|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
Mark Hickey wrote:
No, my original claim was that one day there's a possibility that Lance could be caught using drugs. At that point, many will have to consider whether he still constitutes a good role model. Some day you may be caught molesting a child. At that point, many will have to consider whether you still constitute a good role model. A little harsh, but, if we want to take your analogy and run with it, if I was consistently hanging out with paedophiles and child abusers, the finger of suspicion would certainly be raised at some point. And of course, you'd have to find somebody who found me a good role model in the first place You might ask how I could write something like that with absolutely no proof that you molest children. Of couse, I could also ask how you could write what you did even though the intense scrutiny Lance has been under (including many, many blood, unine and hair tests) have come up 100% negative. Nothing. Nada. Zip. I can write that based on the large amount of evidence and hearsay of rampant drug abuse in professional cycling. The fact that advances in performance-enhancing practices are always one step ahead of detection (and as someone pointed out, doesn't the USPS have the largest resources at their disposal?) The fact that almost all those who have been caught have alluded to the widespread drugs culture, and even those who haven't and no longer compete also allude to it. The fact that anyone that follows the Tour with any interest generally accepts that drug abuse is widespread. Then of course, there was the seizure by French police of medical refuse, dumped suspiciously by the USPS in 2000, containing hypodermics and bandages, and the admission by Armstrong that he worked with Dr Ferrari who is known to have promoted the use of EPO. I realise that it's all circumstantial, but I think there's certainly the possibility that Armstrong could one day be caught in a drugs scandal. -- a.m-b FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/ambfaq.htm a.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
Raptor wrote:
Rumsas is the only top cyclist who's been caught in recent years that I recall, though I'm sure there have been a couple/few others. Pfft... Pantani, Del Olmo, Virenque, Ullrich, Rumsas... Since 1988. Erm, all of those are in the last 5 years. If you want to go back to '88, you can throw in Abdujaparov, Bugno, Chiapucci, Brochard, Zulle, Delgado, Theunisse, etc, etc... -- a.m-b FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/ambfaq.htm a.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
bomba wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote: No, my original claim was that one day there's a possibility that Lance could be caught using drugs. At that point, many will have to consider whether he still constitutes a good role model. Some day you may be caught molesting a child. At that point, many will have to consider whether you still constitute a good role model. A little harsh, but, if we want to take your analogy and run with it, if I was consistently hanging out with paedophiles and child abusers, the finger of suspicion would certainly be raised at some point. OK, let's pretend you are a teacher or a priest (oi vey!). Now we can cast suspicion with impunity - even though you have no history of any problems... (in fact, this is very much the case, particularly for priests lately). And it's sad, because obviously the vast majority don't have anything to hide. And of course, you'd have to find somebody who found me a good role model in the first place Heh... good point! You might ask how I could write something like that with absolutely no proof that you molest children. Of couse, I could also ask how you could write what you did even though the intense scrutiny Lance has been under (including many, many blood, unine and hair tests) have come up 100% negative. Nothing. Nada. Zip. I can write that based on the large amount of evidence and hearsay of rampant drug abuse in professional cycling. The fact that advances in performance-enhancing practices are always one step ahead of detection (and as someone pointed out, doesn't the USPS have the largest resources at their disposal?) The fact that almost all those who have been caught have alluded to the widespread drugs culture, and even those who haven't and no longer compete also allude to it. There can be other reasons for that. If I get caught, of COURSE I am going to say "everyone does it, I had to just be be competitive". If I'm retired I can allude to the fact that I would have kicked everyone's butt all the time "had they not been doing drugs". Basic psychology (sandbox edition) 101. The fact that anyone that follows the Tour with any interest generally accepts that drug abuse is widespread. I would not have disagreed 6 years ago. I do today. Then of course, there was the seizure by French police of medical refuse, dumped suspiciously by the USPS in 2000, containing hypodermics and bandages, and the admission by Armstrong that he worked with Dr Ferrari who is known to have promoted the use of EPO. There are a lot of very valid (and legal) uses for syringes - let's not forget that many riders are rehydrating intraveniously (sp?), and no doubt taking other (legal) supplements in the most effective manner as well. The riders are also under constant monitoring by their handlers, including frequent blood chemistry testing (also requiring a syringe). I realise that it's all circumstantial, but I think there's certainly the possibility that Armstrong could one day be caught in a drugs scandal. The new of you and that 12 year old girl will trump it though... ;-) Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 01:47:47 GMT, Super Slinky wrote:
Mark Hickey said... Some day you may be caught molesting a child. At that point, many will have to consider whether you still constitute a good role model. You might ask how I could write something like that with absolutely no proof that you molest children. Of couse, I could also ask how you could write what you did even though the intense scrutiny Lance has been under (including many, many blood, unine and hair tests) have come up 100% negative. Nothing. Nada. Zip. I take that back - in one of the tours (2000?) he tested positive for a miniscule trace of some banned substance. The French press (and some miscreants on r.b.r.) made much hay about this, even though it was clear that the "problem" was that a saddle sore cream he had used contained the substance and some vanishingly small amount had gotten into his blood stream. But isn't it true that not all performance enhancing drugs are detectable? Without making too broad a statement, as the Official a.m-b Stand-Up Chemist, I would say that *all* performance enhancing drugs are detectable. It's a matter of how much money you want to spend to detect things, which things you think are the worst offenders, who's going to pay for the analysis, how long the analysis takes, etc. Keeping in mind all the time that 'you can't measure zero'. -- J'm Sm'th |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
Mark Hickey wrote:
I can write that based on the large amount of evidence and hearsay of rampant drug abuse in professional cycling. The fact that advances in performance-enhancing practices are always one step ahead of detection (and as someone pointed out, doesn't the USPS have the largest resources at their disposal?) The fact that almost all those who have been caught have alluded to the widespread drugs culture, and even those who haven't and no longer compete also allude to it. There can be other reasons for that. If I get caught, of COURSE I am going to say "everyone does it, I had to just be be competitive". So why have cheats from other sports never said the same thing? It does seem to be a recurring theme from cyclists. If I'm retired I can allude to the fact that I would have kicked everyone's butt all the time "had they not been doing drugs". Basic psychology (sandbox edition) 101. What about the people that did the butt-kicking? People like Merckx, Lemond and Boardman have all mentioned it. The fact that anyone that follows the Tour with any interest generally accepts that drug abuse is widespread. I would not have disagreed 6 years ago. I do today. Ok. Of course, none of the top riders have failed a drugs test in the last 6 years. Oh, hang on, wait, yes they have. Then of course, there was the seizure by French police of medical refuse, dumped suspiciously by the USPS in 2000, containing hypodermics and bandages, and the admission by Armstrong that he worked with Dr Ferrari who is known to have promoted the use of EPO. There are a lot of very valid (and legal) uses for syringes - let's not forget that many riders are rehydrating intraveniously (sp?), and no doubt taking other (legal) supplements in the most effective manner as well. The riders are also under constant monitoring by their handlers, including frequent blood chemistry testing (also requiring a syringe). I agree, but there's the lingering question of why they tried to dump it secretly on a back road. I realise that it's all circumstantial, but I think there's certainly the possibility that Armstrong could one day be caught in a drugs scandal. The new of you and that 12 year old girl will trump it though... ;-) Hey, she said on e-mail that she was 19 and just wanted a trip to Paris /topical -- a.m-b FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/ambfaq.htm a.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
Chris Phillipo wrote:
Does anyone know who they test during the tour? Is it random, or the top 10 or what? I mean could the winner be clean but the guy who draged him there with the Camelbak full of steroids hooked directly to his heart finish 50th place so they both come out clean? I don't *know*, but I suspect they pull the winners plus random finishers from the field every day. -- -- Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Lance learns the truth...
Raptor wrote:
Chris Phillipo wrote: Does anyone know who they test during the tour? Is it random, or the top 10 or what? I mean could the winner be clean but the guy who draged him there with the Camelbak full of steroids hooked directly to his heart finish 50th place so they both come out clean? I don't *know*, but I suspect they pull the winners plus random finishers from the field every day. I heard (on Usenet...) that the top six from Tyler's stage win were tested, and for LANCE's win Monday. -- -- Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bad Journalism - Bicycling Lance Article | WillW | General | 26 | July 31st 04 05:14 AM |
Lance Armstrong's the power of Drug | Red Cloud | General | 43 | July 29th 04 08:33 AM |
The Lance Chronicles and Road to the Tour | Eric S. Sande | General | 22 | May 5th 04 11:42 PM |
Lance on "Imus in the Morning" | Zippy the Pinhead | General | 8 | October 17th 03 02:44 PM |
Lance Armstrong's mother promotes federal funding of bike/ped accommodations | Brent Hugh | General | 5 | September 4th 03 05:37 PM |