to believe that
>> Armstrong could have been so dominating without "help", especially
>> when seemingly everyone else was doping. Hincapie was a classics
>> rider/sprinter, and suddenly he becomes a super-domestique hanging
>> with LA in the lead group over the mountains and wins a mountain stage
>> in the TDF? It's too good to be true.
>>
>> Rick H
>>
>
>Not true, Rick. According to Dr. Eddie Coyle (supported by our own Dr.
>Coggan), it is possible with years of training to develope the efficiency
>needed to climb mountains at 26 kph. Lose weight as Armstrong and George
>are alleged to have done, and you can climb even though you're a classics
>man. Look at Indurain. All he had to do was lose weight and suddenly his
>climbing and time trialing became world class. It's all hard work, diet and
>the efficiency created by years of selfless training. You believe me, don't
>you? ;-)
So, what makes the difference.
Everyone can train hard and lose weight. Everyone can buy drugs. So why such
inequal results. Do you suppose the guys in the back are skimping on the drugs
or on the miles?
Ron
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 May 2007 12:17:14
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
in message <cu3h539ls7ibnnr1453ols0em3o01qstj8@4ax.com >, RonSonic
('ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com') wrote:
>>Not true, Rick. Â According to Dr. Eddie Coyle (supported by our own Dr.
>>Coggan), it is possible with years of training to develope the efficiency
>>needed to climb mountains at 26 kph. Â Lose weight as Armstrong and George
>>are alleged to have done, and you can climb even though you're a classics
>>man. Â Look at Indurain. Â All he had to do was lose weight and suddenly
>>his climbing and time trialing became world class. Â It's all hard work,
>>diet and the efficiency created by years of selfless training. Â You
>>believe me, don't you? ;-)
>
> So, what makes the difference.
>
> Everyone can train hard and lose weight. Everyone can buy drugs. So why
> such inequal results. Do you suppose the guys in the back are skimping on
> the drugs or on the miles?
Different people have different genetics, which respond to both miles and
drugs in different ways. But, more important, different people have
different psychology, different self belief, different ability to deceive
and to persuade, and different will to win. People who win bike races -
people who win a lot of bike races - are as much psychologically
exceptional as they are physically exceptional, whether you're talking
about Obree (who is one of the few people in modern cycling one can say
with certainty did not dope) or about Armstrong.
--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Hobbit ringleader gives Sauron One in the Eye.
|
| | | | |
Date: 26 May 2007 20:56:45
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"RonSonic" <ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com > wrote in message
news:cu3h539ls7ibnnr1453ols0em3o01qstj8@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 19:44:23 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
> <blafferty1@verizon.nospam.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>><agn742@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1180153227.004635.97010@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>> On May 25, 5:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police
>>>> in
>>>> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized
>>>> them
>>>> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those
>>>> warm
>>>> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know
>>>> about
>>>> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
>>>> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about
>>>> these
>>>> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
>>>> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but
>>>> what
>>>> he
>>>> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to
>>>> being
>>>> a
>>>> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee
>>>> team
>>>> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all
>>>> of
>>>> it.
>>>> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick
>>>> of
>>>> the century called pro-cycling.
>>>
>>> I think it's time for Armstrong to come clean and admit he doped, just
>>> like everyone else. I think Hincapie needs to come clean, as does the
>>> rest of the Motorola/Discovery team. Former teammates like Landis,
>>> Hamilton, and Heras all doped. It's impossible to believe that
>>> Armstrong could have been so dominating without "help", especially
>>> when seemingly everyone else was doping. Hincapie was a classics
>>> rider/sprinter, and suddenly he becomes a super-domestique hanging
>>> with LA in the lead group over the mountains and wins a mountain stage
>>> in the TDF? It's too good to be true.
>>>
>>> Rick H
>>>
>>
>>Not true, Rick. According to Dr. Eddie Coyle (supported by our own Dr.
>>Coggan), it is possible with years of training to develope the efficiency
>>needed to climb mountains at 26 kph. Lose weight as Armstrong and George
>>are alleged to have done, and you can climb even though you're a classics
>>man. Look at Indurain. All he had to do was lose weight and suddenly his
>>climbing and time trialing became world class. It's all hard work, diet
>>and
>>the efficiency created by years of selfless training. You believe me,
>>don't
>>you? ;-)
>
> So, what makes the difference.
>
> Everyone can train hard and lose weight. Everyone can buy drugs. So why
> such
> inequal results. Do you suppose the guys in the back are skimping on the
> drugs
> or on the miles?
>
> Ron
Unequal results?! Please. The difference between Armstrong and his main
rivals was really not that great, particularly when you look at where he
made his time-usually one or two early mountain stages in the tour.
The problem with doping is that it brings many riders to the top level when
they would be just below that tier without the boost of drugs. Boosting a
natural hematocrit in the low to mid-40s up to 50+ (even with the 50% limit
that we know was routinely exceeded), can allow a rider to stay with a
better rider. As an example, Cunego has a natural hematocrit of 53%.
Would a rider of equal size and weight with a hematocrit 10% below his be
expected to beat him in the mountains and content for a tour winners
position. I think not. Drugs may not turn draft horses into thoroughbred
stallions, but they will allow a good thoroughbred to compete with the best.
And if you look to the classics, you now have either massive pelotons long
after the sort out should have occurred, or you have a rider who is probably
a bit better prepared (perhaps willing to risk his health more than some
others) riding off into the wind, holding off chase groups working hard to
catch him--even putting time on the chasers.
So, really, the results aren't "unequal." With the seeming exception of
Armstrong and the Tour, since 1995 or 1996, when virtually all the top teams
had comparable doping programs, no one or a few teams or riders dominated as
in the pre-1990s. That's my take on the situation and it does still exist
from the testimony of present riders. Micro dosing, testosterone patches
and gel---it's all there. Perhaps the latest revelation wall change the
rider's mentality, especially given the ever increasing health dangers,
something Zabel alluded to in relations to his son and cycling.
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 04:28:41
From: William Asher
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
agn742@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1180153227.004635.97010@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:
> I think it's time for Armstrong to come clean and admit he doped, just
> like everyone else. I think Hincapie needs to come clean, as does the
> rest of the Motorola/Discovery team. Former teammates like Landis,
> Hamilton, and Heras all doped. It's impossible to believe that
> Armstrong could have been so dominating without "help", especially
> when seemingly everyone else was doping. Hincapie was a classics
> rider/sprinter, and suddenly he becomes a super-domestique hanging
> with LA in the lead group over the mountains and wins a mountain stage
> in the TDF? It's too good to be true.
I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles.
http://tinyurl.com/3yamjb
--
Bill Asher
|
| |
Date: 26 May 2007 01:50:05
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
In article <Z4K5i.13579$Ut6.6888@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net >,
"Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyboss@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> had in the medicine bag.
Dumbass:
everybody knows Carmichael had nothing to do with Lance's training.
Blame Dr. Evil,
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | |
Date: 26 May 2007 19:38:48
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote in message
news:rcousine-DC4289.18500425052007@news.telus.net...
> In article <Z4K5i.13579$Ut6.6888@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
>> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized
>> them
>> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
>> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know
>> about
>> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
>> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
>> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
>> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what
>> he
>> had in the medicine bag.
>
> Dumbass:
>
> everybody knows Carmichael had nothing to do with Lance's training.
>
> Blame Dr. Evil,
True, but that's not what he and Armstrong have led the world to believe
with books and endorsements of training programs. Armstrong is an investor
in CTS.
|
| |
Date: 25 May 2007 16:57:01
From:
Subject: Re: Riis just killed pro-cycling.....
|
On May 25, 7:14 pm, "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyb...@hotmail.com >
wrote:
> Riis just killed the sport known as pro-cycling. The European police in
> Italy and France were in the end correct and the people who criticized them
> were wrong. I think David Millar was the first to crack under those warm
> interrogation lights. In the end he told them all they needed to know about
> this cycling-Mafia. Kudos to all of the European police agencies, in
> cracking this Mafia wide open for all to see. All that crap about these
> guys going up grades >8% at 26 mph were simply an illusion. Where does
> Carmichael go now, when people now know it wasn't his training, but what he
> had in the medicine bag. What about Liggett, will he now return to being a
> shoe salesman? Trautman can now compare his steroid perfected Yankee team
> to the EPO perfected CSC team. It was the perfect illusion,......all of it.
> We should all give them a giant round of applause for this magic trick of
> the century called pro-cycling.
I hope your wrong...but after all that's transpired the last couple of
weeks, I sure ain't gonna argue!!!
One of the really sad parts is that this quote from Riis:
"When I was a rider in the 1990s, I worked extremely hard to get my
results. I worked extremely hard, day in day out and I sacrificed a
lot just even to be part of the best."
is basically true. Just as it is for every other member of the
peleton (even Floyd). Those guys are super-human athletes without EPO
or any other drugs. A lot of the non-cycling public now thinks that
these guys are just no-talent, average-joe lazy bums that are just
willing to take a needle. This slight probably even carries down to
amateurs and wanna-bes who are out there paying their dues at their
own level. I think whoever said drugs can't turn a donkey into a
racehorse got it right. Too bad the talented men and women of future
peletons will have an even tougher fight against an already-jaded
public.
|
|
