In 1976, I was running track for my school, and I watched historic events like Bruce Jenner winning the decathlon.
But then, in those days, I was young and impressionable, like you.
It really is interesting how Armstrong permits you to live in his head. He is actually yearning for a time when you weren’t there, as if he would evict you from his head but he cannot. He feels powerless which is why he gets so irritable.
That is the analogy, bravo. Some "extreme believer" would try to say that all "success is down to doping", and I would be the one challenging whether that was reality or baseless fantasy.
Well done. Gold star for you.
The baseless fantasy is yours but you weren't smart enough to understand that.
In 1976, I was running track for my school, and I watched historic events like Bruce Jenner winning the decathlon.
But then, in those days, I was young and impressionable, like you.
It really is interesting how Armstrong permits you to live in his head. He is actually yearning for a time when you weren’t there, as if he would evict you from his head but he cannot. He feels powerless which is why he gets so irritable.
In 1976, I was running track for my school, and I watched historic events like Bruce Jenner winning the decathlon.
But then, in those days, I was young and impressionable, like you.
You've remained as naive as you were then. But the advantage of Letsrun not existing then is that no one would have heard from you.
Rekrunner took roids but still got whipped by the other schools. He remains bitter to this day, and seeks comfort in constantly sermonizing on the ineffectiveness of peds.
You've remained as naive as you were then. But the advantage of Letsrun not existing then is that no one would have heard from you.
Rekrunner took roids but still got whipped by the other schools. He remains bitter to this day, and seeks comfort in constantly sermonizing on the ineffectiveness of peds.
This is actually less likely than the notion that a Kenyan man broke your heart and you cannot get over it.
You've remained as naive as you were then. But the advantage of Letsrun not existing then is that no one would have heard from you.
Rekrunner took roids but still got whipped by the other schools. He remains bitter to this day, and seeks comfort in constantly sermonizing on the ineffectiveness of peds.
'roids? Why would I take 'roids for distance running?
I guess my highest palmar is competing in a state meet qualifier for the Junior Olympics. It was a great journey and experience.
Thereafter, the closest thing to doping was too much beer and pizza in university -- also a great experience. It was ineffective.
I would never sermonize that a PED is ineffective. "PED" is a highly emotive but ambiguous term that just raises the question whether a substance can be rightfully called a PED. If a substance is ineffective, you simply cannot call it a PED. But surely you already knew this.
That is the analogy, bravo. Some "extreme believer" would try to say that all "success is down to doping", and I would be the one challenging whether that was reality or baseless fantasy.
Well done. Gold star for you.
The baseless fantasy is yours but you weren't smart enough to understand that.
More predictable self-projection from Mr. Pot.
I believe in talent and training, including at altitude -- all time proven.
You've remained as naive as you were then. But the advantage of Letsrun not existing then is that no one would have heard from you.
Again, predictable self-projection coupled with a personal attack -- picked out from your many tools when you've run out of intellectual things to say.
Rekrunner took roids but still got whipped by the other schools. He remains bitter to this day, and seeks comfort in constantly sermonizing on the ineffectiveness of peds.
'roids? Why would I take 'roids for distance running?
I guess my highest palmar is competing in a state meet qualifier for the Junior Olympics. It was a great journey and experience.
Thereafter, the closest thing to doping was too much beer and pizza in university -- also a great experience. It was ineffective.
I would never sermonize that a PED is ineffective. "PED" is a highly emotive but ambiguous term that just raises the question whether a substance can be rightfully called a PED. If a substance is ineffective, you simply cannot call it a PED. But surely you already knew this.
EPO, roids and the rest are still called peds, even if you believe them to be ineffective. Maybe you need some help for your solipsism?
Rekrunner took roids but still got whipped by the other schools. He remains bitter to this day, and seeks comfort in constantly sermonizing on the ineffectiveness of peds.
'roids? Why would I take 'roids for distance running?
I guess my highest palmar is competing in a state meet qualifier for the Junior Olympics. It was a great journey and experience.
Thereafter, the closest thing to doping was too much beer and pizza in university -- also a great experience. It was ineffective.
I would never sermonize that a PED is ineffective. "PED" is a highly emotive but ambiguous term that just raises the question whether a substance can be rightfully called a PED. If a substance is ineffective, you simply cannot call it a PED. But surely you already knew this.
But we know from you that EPO is not a ped. Nothing is, when it comes to Kenyan distance runners. In fact ped is a fictional term invented by WADA.
Yet the irony is that you are determined to argue to the nth degree that dopers are innocent when convicted, that no one at the top of running is doping, and the incidence of doping is far less than many estimates - all of which speaks volumes of your secret fear that doping does indeed enhance performance in top runners, including altitude-trained Kenyans. Otherwise you would simply say - "so what, if they are doping. It's only their misplaced and unsubstantiated belief that it aids them". But you don't say that. So it does help them. And massively.
The baseless fantasy is yours but you weren't smart enough to understand that.
More predictable self-projection from Mr. Pot.
I believe in talent and training, including at altitude -- all time proven.
They work even better with drugs. Also proven. And many athletes believe they help, with more knowledge and experience of drugs than you have. You deny the effect of drugs on performance when never having used them. A perfect demonstration of "baseless fantasy".
You've remained as naive as you were then. But the advantage of Letsrun not existing then is that no one would have heard from you.
Again, predictable self-projection coupled with a personal attack -- picked out from your many tools when you've run out of intellectual things to say.
That no one would have heard from you in '76 - and they didn't - in the absence of a forum like this does not require an intellectual basis to say that. It is strikingly obvious. But grasping such a simple point of fact is doubtless a major intellectual exercise for you.
But we know from you that EPO is not a ped. Nothing is, when it comes to Kenyan distance runners. In fact ped is a fictional term invented by WADA.
Yet the irony is that you are determined to argue to the nth degree that dopers are innocent when convicted, that no one at the top of running is doping, and the incidence of doping is far less than many estimates - all of which speaks volumes of your secret fear that doping does indeed enhance performance in top runners, including altitude-trained Kenyans. Otherwise you would simply say - "so what, if they are doping. It's only their misplaced and unsubstantiated belief that it aids them". But you don't say that. So it does help them. And massively.
Kenyans? I thought we were talking about Viren during his career.
The real irony is you starting a post with "we know", as if your deep-rooted beliefs, dating back to your naive and impressionable days during Viren's career, have ever subsequently been promoted to knowledge.
Note WADA does not use the highly non-specific term PED either.
I believe in talent and training, including at altitude -- all time proven.
They work even better with drugs. Also proven. And many athletes believe they help, with more knowledge and experience of drugs than you have. You deny the effect of drugs on performance when never having used them. A perfect demonstration of "baseless fantasy".
Also proven? Then why can't you ever provide such proofs? These alleged athletes aren't sharing their knowledge -- you are, as someone with no knowledge and experience.
But we know from you that EPO is not a ped. Nothing is, when it comes to Kenyan distance runners. In fact ped is a fictional term invented by WADA.
Yet the irony is that you are determined to argue to the nth degree that dopers are innocent when convicted, that no one at the top of running is doping, and the incidence of doping is far less than many estimates - all of which speaks volumes of your secret fear that doping does indeed enhance performance in top runners, including altitude-trained Kenyans. Otherwise you would simply say - "so what, if they are doping. It's only their misplaced and unsubstantiated belief that it aids them". But you don't say that. So it does help them. And massively.
Kenyans? I thought we were talking about Viren during his career.
The real irony is you starting a post with "we know", as if your deep-rooted beliefs, dating back to your naive and impressionable days during Viren's career, have ever subsequently been promoted to knowledge.
Note WADA does not use the highly non-specific term PED either.
If WADA doesn't use the term then that must prove the drugs don't exist. You are at least consistent, if a little dim.
Despite what you say about what you think "we are talking about", nothing you say on doping amounts to anything more than flatulence.
Again, predictable self-projection coupled with a personal attack -- picked out from your many tools when you've run out of intellectual things to say.
That no one would have heard from you in '76 - and they didn't - in the absence of a forum like this does not require an intellectual basis to say that. It is strikingly obvious. But grasping such a simple point of fact is doubtless a major intellectual exercise for you.
How does that justify your personal attacks about me today? (Hint: It doesn't. It's just what you do because you don't have smart things to say.)
So this thread is a hypothetical "what if" about events in the '70s. Surely there existed a large number of science-minded fans who would respond to emotionally driven unsubstantiated allegations by stepping back and asking, what do we really know from data and observations? In the 1970's, no one knew if Viren blood-doped (we still don't know today), and not much was known nor confirmed with respect to blood transfusion effectiveness for endurance events. It was all emotion and sour grapes from the losers.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.