ek87o78o78o wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Another dog joins the barking.
Dogs are necessary to keep stupid sheep like you under control.
Your best shot at addressing the subject of the thread? I guess so. Woof.
ek87o78o78o wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Another dog joins the barking.
Dogs are necessary to keep stupid sheep like you under control.
Your best shot at addressing the subject of the thread? I guess so. Woof.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are so tediously repetitious - as well as thick as a bunch of planks. No one is asking whether doping has occurred amongst nationalities like the Chinese, but whether a case can be made that a given individual athlete has doped. Absent a confirmed violation you have never have accepted that on these boards. That is the only issue when we are discussing an individual athlete - like Nadal. Your mind has never been changed on that. Your reasons are immaterial. It says that your position is immovable. You have nothing to offer except the rigidity of your asinine convictions. You will never see a doper even while sports are full of them.
Make up your mind -- you said no athletes in the last 30 years, and I referred to a half-dozen or so individual athletes from two events in 1993 and 1997, both within the last 30 years.
This is just one of many things you say that were already disproven before you even said it.
My position can be moved by data and facts, but not by excessive speculation and circular arguments that assume the conclusion to conclude the assumption.
My conviction is that your facts are too sparse and as such cannot connect doping to the individual athlete.
Don't fault me if you cannot form a fact filled argument, and tend to fill the fact gaps with your own personal faith.
You named no individual athlete except Kratochvilova from the early 80's - what a tough call! Eastern bloc women runners from the 80's and "Chinese women runners" from the '90's are not a description of an individual to anyone who understands that a national group is not an individual. Apparently, you don't.
But you will do anything to try to evade the point that you have never accepted any argument made on these boards about an individual distance runner who hadn't failed a doping test. Obviously a matter of "personal faith" for you.
But entering with you into your little personal insanity is a pointless exercise. There is no meaningful dialogue with madness.
Armstronglivs wrote:
You named no individual athlete except Kratochvilova from the early 80's - what a tough call! Eastern bloc women runners from the 80's and "Chinese women runners" from the '90's are not a description of an individual to anyone who understands that a national group is not an individual. Apparently, you don't.
But you will do anything to try to evade the point that you have never accepted any argument made on these boards about an individual distance runner who hadn't failed a doping test. Obviously a matter of "personal faith" for you.
But entering with you into your little personal insanity is a pointless exercise. There is no meaningful dialogue with madness.
Now you are the tedious repetitous, thick as a bunch of planks.
You asked for one name -- insisted on it. I gave you exactly what you asked me for.
If you want some Chinese names, here are 10: Wang Junxia, Ma Ningning, Wang Yuan, Lu Ou, Wang Xiaoxia, Zhang Linli, Liu Li, Lu Yi, Liu Dong and Zhang Lirong
If you want another name -- Eddy Hellebuyck
You want more names, look up the Russian women who swapped urine samples and were only found out by comparing DNA
Not only have I not evaded it, I have repeatedly answered your point, explaining to you why the arguments about individual distance runners are rejected -- I cannot accept specific conclusions without specific data. Lacking such data, it is untested speculation, and remains inconclusive. I can accept it as a personal hypothesis, speculation, suspicion, etc., but not as a conclusion intellectually supported by facts data and logic.
Note even a confirmed positive test can be a false positive. Consider the cases of Vojtěch Sommer, Steven Colvert, and Benedikt Karus -- apparently some WADA labs get the EPO urine test wrong.
Armstronglivs wrote:
ek87o78o78o wrote:
Dogs are necessary to keep stupid sheep like you under control.
Your best shot at addressing the subject of the thread? I guess so. Woof.
"Woof"?
You sound just like your mother.
123 5 wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Your best shot at addressing the subject of the thread? I guess so. Woof.
"Woof"?
You sound just like your mother.
Thanks bro.
And you know what, Armstronglivs, you demented old fart? That poster is right. If you are going to call me a dog, start with your parents. I'm sure that explains your existence and unique personality.
Armstronglivs wrote:
Dope Hardstrong wrote:
But you're doing it now in your usual clumsy fashion.
And that's because you have still failed to prove your thread title.
That would require comprehension skills you don't have. Go clean out your stables and leave thinking for those who can.
That was even clumsier. Do these actually sound sharp to you in your head?
Stop following Trump's twitter feed. It's starting to influence your thinking.
Dope Hardstrong wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
That would require comprehension skills you don't have. Go clean out your stables and leave thinking for those who can.
That was even clumsier. Do these actually sound sharp to you in your head?
Stop following Trump's twitter feed. It's starting to influence your thinking.
You guys need to go to school on the art of the insult. All you do is p*ss on your own feet.
ek87o78o78o wrote:
123 5 wrote:
"Woof"?
You sound just like your mother.
Thanks bro.
And you know what, Armstronglivs, you demented old fart? That poster is right. If you are going to call me a dog, start with your parents. I'm sure that explains your existence and unique personality.
Ooh, you're so fierce! I feel like I've been savaged by a wet sheep.
Armstronglivs wrote:
Dope Hardstrong wrote:
That was even clumsier. Do these actually sound sharp to you in your head?
Stop following Trump's twitter feed. It's starting to influence your thinking.
You guys need to go to school on the art of the insult. All you do is p*ss on your own feet.
Your existence is an insult to the human race.
So, well done. You have mastered the art.
Armstronglivs wrote:
I feel like I've been savaged by a wet sheep.
I hope you haven't forgotten your Viagra.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You named no individual athlete except Kratochvilova from the early 80's - what a tough call! Eastern bloc women runners from the 80's and "Chinese women runners" from the '90's are not a description of an individual to anyone who understands that a national group is not an individual. Apparently, you don't.
But you will do anything to try to evade the point that you have never accepted any argument made on these boards about an individual distance runner who hadn't failed a doping test. Obviously a matter of "personal faith" for you.
But entering with you into your little personal insanity is a pointless exercise. There is no meaningful dialogue with madness.
Now you are the tedious repetitous, thick as a bunch of planks.
You asked for one name -- insisted on it. I gave you exactly what you asked me for.
If you want some Chinese names, here are 10: Wang Junxia, Ma Ningning, Wang Yuan, Lu Ou, Wang Xiaoxia, Zhang Linli, Liu Li, Lu Yi, Liu Dong and Zhang Lirong
If you want another name -- Eddy Hellebuyck
You want more names, look up the Russian women who swapped urine samples and were only found out by comparing DNA
Not only have I not evaded it, I have repeatedly answered your point, explaining to you why the arguments about individual distance runners are rejected -- I cannot accept specific conclusions without specific data. Lacking such data, it is untested speculation, and remains inconclusive. I can accept it as a personal hypothesis, speculation, suspicion, etc., but not as a conclusion intellectually supported by facts data and logic.
Note even a confirmed positive test can be a false positive. Consider the cases of Vojtěch Sommer, Steven Colvert, and Benedikt Karus -- apparently some WADA labs get the EPO urine test wrong.
You need to stop repeating yourself. It's all you do. Of course there is never "sufficient data" to satisfy you - that is called denial. (Quite apart from your omniscience on these matters that always enables you to correct every other argument on doping. You make a narcissist look modest.) No one has made an argument here that you will accept and so dopers are always given a pass. By you. I look forward to the next vacuous repetition of what you have previously - and endlessly - said .
ek87o78o78o wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You guys need to go to school on the art of the insult. All you do is p*ss on your own feet.
Your existence is an insult to the human race.
So, well done. You have mastered the art.
You really need to clean your shoes.
ek87o78o78o wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I feel like I've been savaged by a wet sheep.
I hope you haven't forgotten your Viagra.
I see the prospect of a wet sheep excites you. Quelle surprise.
Armstronglivs wrote:
ek87o78o78o wrote:
I hope you haven't forgotten your Viagra.
I see the prospect of a wet sheep excites you. Quelle surprise.
You came up with it, Viagra man.
Sheep, horses, dogs... No wonder you need help for the old c0ck.
Armstronglivs wrote:
Dope Hardstrong wrote:
That would require comprehension skills you don't have. Go clean out your stables and leave thinking for those who can.
That was even clumsier. Do these actually sound sharp to you in your head?
Stop following Trump's twitter feed. It's starting to influence your thinking.
You guys need to go to school on the art of the insult. All you do is p*ss on your own feet.[/quote}
What has made you think you have mastered it past grade 2?
Armstronglivs wrote:
ek87o78o78o wrote:
Thanks bro.
And you know what, Armstronglivs, you demented old fart? That poster is right. If you are going to call me a dog, start with your parents. I'm sure that explains your existence and unique personality.
Ooh, you're so fierce! I feel like I've been savaged by a wet sheep.
A regular event for you?
ek87o78o78o wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I see the prospect of a wet sheep excites you. Quelle surprise.
You came up with it, Viagra man.
Sheep, horses, dogs... No wonder you need help for the old c0ck.
One of the characteristics of an inferior intellect is that it never grasps that fact. You need to stay in your stables, cleaning out the manure.
Dope Hardstrong wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Ooh, you're so fierce! I feel like I've been savaged by a wet sheep.
A regular event for you?
It seems that the board allows toddlers here. We are past your bedtime.
Dope Hardstrong wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
That would require comprehension skills you don't have. Go clean out your stables and leave thinking for those who can.
That was even clumsier. Do these actually sound sharp to you in your head?
Stop following Trump's twitter feed. It's starting to influence your thinking.
You guys need to go to school on the art of the insult. All you do is p*ss on your own feet.[/quote}
What has made you think you have mastered it past grade 2?(/quote)
You.
Armstronglivs wrote:
You need to stop repeating yourself. It's all you do. Of course there is never "sufficient data" to satisfy you - that is called denial. (Quite apart from your omniscience on these matters that always enables you to correct every other argument on doping. You make a narcissist look modest.) No one has made an argument here that you will accept and so dopers are always given a pass. By you. I look forward to the next vacuous repetition of what you have previously - and endlessly - said .
Can't you make up your mind? Which is it? Do I "evade the point" or do I repeat myself so much a narcissist is jealous?
In this instance, the repetition was directly responding to your repetition.
And no response to the dozen names you've been lamenting I never give? What will you do with these names now?
Once again, you have been directly proven wrong, but you circle back to some previous lame point.
By now you should know why your Nadal thread has failed to support your initial subject line -- for the same reason "dopers are always given a pass" fails -- if you had specific data, they would not get a pass. Otherwise they get the benefit of the doubt -- of which there is plenty.
Let me know when you are able to cure the defects in your data and your logic.