Reason why Lance stuff drags and drags and drags

Trying to figure out why this whole mess has taken so long, why it
wasn't over and done with years ago. There's so much stuff flying out
there, from David Walsh to Novitsky to 60 minutes to whatever. And then,
reading through the recent threads here, something became obvious.
Consider the three different focuses of people wanting to see Lance
drawn & quartered-

#1: Those who hate Lance because he's too successful, and they see
success as a sort of arrogance that should be put down.
#2: Those who want Lance punished because they believe he doped and they
see doping as a terrible thing in cycling.
#3: Those who want Lance punished because he was part of a mis-use of
public monies

Obviously there are combinations of the three, but the problem is that
people like Walsh don't really care about the money, and the money
people often don't really care about the doping. The multi-pronged
approach, instead of making a case against Lance stronger, actually
dilutes it because people either don't understand it or don't buy into
the total package. The exception would be those in the first camp; they
don't need any more evidence than they had when Lance won his first TdF
(or maybe his second or third, if I want to be charitable). They saw
something that didn't add up and to them, it's about time the world
caught up to their way of thinking. They're probably the most-frustrated
of all (because of how long this has been drawn out).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Mike - there also those that just like to see a little more truth in
the world we live in.

Cycling for me was something pure.

It would be good if Lance said "Yes i did it" and went on to help make
cycling something close to 'pure' again.

But then again - who'd watch a Giro stage like today's when mere
humans wouldn't even finish.

It looked pretty hard for the best dopers in the world to complete
today.

On May 22, 11:28*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:
Mike *- there also those that just like to see a little more truth in
the world we live in.

Cycling for me was something pure.

Understood. But it never was pure, from the first events up through
the last time your local training groups or races-- sanctioned or
informal-- met.

Making Lance into The Great Satan-- why? They were all doping.

It would be good if Lance said "Yes i did it" and went on to help make
cycling something close to 'pure' again.

It's never going to be pure, and the next upping of the ante is going
to be even harder to detect.

Looks like it's a little late to offer amnesty. But, maybe not.

But then again - who'd watch a Giro stage like today's when mere
humans wouldn't even finish.

It looked pretty hard for the best dopers in the world to complete
today.

Better racing through chemistry?
--D-y

Anton Berlin wrote:
Cycling for me was something pure.

There's nothing pure in this world. Next thing you'll be wanting a white
wedding with Liz.

"Anton Berlin" wrote in message
...
Mike - there also those that just like to see a little more truth in
the world we live in.

Cycling for me was something pure.

It would be good if Lance said "Yes i did it" and went on to help make
cycling something close to 'pure' again.

But then again - who'd watch a Giro stage like today's when mere
humans wouldn't even finish.

It looked pretty hard for the best dopers in the world to complete
today.

Cycling on a personal basis can be something pure. But if you got into
cycling believing that, as a sport, it was something pure... you set
yourself up for quite a disappointment. How old were you when the Dave
Stoller line "Everybody cheats. I just didn't know" hit home? Even back
in the 70s we had no illusions that cyclists weren't doped in Europe.
Eddy was certainly on the list, yet we still held the competition in
high regard.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

On May 22, 10:09*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:
Trying to figure out why this whole mess has taken so long, why it
wasn't over and done with years ago. There's so much stuff flying out
there, from David Walsh to Novitsky to 60 minutes to whatever. And then,
reading through the recent threads here, something became obvious.
Consider the three different focuses of people wanting to see Lance
drawn & quartered-

#1: Those who hate Lance because he's too successful, and they see
success as a sort of arrogance that should be put down.
#2: Those who want Lance punished because they believe he doped and they
see doping as a terrible thing in cycling.
#3: Those who want Lance punished because he was part of a mis-use of
public monies

Obviously there are combinations of the three, but the problem is that
people like Walsh don't really care about the money, and the money
people often don't really care about the doping. The multi-pronged
approach, instead of making a case against Lance stronger, actually
dilutes it because people either don't understand it or don't buy into
the total package. The exception would be those in the first camp; they
don't need any more evidence than they had when Lance won his first TdF
(or maybe his second or third, if I want to be charitable). They saw
something that didn't add up and to them, it's about time the world
caught up to their way of thinking. They're probably the most-frustrated
of all (because of how long this has been drawn out).

--Mike-- * * Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com

#1: Those who hate Lance because he's too successful, and they see
success as a sort of arrogance that should be put down.

You gotta wonder if Armstrong has ever asked himself: "Would all this
be happening if I weren't such a douchebag?"

On 5/23/2011 11:39 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
"Anton wrote in message
...
Mike - there also those that just like to see a little more truth in
the world we live in.

Cycling for me was something pure.

It would be good if Lance said "Yes i did it" and went on to help make
cycling something close to 'pure' again.

But then again - who'd watch a Giro stage like today's when mere
humans wouldn't even finish.

It looked pretty hard for the best dopers in the world to complete
today.

Cycling on a personal basis can be something pure. But if you got into
cycling believing that, as a sport, it was something pure... you set
yourself up for quite a disappointment. How old were you when the Dave
Stoller line "Everybody cheats. I just didn't know" hit home? Even back
in the 70s we had no illusions that cyclists weren't doped in Europe.
Eddy was certainly on the list, yet we still held the competition in
high regard.

Mike,

I don't believe Anton is being 100% forthright about this. As
you note, his level of stupidity would have to be pretty high.
I'm skeptical he's as stupid as he appears to be.

More likely he's got some personal grudge against LANCE that
he's been carefully nursing all these years. I think everyone
recognizes that LANCE is not the worlds most likable guy.

F

In article
,
Anton Berlin wrote:

Cycling for me was something pure.

So? You found otherwise. Bashing people who do not
share your outrage is not the way out. Professional
cycling is too insignificant to rate what you put into it.

--
Old Fritz

In article ,
Fred Flintstein wrote:

On 5/23/2011 11:39 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
"Anton wrote in message
...
Mike - there also those that just like to see a little more truth in
the world we live in.

Cycling for me was something pure.

It would be good if Lance said "Yes i did it" and went on to help make
cycling something close to 'pure' again.

But then again - who'd watch a Giro stage like today's when mere
humans wouldn't even finish.

It looked pretty hard for the best dopers in the world to complete
today.

Cycling on a personal basis can be something pure. But if you got into
cycling believing that, as a sport, it was something pure... you set
yourself up for quite a disappointment. How old were you when the Dave
Stoller line "Everybody cheats. I just didn't know" hit home? Even back
in the 70s we had no illusions that cyclists weren't doped in Europe.
Eddy was certainly on the list, yet we still held the competition in
high regard.

Mike,

I don't believe Anton is being 100% forthright about this. As
you note, his level of stupidity would have to be pretty high.
I'm skeptical he's as stupid as he appears to be.

More likely he's got some personal grudge against LANCE that
he's been carefully nursing all these years. I think everyone
recognizes that LANCE is not the worlds most likable guy.

Then there is Gadret.

--
Old Fritz

On May 23, 2:20*pm, Fred Flintstein
wrote:
On 5/23/2011 11:39 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
"Anton *wrote in message

Mike *- there also those that just like to see a little more truth in
the world we live in.

Cycling for me was something pure.

It would be good if Lance said "Yes i did it" and went on to help make
cycling something close to 'pure' again.

But then again - who'd watch a Giro stage like today's when mere
humans wouldn't even finish.

It looked pretty hard for the best dopers in the world to complete
today.

Cycling on a personal basis can be something pure. But if you got into
cycling believing that, as a sport, it was something pure... you set
yourself up for quite a disappointment. How old were you when the Dave
Stoller line "Everybody cheats. I just didn't know" hit home? Even back
in the 70s we had no illusions that cyclists weren't doped in Europe.
Eddy was certainly on the list, yet we still held the competition in
high regard.

Mike,

I don't believe Anton is being 100% forthright about this. As
you note, his level of stupidity would have to be pretty high.
I'm skeptical he's as stupid as he appears to be.

More likely he's got some personal grudge against LANCE that
he's been carefully nursing all these years. I think everyone
recognizes that LANCE is not the worlds most likable guy.

Of course it's personal. Who wouldn't want to take it out on somebody
that stole their youthful trusting/optimistic outlook and naivete?

Goddammit - LANCE killed the ****ing Easter Bunny AND Santa Claus!

LANCE made the sport impure - I'm sure we can all agree on that.
Before Anton pointed this out, I was under the mistaken impression
that Mr. Stoller was right. Now I know.

Thanks, Anton!*

R

*BTW, Anton, I went to DiFara's for the first time the other day, and
now have conclusive proof that you are full of ****e on another,
entirely separate matter. You may make a fine pizza - may being the
operative word - but there's no way that your pizza is better. It's
simply not possible. YOU may like YOUR pizza better (surprise!), and
your bunghole buddies might swear to that as well, but there is quite
clearly not enough room left for improvement after Dom DeMarco does
his thing. I went to lunch there early and was decidedly _not_ hungry
as I'd eaten a big diner breakfast an hour and a half earlier. Never
taste test when you're hungry.