Dick Pound can go pound dick.
Dick Pound can go pound dick.
Jose Canseco is Victor Conte’s alter ego
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Looks like you asked and answered the question. Me too. He has nothing to lose and everything to gain by creating an image that he knows something about doping since BALCO.
Who would think that someone who made a career out of doping athletes would know anything about doping?
I suppose a lot of people would think that — that is what Conte is counting on.
None of this can be true because the dopers aren't Spanish.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Who would think that someone who made a career out of doping athletes would know anything about doping?
I suppose a lot of people would think that — that is what Conte is counting on.
Well, there are people who can think.
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
I suppose a lot of people would think that — that is what Conte is counting on.
Well, there are people who can think.
And there are people who believe what they want without thought, unable to link their thoughts with real world facts.
How many threads have left you dancing and squirming and dodging and deflecting and projecting when asked directly if you could provide specific supporting real world facts?
I think Conte has some direct experience about how to dope a small group of sprinters between the 1980s, up to about 2004, and how to avoid testers before the WADA standards were fully adopted. He wasn’t even the “brains” of BALCO.
Have you ever read, or watched, a Conte interview, and count how many of his statements start with “I believe …”?
I count 5 in this paragraph alone:
“I believe positive drug tests are bad for business, but I believe that there are people at the very highest levels who are in essence looking the other way. And I know for a fact that there’s been a lot of positive drug tests that have been covered up. ... (This) goes all the way beyond the athletes and the coaches,” Conte told The Japan Times. “I believe it goes all the way to the top, meaning beyond Nike to television networks that broadcast these events all the way to the Olympic Games to the International Olympic Committee, WADA itself and the IAAF itself. I believe they are corrupt from top to bottom. I believe they all know that there’s a rampant use of drugs.”
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Well, there are people who can think.
And there are people who believe what they want without thought, unable to link their thoughts with real world facts.
How many threads have left you dancing and squirming and dodging and deflecting and projecting when asked directly if you could provide specific supporting real world facts?
I think Conte has some direct experience about how to dope a small group of sprinters between the 1980s, up to about 2004, and how to avoid testers before the WADA standards were fully adopted. He wasn’t even the “brains” of BALCO.
Have you ever read, or watched, a Conte interview, and count how many of his statements start with “I believe …”?
I count 5 in this paragraph alone:
“I believe positive drug tests are bad for business, but I believe that there are people at the very highest levels who are in essence looking the other way. And I know for a fact that there’s been a lot of positive drug tests that have been covered up. ... (This) goes all the way beyond the athletes and the coaches,” Conte told The Japan Times. “I believe it goes all the way to the top, meaning beyond Nike to television networks that broadcast these events all the way to the Olympic Games to the International Olympic Committee, WADA itself and the IAAF itself. I believe they are corrupt from top to bottom. I believe they all know that there’s a rampant use of drugs.”
Well, you have just proven you are one of those who can't think.
Conte made a living out of doping athletes, working with those who manufacture the drugs and the athletes who used them. But that still doesn't make him an expert on the subject to a computer jockey like yourself - because he prefaces his opinions - his opinions that are based on his considerable experience - with "I believe". You are an utter moron.
Do you think that the biggest organizations in s US sport wouldn't cover up doping?
Like any other “enforcement agency”, some people will emerge to them as targets. Get on their radar, and look out. Efforts have to be concentrated to ultimately succeed. Insane performances, bad conduct, un-cooperativeness, ego, politics, etc all play a role—and fair enough. If you want to play their game, you play by their rules. Like it or not, someone has to be in charge.
I don’t feel bad for users who get caught, just because “well everyone else is using, too”. That doesn’t make them less of a cheater with respect to the articulated rules. And many of the most egregious performers do actually get caught, so even by that type of logic there is some justice.
It is imperfect, but not unfair.
Oh and of course 1988 was a mess. The whole era was insane and rapacious. Looking back, it was like a fantasy.
Give me a break wrote:
Exactly what makes anyone believe Victor Conte is credible?
and why isn't he?
Conte is a shill.
He used to shill drugs, now he shills conspiracies.
At least he was good at shilling drugs.
Doping may be rife, but poor old Victor is now just an outsider looking in, coasting on the coattails of his glory days…
Armstronglivs wrote:
Well, you have just proven you are one of those who can't think.
Conte made a living out of doping athletes, working with those who manufacture the drugs and the athletes who used them. But that still doesn't make him an expert on the subject to a computer jockey like yourself - because he prefaces his opinions - his opinions that are based on his considerable experience - with "I believe". You are an utter moron.
I’m not convinced you know what constitutes a “proof”.
If he talked about doping and anti-doping of the ‘80s and ‘90s and early 2000s, that would be one thing. But he is expressing his beliefs on other subjects outside of the living he made doping athletes, e.g. Nike, TV networks, the IOC, WADA, and the IAAF.
It’s precisely my ability to think that causes me to ignore his beliefs he expresses outside of his small domain of personal experience of doping a handful of sprinters, 15-35 years ago. When you lose the ability to think independently, you become a lemming, looking for leaders to follow because they say things you want to believe.
It would be different if any of his interviews and opinions actually revealed new information, accompanied with substantiation.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Well, you have just proven you are one of those who can't think.
Conte made a living out of doping athletes, working with those who manufacture the drugs and the athletes who used them. But that still doesn't make him an expert on the subject to a computer jockey like yourself - because he prefaces his opinions - his opinions that are based on his considerable experience - with "I believe". You are an utter moron.
I’m not convinced you know what constitutes a “proof”.
If he talked about doping and anti-doping of the ‘80s and ‘90s and early 2000s, that would be one thing. But he is expressing his beliefs on other subjects outside of the living he made doping athletes, e.g. Nike, TV networks, the IOC, WADA, and the IAAF.
It’s precisely my ability to think that causes me to ignore his beliefs he expresses outside of his small domain of personal experience of doping a handful of sprinters, 15-35 years ago. When you lose the ability to think independently, you become a lemming, looking for leaders to follow because they say things you want to believe.
It would be different if any of his interviews and opinions actually revealed new information, accompanied with substantiation.
So, sitting in your living room you're the kind of guy who thinks he knows more about space than the astronaut who has been there. Still a moron. You simply do not get that experience trumps theorizing. No one can have all the facts on doping, which is a global practice that is also largely invisible, but someone who spent years on the inside of it knows more about it than those who haven't. You risibly attempt to discredit what you have no experience of, because your need to minimise the influence of doping on the sport patently requires it.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Well, there are people who can think.
And there are people who believe what they want without thought, unable to link their thoughts with real world facts.
How many threads have left you dancing and squirming and dodging and deflecting and projecting when asked directly if you could provide specific supporting real world facts?
I think Conte has some direct experience about how to dope a small group of sprinters between the 1980s, up to about 2004, and how to avoid testers before the WADA standards were fully adopted. He wasn’t even the “brains” of BALCO.
Have you ever read, or watched, a Conte interview, and count how many of his statements start with “I believe …”?
I count 5 in this paragraph alone:
“I believe positive drug tests are bad for business, but I believe that there are people at the very highest levels who are in essence looking the other way. And I know for a fact that there’s been a lot of positive drug tests that have been covered up. ... (This) goes all the way beyond the athletes and the coaches,” Conte told The Japan Times. “I believe it goes all the way to the top, meaning beyond Nike to television networks that broadcast these events all the way to the Olympic Games to the International Olympic Committee, WADA itself and the IAAF itself. I believe they are corrupt from top to bottom. I believe they all know that there’s a rampant use of drugs.”
He has to say I believe so it doesn't open him up to law suits. I could say I believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy when I get interviewed without any proof of their existence and I can't get sued by somebody for slander.
Armstronglivs wrote:
So, sitting in your living room you're the kind of guy who thinks he knows more about space than the astronaut who has been there. Still a moron. You simply do not get that experience trumps theorizing. No one can have all the facts on doping, which is a global practice that is also largely invisible, but someone who spent years on the inside of it knows more about it than those who haven't. You risibly attempt to discredit what you have no experience of, because your need to minimise the influence of doping on the sport patently requires it.
What experience does Conte have with: Nike, TV networks, the IOC, WADA, and the IAAF, and the impact of positive doping tests on their business? This looks more like theorizing than experience.
Not so Fast! wrote:
He has to say I believe so it doesn't open him up to law suits. I could say I believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy when I get interviewed without any proof of their existence and I can't get sued by somebody for slander.
Also because he is sharing something that he can’t begin with “I know”.
Poor old Victor shilling for a living, an outsider even to the doping world in which he used to be a “star”.
The Clear was his greatest achievement in life, and even that he owes to Patrick Arnold.
If Victor really knew what was up, he’d spill the beans and get paid for it….but he doesn’t actually know…so he’s just doing what he can to stay relevant…until people get bored…
rekrunner wrote:
Not so Fast! wrote:
He has to say I believe so it doesn't open him up to law suits. I could say I believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy when I get interviewed without any proof of their existence and I can't get sued by somebody for slander.
Also because he is sharing something that he can’t begin with “I know”.
What he "believes" is more than anything you think you "know". You are a fantasist.
Armstronglivs wrote:
What he "believes" is more than anything you think you "know". You are a fantasist.
This isn’t about me.
What Conte “believes” is of very little interest to me, unless he can support it with external facts, because belief is the domain of religion, and cannot be a substitute for knowledge.
If you add Conte’s belief to my knowledge, the sum of knowledge is not greater than my knowledge alone.
You attach artificial value to his beliefs in domains outside of his experience, because he had a certain experience in the past in a connected domain.
This is something Rob Rosenberger calls “False Authority Syndrome”. The salesman at a PC store is not an expert in computer viruses, but will speak about viruses to trusting customers with confidence. He might be a recent newhire that was selling cars the week before. Doping experts are not anti-doping experts. Anti-doping experts are not elite performance experts.
For someone who claims to value thought, you consistently chose a path that requires no thought, replacing it with faith in others you believe to possess knowledge, and fault me for thinking about the content of what is said, and its context in the real world.
I attach a higher value to statements that can be supported by facts, while not contradicted by facts, than to the unfounded beliefs from someone with experience in one domain, about topics in another domain.
Initially, I expressed a doubt that Conte possessed any relevant knowledge about events after Balco. After 2003, he left the world of PEDs and athletics, ceasing to be an expert in any new developments post-Balco.
One intelligent response you can chose is to provide evidence of post-BALCO knowledge that Conte has revealed to the public. In the domain of science, the most powerful, persuasive tool is the contradiction.
I found a profile of Conte after BALCO. On the subject of anti-doping, Conte doesn’t appear to be particularly knowledgeable, as he becomes an ancient relic of the past:
“Conte says he has tried to work with domestic and international anti-doping agencies to effect change, but after some initial cooperation has found them unwelcoming. A high-ranking U.S. doping official says Conte never provided useful doping intelligence. Meanwhile, the massive, state-sponsored Russian doping scandal of 2010–16 and smaller, but no less damaging, scandals involving Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes have pushed BALCO deeper into the past.”
https://www.si.com/more-sports/2017/06/28/victor-conte-balco-steroidsrekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
What he "believes" is more than anything you think you "know". You are a fantasist.
This isn’t about me.
What Conte “believes” is of very little interest to me, unless he can support it with external facts, because belief is the domain of religion, and cannot be a substitute for knowledge.
If you add Conte’s belief to my knowledge, the sum of knowledge is not greater than my knowledge alone.
You attach artificial value to his beliefs in domains outside of his experience, because he had a certain experience in the past in a connected domain.
This is something Rob Rosenberger calls “False Authority Syndrome”. The salesman at a PC store is not an expert in computer viruses, but will speak about viruses to trusting customers with confidence. He might be a recent newhire that was selling cars the week before. Doping experts are not anti-doping experts. Anti-doping experts are not elite performance experts.
For someone who claims to value thought, you consistently chose a path that requires no thought, replacing it with faith in others you believe to possess knowledge, and fault me for thinking about the content of what is said, and its context in the real world.
I attach a higher value to statements that can be supported by facts, while not contradicted by facts, than to the unfounded beliefs from someone with experience in one domain, about topics in another domain.
Initially, I expressed a doubt that Conte possessed any relevant knowledge about events after Balco. After 2003, he left the world of PEDs and athletics, ceasing to be an expert in any new developments post-Balco.
One intelligent response you can chose is to provide evidence of post-BALCO knowledge that Conte has revealed to the public. In the domain of science, the most powerful, persuasive tool is the contradiction.
I found a profile of Conte after BALCO. On the subject of anti-doping, Conte doesn’t appear to be particularly knowledgeable, as he becomes an ancient relic of the past:
“Conte says he has tried to work with domestic and international anti-doping agencies to effect change, but after some initial cooperation has found them unwelcoming. A high-ranking U.S. doping official says Conte never provided useful doping intelligence. Meanwhile, the massive, state-sponsored Russian doping scandal of 2010–16 and smaller, but no less damaging, scandals involving Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes have pushed BALCO deeper into the past.”
https://www.si.com/more-sports/2017/06/28/victor-conte-balco-steroids
If I happened to know your real name and searched online for any credible experience you have relating to the practice of doping I am sure I would find nothing. Basement dwellers tend not to have a profile. I'll take what Conte says over your drivel anyday.