Current Topics
Big Lies and Tax Cuts
by jgw
Today at 07:26 PM
Al Franken 2020
by rporter314
Today at 05:25 PM
Gun Control
by rporter314
Today at 01:02 PM
'fixing' the internet
by Jeffery J. Haas
Today at 04:04 AM
more help for the middle class
by jgw
Yesterday at 07:46 PM
sex assaults
by pondering_it_all
Yesterday at 02:07 AM
the democratic plan to win
by jgw
11/20/17 07:10 PM
Trump held his first VA listening session without veterans advocates
by Jeffery J. Haas
11/20/17 12:48 AM
Round Table for November, 2017
by pdx rick
11/20/17 12:06 AM
Miscellaneous humor thread
by Jeffery J. Haas
11/19/17 10:32 PM
Donald Trump Jr.'s Elephant Tail
by NW Ponderer
11/19/17 08:22 PM
Reign of Idiots
by rporter314
11/19/17 12:50 PM
Is keystone xl dead?
by pondering_it_all
11/19/17 06:05 AM
Let’s just cancel the Oscars
by Jeffery J. Haas
11/18/17 10:23 PM
Why Netflix’s ‘Godless’ is the Western you’ve been waiting for
by Golem
11/17/17 08:57 PM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
57 Forums
16104 Topics
277471 Posts

Max Online: 282 @ 05/29/08 05:08 AM
Google Adsense
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#234479 - 08/24/12 07:18 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: Ken Condon]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3738
Loc: Eugene, OR
Bump
As we all have heard by now:
Quote:
The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency erased 14 years of Lance Armstrong's career Friday — including his record seven Tour de France titles — and banned him for life from the sport that made him a hero to millions of cancer survivors after concluding he used banned substances.

Link
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#234487 - 08/24/12 08:49 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: Ken Condon]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15537
I still think that a double standard is being applied to Armstrong. There is a complete absence of substantive evidence, and only witnesses with biases against him. I can understand why someone in his position would simply quit fighting.

Lance Armstong's Statement of August 23, 2012
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#234489 - 08/24/12 09:17 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: NW Ponderer]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3738
Loc: Eugene, OR
This is truly a puzzling affair. It’s a he said she said. But if Mr. Armstrong has/had always been “clean” why has the USADA put so much effort into attempting to prove otherwise? What has he done to piss them off so if this were solely a witch hunt?

After all of this I and many more would like to know the truth but I suppose we never will. At least with today’s technologies. This goes for all professional athletes as well.
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#234490 - 08/24/12 09:26 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: Ken Condon]
jgw Offline
member

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 1744
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I can understand Armstrong's decision to get out of the fight. Its been going on for 15 years! They have proven nothing! This seems to be yet another example of an out of control prosecutor type waging a vendetta for no apparent reason, and using our taxes to do it with. The argument of that agency seems to be that Mr. Armstrong could not have been a winner without drugs, even though they have never been able to prove it in over 600 drug tests! In reading this blog I note that there doesn't seem to be a single person who is not on the side of Mr Armstrong - with good reason. Its also interesting that the U.S. Anti Doping Agency is not really a recognized agency, in the world organization, as that has yet to be decided. Sounds to me like the drug warriors have made their decision and that is that and to hell with anybody who might disagree. What's new!

Perhaps this is yet another example of certain groups, in the United States, that get VERY nervous when somebody in America turns in a superior performance. Its as if they are simply embarrassed when an American does something right <sigh>.


Edited by jgw (08/24/12 09:33 PM)

Top
#234492 - 08/24/12 09:46 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: Ken Condon]
keysersoze Offline
journeyman

Registered: 12/01/11
Posts: 884
Former teammates gave evidence that he used PED's. So did he just sit around with "The Boys" telling them this is a great way to juice? In sports this is usually a very discreet item that is not announced or done in front of teammates "Hey, guys, watch me jab my arse with this cool s!!t." Not likely. This is the evidence?

But why give up the fight? This guy was successful at one of the most difficult events in the world. He survived a bout with cancer. His training regimen burns upwards to 14,000 calories a day. This is not the kind of guy that backs down so did they have something? You don't walk away from your legacy.
_________________________
Only racists oppose my dictatorship.

Top
#234497 - 08/24/12 10:46 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: keysersoze]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 8631
Loc: New Mexico (not old Mexico)
It seems very odd to me that the USADA would cut the head off of the golden goose of cycling for, at worst, doing what everyone was doing. Armstrong brought the sport out of the relative obscurity of being a quirky French thing into the global spotlight. Doping (whatever that means anymore) or not, Armstrong became one of the more deserving real legends that we will ever see, especially with the addition of his Livestrong organization. I'm pretty sure he has plenty of warts but, my God, the races he won, after surviving cancer! I'm not even much of a sports fan but I have found him inspiring.

I see cycle racing going back to being a lurker sport as a result of the USADA action.
_________________________
"You can't fix a problem until you understand what the problem is." Logtroll

Top
#234499 - 08/24/12 11:16 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: Ken Condon]
Ted Remington Offline
old hand

Registered: 07/09/08
Posts: 4939
Never taken any PEDs, but I've biked a lot in the past, and have seen a few races (had a girl friend who got SERIOUSLY turned on by watching the racers go by. HOT HOT HOT.)

But that's another story. (Did I mention seriously turned on? I should have been jealous, but she took it out on me!)

High end cycling has had a long sordid history of drug use, I understand. I've always suspected that Armstrong was one of the few who did not take such drugs, and that there was a hell of a lot of animosity towards him because he was just so flipping good at pedaling long distances at almost inhuman speed. These guys seemed to be POed because, even on drugs, they were not as good as he was.

I've always thought, though, that the real king of road racing was Greg LeMond. In the 1989 Tour de France, LeMond was 50 seconds behind atthe start of the last day of the tour, trailing Laurent Fignon, one of the great time trialists in cycling history. A time trial is an individual effort, no head to head, no supporting breakaway helpers, just the rider against the course. And that's the traditional last ride of the Tour.

LeMond beat Fignon by 58 seconds in that time trial, making up more than two seconds per kilometer against one of the world greats.

In my opinion this is like hitting 100 home runs in a 162-game major league ball season; running a 3:30 mile; or running a sub 2-hour marathon. And almost no one outside cycling noticed. Shame, that.
_________________________
Take the nacilbupeR pledge: I solemnly swear that I will help back out all Republicans at the next election.

Top
#234503 - 08/24/12 11:55 PM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: Ken Condon]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3738
Loc: Eugene, OR
Whether or not Mr. Armstrong is personally guilty of “doping”, the fact remains that athletes of whatever stripe will be compelled to use whatever means are available to enhance performance. Winners win big. Money, endorsements, and fame.

Not to mention god like status. Whether this means the use of substances to enhance mental or physical skills, or both-gaining an edge- no matter how small- is a tough thing to pass on. Celebrity worship is big and it isn't going to disappear anytime soon. And humans are a clever species. Catch me if you can.
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
#234506 - 08/25/12 12:59 AM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: Ken Condon]
keysersoze Offline
journeyman

Registered: 12/01/11
Posts: 884
IMO Armstrong would be an elite in his sport drugs or no drugs but I will reference a sport I am familiar with - baseball.

I present to you Manny Alexander - a very strong suspected PED user. Manny was a journeyman who played in the majors 11 seasons with each season being questionable if he would survive spring training. Manny was a utility player who in a good season may get a few hundred at bats and hit in the .230 range. Certainly nothing special but Manny had an edge - PED's.

How often was Manny on the MLB roster for that precious 24th or 25th man slot? How many clean players didn't get the shot because Manny had that slight edge? How many never got to spend a day on the ML roster - one day gets you health insurance for life? How many never stayed 35 days on a roster and be eligible for a 35K pension at age 65? Manny earned 2.3M in his 11 years. A 3A minor league player gets 35K.

Yes I certainly get ticked at Bonds, Clemens, Giambi, "Slappy" Rodriguez and a bunch of up in lights names. Most of them would be Hall of Fame material or recognized as stars without PED's. It's the Manny's that just get me going.

Nothing to do with Armstrong but just a view I have on one sport.
_________________________
Only racists oppose my dictatorship.

Top
#234507 - 08/25/12 01:54 AM Re: Lance Armstrong--doping [Re: keysersoze]
Ken Condon Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 06/14/07
Posts: 3738
Loc: Eugene, OR
And also not to divert-but. I too am a waxing and waining baseball fan. Carlos Guillen- formerly of the Seattle Mariners -comes to mind.

Carlos was a utility infielder for the Mariners and then other MLB clubs. In his first few seasons he was a rail thin but excellent infielder, although his hitting power was lacking. In his third season, if memory serves, he showed up as a hulking behemoth. It was an absolutely astonishing sight to behold. Yet nothing was mentioned nor has his name ever been associated with the “dopers” list.

I do not attempt to cast asparagus on Mr. Armstrong-yet his case has always felt funny to me.

And then of course there is the ultimate question: If medical science can help many live longer, why is it not allowed to help people perform better? It already has to help certain males stand tall and proud-never mind.
_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 23 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2