Cyclist Floyd Landis Admits Doping, Alleges Use by Armstrong and Others .

Get me a positive test and I will honestly be more then happy to do just that.

There's no negative drug test that can show any person is clean. It does not exist. The fact that Armstrong is White accounts for 95% of the doubters. If he was Black, people here would be jumping all over him.

But there are drug tests that can show a person is "not clean". And I don't think so.

No, there are no drug tests that can defintively show a human, racing dog, racing horse, etc. as clean. Drug tests only examine a single given substance. Psychological evaluations can reveal steroid induced behavior. Statisticians can prove android-like PED performances.

So your saying if athletes at a high level show consistency when it counts, I'm assuming this is what you mean by "android" (for cycling it counts during the Tour De France) then they are dopers?

However you want to squirm and weasel your gay love for him doesn't matter to the truth we all know, that Armstrong is a doper. The sad part is Armstrong has hurt the NYM and BOSM considerably and damaged running.

Also your process of catching dopers can prove to be very dangerous. No longer do we count on the blind neutrality of science and drug testing to determine if someone is doping but now we count on the opinon of a few sciensts on weither this guy is acting too "weird" or he is improving to greatly or if he is too consistant.

Is drug testing a perfect science? Of course not. Is it better then a few men or women deciding what is "normal" and what is "weird" or what is "too impressive". I think so.

PULL THE WHITE CARD wrote:

The fact that Armstrong is White accounts for 95% of the doubters. If he was Black, people here would be jumping all over him.

Well, you have to admit that if a Black guy from Texas had suddenly won seven straight Tours de France, it would look a little suspicious.

But I don't know why so many people seem to believe that Armstrong was a clean athlete. I doubt that's it's because of his race. I suspect that it has something to do with the way that people choose and stubbornly hang on to their heroes. People tend to believe what's comfortable, even in the face of inconvenient evidence. Do many people outside of the U.S. actually believe that he was clean?

How's those apples?

You are still weaseling and making excuses for that doper, Lance Armstrong.

good wrote:

Get me a positive test and I will honestly be more then happy to do just that.

This should do:

Does anyone care to provide a link or at least a citation for these "numerous" statisticians who have proven Lance guilty of doping? Talk is cheap, and claiming on the letsrun boards that "you know someone who proved something to be true..." is as close to free as it gets.

I'm not saying Lance is clean, but everyone who claims with full confidence that he is a doper is riding on a lot of hearsay and speculation.

kudzu runner nails the problem with Landis on the head. I have no doubt that his claims to have used dope are true -- presumably no one would claim to have doped when they haven't. Landis has become a fairly shady figure within the cycling world since his charade of a trial post-TdF. Of course, this suits the conspiracy theorists, who can simply claim Landis is a victim of having broken omerta and is now persona-non-grata. But going on instinct, however, anyone who starts slinging mud once their ship is undoubtedly sinking is a suspicious figure.

At any rate, if Landis cannot provide tangible proof (which he says on the espn.com article he cannot), these allegations will eventually fade into just another blip among the many others. If Landis is coming clean with truthful accusations -- things he is sure of, not just suspicions he had during his pro days -- then chapeau to him for his courage.

good wrote:

Oh ok, if it's true then you'll have no problem in showing me a time where Lance tested positive for performance enhancing drugs.

Marion Jones has zero positive tests for performance enhancing drugs to her name to this day. Passing a test is not the same as being clean.

She passed every drug test. Lance Armstrong passed every drug test but fails statistical and psychological analysis, and has been nailed by numerous fellow dopers he used with.

Let's use the Socratic Method: Perhaps Landis is simply using Lance to justify his own failings ie yes I'm guilty but so is Lance which still makes me great. Or: Lance has truly done some amazing things almost super human which would indicate a strong possibility of drug use to support such strong performances. However there's nothing conclusive at this point other than one mans accusations so we must conclude that until further evidence comes forward that a rush to judgement would be unjust.

It is just like an internet site like lestrun to post such slanderous remarks on their home page. Floyd Landis obviously wrote a book claiming his innocence after the 2006 Tour. Now they are posting the remarks from the same acclaimed liar to gain support against Lance in a sport other than running? Isn't it obvious that Landis will do anything now to save grace? Maybe track and field isn't doing as well in America as letsrun thought it was. Lestrun has failed me once again. They are now on the same level in my book as Greg Lemond or Tyler Hamilton.

Easy Answer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIl5RxhLZ5U

We don't need statistics or psychological tests, when we have facts.Six urine samples from Lance Armstrong in 1999 tested positive for EPO.

Yup Yup Yup wrote:

She passed every drug test. Lance Armstrong passed every drug test but fails statistical and psychological analysis, and has been nailed by numerous fellow dopers he used with.

[quote]rekrunner wrote:

We don't need statistics or psychological tests, when we have facts.

Six urine samples from Lance Armstrong in 1999 tested positive for EPO.

"Unfortunately, the witch hunt continues and tomorrow's article is nothing short of tabloid journalism. The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself. They state: 'There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant's rights cannot be respected.' I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs."[74]