Hey, Head, meet sand.
Who do you think you are, Rojo?
Why is it you can use a "banned, naughty" word on letsrun when the rest of us cannot? I had to change the spelling of your banned work so I could reply at all.
Hey, Head, meet sand.
Who do you think you are, Rojo?
Why is it you can use a "banned, naughty" word on letsrun when the rest of us cannot? I had to change the spelling of your banned work so I could reply at all.
coach d wrote:
I still haven't seen any actual evidence of Lance cheating.
How much of the so-called "testimony" was coerced? Was there ANY testimony that wasn't coerced by Tygart claiming to have evidence against them that he didn't have?
Where are the actual positive test results?
All I've see thus far looks like a PR campaign by an obsessed nut out to build his own empire and "get" someone.
If the evidence is what it seems thus far, I want to see a Federal investigation of USADA/Tygart in the Gatlin case.
Seriously? How the view of the inside of your colon since you should be able to see it by now?
I guess you give Hitler a pass for the Final Solution as well, right?
luv2run wrote:
I guess you give Hitler a pass for the Final Solution as well, right?
I do. Where is the evidence? It's just a bunch of he said she said nonsense. Worse, most of the people doing the saying are dead or at least senile by now. And you give them credibility?!? Who's the gullible one here?
ukathleticscoach wrote:
'I still haven't seen any actual evidence of Lance cheating'
Yeah, 'no comment' is really the refrain of the innocent
It's kind of ironic when one of the biggest dooshbags on the board comments another another one of the biggest dooshbags on the boards' post...
Just sayin...
Well Now That You Mention It wrote:
luv2run wrote:I guess you give Hitler a pass for the Final Solution as well, right?
I do. Where is the evidence? It's just a bunch of he said she said nonsense. Worse, most of the people doing the saying are dead or at least senile by now. And you give them credibility?!? Who's the gullible one here?
What I see in the report is this:
(p.19)Had Mr. Armstrong not refused to confront the evidence against him in a hearing, the witnesses in the case of The United States Anti-Doping Agency v. Lance Armstrong would have testified under oath with a legal duty to testify truthfully or face potential civil and/or criminal consequences. Witness after witness would have been called to the stand and witness after witness would have confirmed the following: That Lance Armstrong used the banned drug EPO. That Lance Armstrong used the banned drug Testosterone. That Lance Armstrong provided his teammates the banned drug EPO. That Lance Armstrong administered to a teammate the banned drug Testosterone. That Lance Armstrong enforced the doping program on his team by threatening a rider with termination if he did not dope in accordance with the plan drawn up by Dr. Michele Ferrari.
...
(p.21)There is, however, evidence from a number of Mr. Armstrong?'s past samples that corroborate the other evidence of his doping. As explained below, had this matter gone to a hearing USADA would have asked the hearing panel to permit use of the scientific evidence to corroborate the testimony of its witnesses. However, the witness testimony and other document evidence is so strong USADA would have confidently proceeded to a hearing without any evidence from samples had the panel accepted the UCI?'s contention that only the UCI has jurisdiction to examine evidence gathered from samples collected by the UCI.
So they're basically saying that it's Lance Armstrong's fault that THEY (USADA) don't have any physical evidence?
This is ludicrous. If they have evidence that Lance used testosterone and EPO they should present it.
The concern I have is the parallels with the Gatlin case, where it IS clear that they went out to "get" Gatlin because they felt they needed him to provide testimony to use against Trevor Graham. We KNOW that they (the drug testers) tightened the T/E ratio in the sample taken at the Kansas Relays (public record). We don't know (can't prove) that extralegal methods were used. But the situation seems highly suspicious when you consider not just the timing of the case, but the rub-down creme container that apparently nobody ever found, Victor Conte's expert commentary about how sharply T/E ratio goes up with testosterone creme, and Gatlin's legal times this year compared to his "doped" times 6 years ago.
More and more people are questioning the protections (little no none it appears) athletes have against this particular agency. They would have more protection if they had committed espionage or treason as in the Wikileaks case. This is part of the reasons that pro track athletes need a union. Compare the situation with pro track athletes and other pro sports (MLB and NFL, for example).
THANK YOU!
Anyone who dismisses and denounces Lance as a 'cheater' who should be condemned is ignorant, plain and simple. Doping was part of the culture in cycling during that period and continues to be as we write in this forum.
You people on these boards need to screw your heads on straight and cease in your naivete... doping is a product of an individual's extreme dedication and commitment to sport. Yes of course it is morally reprehensible, but an athlete who puts their heart and soul into sport only to have it snatched away by a 'one hit wonder' doper having a great year has good reason to engage in such activities.
You all may as well clump all of Lance's fellow competitors into the doping conversation and just hate cycling in general. Let's see... the second place finishers in Armstrong tour wins...
Alex Zulle (doper), Ullrich (currently banned doper), Basso (Operation Puerto doper), Kloden (name in numerous doping documents, banned then reinstated).
Questions?
"If they have evidence that Lance used testosterone and EPO they should present it."
They should. As long as the athlete is under the care of a physician then there isn't a case. All LA has to say, is
"I was under the CARE of a physician", the issue of doping,
becomes moot as a result of the American constitutional right against self-incrimination. LA walks the USADA says "Okey dokey my main man...just be under the care of physician" and everything is cool.
This is a golden opportunity for LA to push for national heath care and Obamacare. Can you imagine the ads for national health care, LA: "I used to ba drug user now I'm under the care of a physician", can you just smell the gold.
drosenke wrote:
You all may as well clump all of Lance's fellow competitors into the doping conversation and just hate cycling in general. Let's see... the second place finishers in Armstrong tour wins...
Alex Zulle (doper), Ullrich (currently banned doper), Basso (Operation Puerto doper), Kloden (name in numerous doping documents, banned then reinstated).
Questions?
Clump away, dumba\ss. And while you're clumping, please tell us where the "physical evidence" (by your and coach d's definition) against Ullrich, Basso and Klöden is. That's right, nowhere. No positive tests by any of those guys, just hundreds of negative ones. I guess they're innocent too and you just became guilty of hunting witches.
coach d, you have GOT to be a triathlon coach! Looks like triathlon doesn't mind cheaters, they welcome Lance with open arms!
Sand meet Head wrote:
Hey, Head, meet sand.
Who do you think you are, Rojo?
Why is it you can use a "banned, naughty" word on letsrun when the rest of us cannot? I had to change the spelling of your banned work so I could reply at all.
LOL, that filter is just an IQ test. An IQ test which your dumb a\ss just fu\cking failed, moth\erfu\cker!
where do these lance fanboys come from? straight from the primordial ooze, these unicellular prokaryotes? i'm actually just kinda glad nobody has incorrectly used 'hearsay' in this thread.
wakey wakey wrote:
ukathleticscoach wrote:'I still haven't seen any actual evidence of Lance cheating'
Yeah, 'no comment' is really the refrain of the innocent
It's kind of ironic when one of the biggest dooshbags on the board comments another another one of the biggest dooshbags on the boards' post...
Just sayin...
Then there is you who cannot actually discuss either of our statements
Keep trying under a different name
'Anyone who dismisses and denounces Lance as a 'cheater' who should be condemned is ignorant, plain and simple. Doping was part of the culture in cycling during that period and continues to be as we write in this forum. '
That's like saying everyone in prison is a criminal
11 teammates testified he doped. Alot.
Can't wait until the IRS gets involved! Look out Lance, here they come!
jesucristo wrote:
where do these lance fanboys come from? straight from the primordial ooze, these unicellular prokaryotes? i'm actually just kinda glad nobody has incorrectly used 'hearsay' in this thread.
The fanboys spell it "heresay"
I'm still looking for a real response...noone can answer this question. I think this speaks to TTT's motiviation.
Why mention tax payer money in the official statement but the word tax is not mentioned anywhere in the decision.
I guess some people would have to see Lance on live tv shooting up while screaming "THIS IS EPO I'M SHOOTING INTO MY VEINS!!!"