choodi
Banned
Did you not read about how Armstrong bullied others on the tour?
Or are you just trolling the thread?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
International Cycling Union (UCI) strips Lance Armstrong of all titles
- Thread starter numble
- Start date
- Status
Did you not read about how Armstrong bullied others on the tour?
Or are you just trolling the thread?
Generally I like to hold our justice system to a higher standard than a cyclist.
I don't shed a tear for O.J. Simpson, but the way the justice system came after him for that Vegas incident was even more disgraceful than the USADA's behavior here.
choodi
Banned
Oh, so you are just trolling. That's cool.
I never troll.
choodi
Banned
That's exactly what a troll would say.
Sickboy007
Member
I know for a fact that even a lot of hobbyists cyclists dope.
Shit is insane.
Shit is insane.
choodi
Banned
Why? So they can win the tour in their own minds?
Sickboy007
Member
It boggles my mind, at least gym steroids and so forth have a comprehensible purpose.
choodi
Banned
Nah, it's the same thing really... vanity. Some douche amateur cyclist is going to dope for the same reason some idiot pumps himself full of steroids to build big muscles. To show off to other idiots who are impressed by big muscles or better performance on a bike ride.
This isn't the reality of what happened. "Over and over"?!? He's exhausted? From what? He's been litigious for his entire career and now he's TIRED?
So Lance got treated like he's treated so many others? Funny how he got tired when it was obvious he was fucked.
Didn't he leave Sheryl Crow after she found out she had a tumor
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Anti-dopin controls have become more agressive and you can clearly see in the last Tours that they aren't "super humans" anymore, times are slower than before. Probably there's still doping, of course, but is clearly not rampant like years before. It was a disease, and acknowleging that Armstrong was part of that disease is for the best if that sport wants to go forward.
There's no possible way that the best cyclist of all time falls in the hands of a doper.
Pathetic.
If he did the Giro or Espana then we could at least call him a drugged up Hardman. Aside from his poor choice in sock length, his desire to win the showmanship award sealed his fate as the pretty boy of cycling.
But now pretty boy has got track marks.
Seriously though, the worst part about all of this is that the corrupted powers that knowingly let his shit slide are still in power.
e; and I mean a more Americanized showmanship award. Cipollini still takes the cake in making men and ladies alike drip their sauces.
But now pretty boy has got track marks.
Seriously though, the worst part about all of this is that the corrupted powers that knowingly let his shit slide are still in power.
e; and I mean a more Americanized showmanship award. Cipollini still takes the cake in making men and ladies alike drip their sauces.
Nope.
freenudemacusers
Member
Rock, flag, and eeaagle
joevigilante
Neo Member
the tour is much more prestigious to win than the giro or vuelta and so the biggest names have the tour as the main goal of their season. the giro is more much important to italians particularly than riders from other countries. plus the giro is often pretty brutal and is pretty hard to be a contender in both it and the tour within a month and a half part of each other. the last guy to do it was marco pantani in 1998 but suspect he may have doped too since he was caught in a subsequent giro. people who win the tour almost never do the vuelta later in the year because they've reached their goal, too exhausted to complete another grand tour, would rather make more money in appearance fees, reap in sponsorship money.
Onion_Relish
Member
I know that blood doping relates to replacing old blood with new more heavily oxygenated blood through a direct transfusion, but are riders allowed to use a hyperbaric chamber ala dragonball z?
Squirrel Killer
Member
Ignoring everything but the TdF is what allowed to win so many.
Doping, like most forms of cheating, isn't equal. So yes, he was the best cheater, since his victories prove that he was the most effective at cheating. Was he the best cyclist? We'll never know.
We pretty much know he wasn't the best, there were riders with better natural physiques than him for races like the Tour de France. Doping made him the best. Also, of the samples tested from the 1999 Tour de France, aside from Armstrong's six positive ones, less than 10% was actually found to contain EPO. So yeah, he didn't compete against a field that was equally doped as him in that year at least.
Psychotext
Member
Apparently (and amongst the lawsuits that will be asking for sponsorship bonuses back) he's going to have to pay back his TDF prize money. I do hope he hasn't spent it... I mean I'd hate to see them take his house or something.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20038998
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20038998
Alx
Member
The prize money itself must have been a small drop in his income anyway : according to the article its £2.4 million, for 7 tours (and shared between the members of the team). I suppose that a simple sponsor contract for a year beats that.
Squirrel Killer
Member
Either he pays up and tacitly admits doping, or he goes back on his word to not fight it anymore.
Stuggernaut
Grandma's Chippy
Ok everyone at my work will not stop arguing about this topic. So can someone set some things straight for me?
1) Do they or do they not have definitive test results to back this up? Or is this all based on the huge amount of people saying he did it?
2) Are the rest of the people that admitted to doping getting in any trouble at all? Or is every cyclist who ever doped falling through the cracks because Armstrong is caught?
3) I am hearing people say that everyone was doping, so what is the difference if Armstrong doped and won against doped riders?
If all of this is obvious to find...I suck.
I have always thought the majority of cyclists doped and I could care less as it did not hurt my enjoyment of the sport any. The witch hunt for Armstrong's head aside, the guy is still a machine that was built to cycle and may or may not have won clean races as well.
Unless you believe people that say Armstrong did such high tech doping that he was a better cheater than the other cheaters.
1) Do they or do they not have definitive test results to back this up? Or is this all based on the huge amount of people saying he did it?
2) Are the rest of the people that admitted to doping getting in any trouble at all? Or is every cyclist who ever doped falling through the cracks because Armstrong is caught?
3) I am hearing people say that everyone was doping, so what is the difference if Armstrong doped and won against doped riders?
If all of this is obvious to find...I suck.
I have always thought the majority of cyclists doped and I could care less as it did not hurt my enjoyment of the sport any. The witch hunt for Armstrong's head aside, the guy is still a machine that was built to cycle and may or may not have won clean races as well.
Unless you believe people that say Armstrong did such high tech doping that he was a better cheater than the other cheaters.
1) They have had definitive test results that back it up. Unfortunately, the UCI and doctors were able to backdate some prescriptions. Check out stuff relating to Armstrong's donations to the UCI and what was going on at those times. Some blood samples also disappeared~~
2) Those who testified against Armstrong have received reduced sentences. Pretty much, 6 months during the off season, they might miss some early races. Levi Leipheimer was dropped from his team this season so it's unlikely that he'll race.
The issue with Armstrong is not that he was cheating but that he was cheating with tax payer or something. Pretty much, he was scamming the world and profiting off it.
3) It wasn't just that he had the best drugs, he made sure that he had the best and others did not. He would even fuck with his teammates supplements, re: Floyd Landis getting his blood bag dumped for pissing of Armstrong.
Greg LeMond, the greatest american cyclist alive, is an avid supporter of clean cycling. According to him, his racing days were cleaner, that doping was more of something that Armstrong truly brought to the race (ehhhh). LeMond is also the only american cyclist to win the tour. He won three times and beat Fignon by 8 seconds.
Greg LeMond is a Grade A Hardman.
The truth is, Armstrong's fall wouldn't be nearly as bad as it is if he A) Didn't lie every fucking time he was accused. B) Wasn't a huge asshole and perfect example of being a bully. C) Didn't fuck with LeMond.
But Lance did all that shit, had backup information that he could use to blackmail the UCI with if his tests ever proved positive, and yada yada yada.
Psychotext
Member
There's really not a lot of argument here, especially when you consider the fact that cycling is very much a team sport. You could be the best cyclist in the world by some margin but without the best team you wouldn't win the TDF.
The best drugs, the best (dirty) doctors, the best tech and the willingness to blackmail / bribe. This makes for easily the best team, though almost certainly not the best individual rider... but almost no-one would fuck with him, because he was the don.
Squirrel Killer
Member
- They do have a definitive test, but only because anonymity was broken on a set of old samples intended to test new testing procedures. There's no "B" sample to test as would be required of current positive test.
- They're getting punished too. Much more lightly than Armstrong, but they are getting punished too.
- Yes, doping was widespread. It's still cheating and anyway, Armstrong had the resources to cheat more than the others.
Yes, there were 6 positive EPO tests from the same tour (+a couple that were barely negative). Plus the testosterone that he faked a prescription for.
You can be sentenced to death with a couple of first hand witnesses and here there is a lot more (lost count). Both people involved in doping themselves and those who didn't want to be a part of it.
It was a steroid, not testosterone. He got the backdated prescription for "saddle sores."
Yes, cortisol if I remember correctly.
Especially not in Breaking Bad threads.
Thanks for the correction.
My research field is the adrenal glands (producer of cortisol), so I should've got that one :/
What do you mean by "unless you believe people" like they are conspiracists? It's all in the USADA report, how he had secret delivery guy during the tour, advanced warning and running away from testers during off seasons, not to mention the expensive blood procedures and top cheating doctors that not everyone can afford.
Pretty sure it'll be the first Google result and is "obvious to find".
He's a world class cheater. That's all you can say about him at this point.
I do find it funny how many Armstrong fans come with the argument that there are only eye witnesses and no direct proof. Like you could commit a murder with ten eye witnesses but just toss the gun and be cleared because there is no proof. (Not directed directly to you, just a random thought after reading people reacting in the news papers)
choodi
Banned
Your point is..?
This is a very stupid train of thought. It basically amounts to it's too hard to regulate so they shouldn't try.
I find using 'dope' and 'doping' as generic terms for a wide variety of infractions to be deceiving. What Lance did is not like Frank Schleck or Contador. Even Tyler and Floyd did nothing near as harmful to the sport. These are just rules, I have a bit of a problem with celebrities being allowed to buy their way out of breaking rules.
50% weren't using EPO and transfusions. I care less about diuretics, testosterone or steroids for cycling, as they have limited value (in cycling) and I could argue have some legitimate value in small quantities.
bobnowhere
Member
Better colour Bobby Julich red! Has admitted to doping for his 3rd place and has left Team Sky.
Linky
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked