#21
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
Wow. I nominate you for cycling saint of the year: "I am high on
life; this petty squabbling is beneath me." What self righteous, self-important hogwash. Did it ever occur to you that all the Master Fatties, the clubbies and the Cat 4's and below in this world get the same satisfaction as you. Even me. But I suspect if you were a Cat 3 or above other people's doping just might hit a tad closer to the bone in your personal cycling - where your satisfaction might be more geared to your objective placing and your points and not just your isolated and pristine subjective world. Then you would have to decide just how above it all you really were. Would you still stay above the fray? Would you get on your Greg Lemond soapbox and excoriate the dopers? Or would you risk your own health and join the club? Somehow I doubt you've ever had to face making such a decision. The cycling "witch hunt" makes page 10 of the newspapers in USA. On page 1 is Barry Bonds, professional baseball and steroids. Page 2 is American football. Page 3 is steroids and the PGA. Page 4 is doping and the Olympics. Etc. Then there's European football. Etc. The point is that all these spectator sports are HUGE in terms of the money, the following, the actual importance in people's lives, even if they are "mere diversions." Clean athletes are important on many levels. Otherwise why would anybody be talking about it at all? Sorry dude. Your "I'm above it all and the cure is worse than the disease" is an unrealistic, out of touch attitude. You got all that out of these two paragraphs? You don't get it at all. Bill knows perfectly well what goes on or has a pretty good idea, like we all have. Why are you on such a mission? We mostly don't care. Or at least, I care about cycling as a spectacle and think that the witch hunt is much worse than the doping. I also care about cycling as a participant but then, too, the doping is totally unimportant. Who cares if others dope? I get my satisfaction from training, suffering and improving. It's just a passtime. When I was a lowly Cat-2, racing with Cat 1 & Pros, doping was there in the background. People knew of it, but, I dunno why, it just didn't matter. It was a choice that others made to cheat, although I don't think some of us even saw it as cheating per se. It was more like an extension of the recreational drug usage so popular at the time (mid-70s). Did I have less chance of winning because I didn't dope? I never thought of it that way. Factually, it *may* have been true, but I believed then, and still believe now, my biggest obstacle to my own success was found in the mirror. I thought then, and still believe now, that you can win without doping. It may not be as easy, and you may have to work a lot harder. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't go after those doping. I'm just saying that it doesn't have to kill the sport for the rest of us, whether we're spectators or Masters Fatties or whatever. --Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
benjo maso wrote:
Anyhow, according to dr. Jeanne-Pierre de Modenard, probably world's greatest expert in the field of the history of doping, writer of six extremel;y informative books on the subject, and owner of an incredible rich archive, declared a few days ago that he is convinced that Greg Lemond is the only TdF-winner after the war who never deliberately used doping. Poor Gino is turning over in his grave. Bob Schwartz |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:32:00 GMT, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote: When I was a lowly Cat-2, racing with Cat 1 & Pros, doping was there in the background. People knew of it, but, I dunno why, it just didn't matter. It was a choice that others made to cheat, although I don't think some of us even saw it as cheating per se. It was more like an extension of the recreational drug usage so popular at the time (mid-70s). Did I have less chance of winning because I didn't dope? I never thought of it that way. Factually, it *may* have been true, but I believed then, and still believe now, my biggest obstacle to my own success was found in the mirror. I thought then, and still believe now, that you can win without doping. It may not be as easy, and you may have to work a lot harder. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't go after those doping. I'm just saying that it doesn't have to kill the sport for the rest of us, whether we're spectators or Masters Fatties or whatever. First, from where I sit Cat. 2 is not lowly; it's god-like :-) Second, anybody who posts or lurks on rbr - whether all year or only in July - loves the sport and doesn't want it killed. We loved this year's tour when Kodi, Vino and Skeletor were in it, and the podium was an actual competition, dope or no dope. It's just that some of us have a naive belief that a level playing field of athletes competing on just "food" and training, and not stuff that has to be injected with needles, is preferable to the status quo, and also the innocent hope that it somehow can be pulled off. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
On Jul 27, 11:32 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote: Wow. I nominate you for cycling saint of the year: "I am high on life; this petty squabbling is beneath me." What self righteous, self-important hogwash. Did it ever occur to you that all the Master Fatties, the clubbies and the Cat 4's and below in this world get the same satisfaction as you. Even me. But I suspect if you were a Cat 3 or above other people's doping just might hit a tad closer to the bone in your personal cycling - where your satisfaction might be more geared to your objective placing and your points and not just your isolated and pristine subjective world. Then you would have to decide just how above it all you really were. Would you still stay above the fray? Would you get on your Greg Lemond soapbox and excoriate the dopers? Or would you risk your own health and join the club? Somehow I doubt you've ever had to face making such a decision. The cycling "witch hunt" makes page 10 of the newspapers in USA. On page 1 is Barry Bonds, professional baseball and steroids. Page 2 is American football. Page 3 is steroids and the PGA. Page 4 is doping and the Olympics. Etc. Then there's European football. Etc. The point is that all these spectator sports are HUGE in terms of the money, the following, the actual importance in people's lives, even if they are "mere diversions." Clean athletes are important on many levels. Otherwise why would anybody be talking about it at all? Sorry dude. Your "I'm above it all and the cure is worse than the disease" is an unrealistic, out of touch attitude. You got all that out of these two paragraphs? You don't get it at all. Bill knows perfectly well what goes on or has a pretty good idea, like we all have. Why are you on such a mission? We mostly don't care. Or at least, I care about cycling as a spectacle and think that the witch hunt is much worse than the doping. I also care about cycling as a participant but then, too, the doping is totally unimportant. Who cares if others dope? I get my satisfaction from training, suffering and improving. It's just a passtime. When I was a lowly Cat-2, racing with Cat 1 & Pros, doping was there in the background. People knew of it, but, I dunno why, it just didn't matter. It was a choice that others made to cheat, although I don't think some of us even saw it as cheating per se. It was more like an extension of the recreational drug usage so popular at the time (mid-70s). Did I have less chance of winning because I didn't dope? I never thought of it that way. Factually, it *may* have been true, but I believed then, and still believe now, my biggest obstacle to my own success was found in the mirror. I thought then, and still believe now, that you can win without doping. It may not be as easy, and you may have to work a lot harder. I'm not suggesting we shouldn't go after those doping. I'm just saying that it doesn't have to kill the sport for the rest of us, whether we're spectators or Masters Fatties or whatever. Indeed. It seems to me that the real objection is that doping is not "fair". For the life of me, I can't think of a single thing in this life that _is_ fair. I can understand the disappointment when a sporting hero is exposed for a cheat, but, really, what do you expect? People are attempting to legislate stupidity out of existence and "fairness" into existence. Ain't gonna happen. Get over it and get on with the business at hand. The thing that I find most unfortunate is that Munchkin being booted happened at the end of the mountain stages and now all we're left with are some flats and a TT. Disappointment and denouement were not part of the script. All the riders just want to go home. Let's just skip to the TT, put an asterisk next to the winner's name and move on. There's always next year. R |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
On Jul 27, 6:52 am, Doug Taylor wrote:
Bottom line: how can you slam a guy who DID win the TdF 3 times while clean? ****tard - He's no longer actively involved in the racing end of cycling. He has no firsthand knowledge whatsoever of what the current riders are or are not doing. For a good example of the way to act: Eddy Merckx, Bernard Hinault, Miguel Indurain. If they don't know something, they don't pretend to. The epitome of the graceful former champions. For a good example of the way not to act: Greg Lemond. Self-righteous blowhard. He's so egocentric he doesn't realize he's no different than those who accused Lemond of doing drugs. thanks, K. Gringioni. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
On Jul 27, 7:43 am, Doug Taylor wrote:
The point is that all these spectator sports are HUGE in terms of the money, Ignoramous - The budget of all the Protour teams combined is only about $200 million (if that). That's a lot of money for an individual, but compared to the entire economy it's nothing. thanks, K. Gringioni. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
On Jul 27, 6:32 am, Ewoud Dronkert
wrote: wrote: You are the Epitomy of the cycling enthusiast in denial. You don't get it at all. Bill knows perfectly well what goes on or has a pretty good idea, like we all have. Why are you on such a mission? We mostly don't care. Or at least, I care about cycling as a spectacle and think that the witch hunt is much worse than the doping. I also care about cycling as a participant but then, too, the doping is totally unimportant. Who cares if others dope? I get my satisfaction from training, suffering and improving. It's just a passtime. Exacta-moon-dough |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
On Jul 27, 7:43 am, Doug Taylor wrote:
But I suspect if you were a Cat 3 or above other people's doping just might hit a tad closer to the bone in your personal cycling - where your satisfaction might be more geared to your objective placing and your points and not just your isolated and pristine subjective world. You're a nut. I was and I never cared in the least bit if someone was doping. If someone doesn't want to cycle-race, no one is forcing them to do it. Otherwise why would anybody be talking about it at all? Because you are a loud-mouth. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
LeMond on Contador
On Jul 27, 9:46 am, Doug Taylor wrote:
Second, anybody who posts or lurks on rbr - whether all year or only in July - loves the sport and doesn't want it killed. We loved this year's tour when Kodi, Vino and Skeletor were in it, and the podium was an actual competition, dope or no dope. I enjoy it. But really, I don't care if cycling lives or dies. If it can't survive on its own merits, then bye-bye. You think bike racing is important. It isn't to me. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Contador - Clean? Nope | [email protected] | Racing | 18 | July 27th 07 02:56 AM |
Can Contador win? | steve | Racing | 52 | July 26th 07 10:53 AM |
Contador the New Indurain? | Tom Kunich | Racing | 39 | March 23rd 07 07:11 AM |
Contador vs. Dekker | Tuschinski | Racing | 7 | June 19th 06 06:16 AM |
Alberto Contador | Bret Wade | Racing | 15 | March 27th 05 03:20 PM |