The "failing drug tests" is the worst argument in the universe. Riis didn't fail any drug tests, lots of riders didn't fail any drug tests (Armstrong did, but schh! ).
Levi4life wrote:
Of course if you do not trust anyone (and you know who you are)
Of course if you're an idiot who stereotypes instead of looking at facts, you think I don't trust anyone. Say it as many times as you want. It still won't make it true.
Levi4life wrote:
And, yes Isso, I am biased, I like to give the athlete the benefit of the doubt.
Provided they're american or ride for an american team
Levi4life wrote:
Fact: Rock Racing has never had a failed dope test.
Levi4life wrote:
Of course if you do not trust anyone (and you know who you are)
Of course if you're an idiot who stereotypes instead of looking at facts, you think I don't trust anyone. Say it as many times as you want. It still won't make it true.
Levi4life wrote:
And, yes Isso, I am biased, I like to give the athlete the benefit of the doubt.
Provided they're american or ride for an american team
Levi4life wrote:
Fact: Rock Racing has never had a failed dope test.
Neither did Festina or Telekom
issoisso in the counteroffensive
prevent hangovers --> stay drunk
pozzato, basically the most stupid cyclist around
Stijn_vranken wrote:
issoisso in the counteroffensive
I don't stereotype people, and it gets annoying when people stereotype what they think my thoughts feelings and ideas are instead of reading what I write and learning for themselves.
The result is me having to constantly deal with idiots writing lies of the mould "You think A" or "You believe in B" that are so far out of touch with reality and could easily be dismissed by just reading what I write.
I try to be a nice friendly guy, but this happens so often, I end up having to be a jerk half the time.
I know how annoying it is (mostly with IRL people actually), well, we just have to deal with people who can't read properly.
It's an illusion to think people will understand what is written and implied and not what they think is written and implied. In my communication lessons, years ago (), I learnt that there was like an 80 % loss between what you mean, what you say, what the other person hears/reads, what the other person thinks he/she understood, what he really understood and what he'll repeat that you've meant.
When I imply X or Y rider is doped, and many in that team but few if not none in that other one, some people will understand that I mean every single rider is doped.
How embarrassing...
It's really anoying with IRL people who doens't know a shit about cycling/doping/football, and thinks every single rider is doped and, thinks every single footballer is clean as hardly no one gets caught.
BenBarnes wrote:
Thor wears a live rattlesnake as a condom.
schleck93 wrote:
It's really anoying with IRL people who doens't know a shit about cycling/doping/football, and thinks every single rider is doped and, thinks every single footballer is clean as hardly no one gets caught.
Tell me about it, I have that argument with my brother about once a day
schleck93 wrote:
I normally just let live in their own little box, as it's almost imoposibble to convince that they're wrong
Step 1: remind them of one of the trillions of players who admitted they used cocaine for years and years.
Step 2: sarcastically ask why then why it never showed up in dope tests through years and years
Step 3: rinse and repeat
Aquarius wrote:
I know how annoying it is (mostly with IRL people actually), well, we just have to deal with people who can't read properly.
It's an illusion to think people will understand what is written and implied and not what they think is written and implied. In my communication lessons, years ago (), I learnt that there was like an 80 % loss between what you mean, what you say, what the other person hears/reads, what the other person thinks he/she understood, what he really understood and what he'll repeat that you've meant.
When I imply X or Y rider is doped, and many in that team but few if not none in that other one, some people will understand that I mean every single rider is doped.
How embarrassing...
Tell me about it....I lived 15 years in front of a court. In a court, there's 4 stories present, and everyone realises it:
- The story the prosecution tells
- The story the defence tells
- The story the judge imagines happened
- What really happened
schleck93 wrote:
It's really anoying with IRL people who doens't know a shit about cycling/doping/football, and thinks every single rider is doped and, thinks every single footballer is clean as hardly no one gets caught.
Well I don't discriminate about it... I think the vast majority of professional atheletes in every sport where there are large amounts of money to be won are doped to the gills.
My reasoning is pretty simple... I saw the amount of low end doping going on in ameteur athletics 15 years ago when I was competing and I simply don't believe that if a third of the top competitors are using steroid based inhalers at swim meets with no financial incentive in a sport with no real professional prospect that professional sports with millions at stake are at all clean.
I'm not particularly upset by it... I'm not sure I want my professional atheletes clean. As a fan I think it might be a better viewing experience to have the competitors able to perform super-human feats... it makes it more enjoyable to watch.
Levi4life wrote:
Are you suspicious of my personal friends, such as Sterling Magnell, or Dan Finneran or peaople who have given so much back to the community such as Rodruiguez and Dominguez or even Michael Ball himself.
Or are you going to judge the character of all of the riders on Rock Racing based upon your perception of a few.
I don't care if they are your friends or not, and no I'm not suspicious of that riders that you refer. You know whose riders I was refering to when I made my post, you're not stupid. Also, I don't care if Michael Ball is great to the community, because that doesn't change anything when we come to cycling. And, you know, here we discuss cycling.
I just pointed out what is obvious for every cycling fan, Rock Racing has too many riders linked with dope. Don't be naive.
If this was a european cycling team without your personal friends, you would be here criticizing that team.
I'm warning you right now: no matter how biased some people you've met in your life are, no one is even remotely as biased as the one you're talking to now. You've been warned.
The origional post referred to Rock Racing as being "full of suspicious riders" (to the best of my knowledge only 4 have been linked to dope and 1 had served a sentence) essentially painting all of the riders on the team with the same brush. To stereotype all Rock riders in that fashion is a disgusting notion. Rock Racing adheres to the same Anti-Doping program as Garmin and BMC (Scott Analysts and ACE were founded by the same guy) so you can be assured that the same amount of doping is occuring on those teams.
Of course if you do not trust anyone (and you know who you are) Rock can be full of dopers, just like Garmin and Columbia and BMC.
And, yes Isso, I am biased, I like to give the athlete the benefit of the doubt. Call me crazy.
Fact: Rock Racing has never had a failed dope test.
Now you're just being stupid. When I made my comment, I was obviously refering to the riders linked with dope. Also, I don't care if Rock Racing has the same anti-doping programme as Garmin and BMC. That doesn't mean nothing, because that doesn't mean the anti-doping program is reliable. It seems like Garmin is now the example of anti-doping and everyone associated with them is now clean.
PS: I do trust in people, but only in the people that I truly know.
Levi4life wrote:
Of course if you do not trust anyone (and you know who you are)
Of course if you're an idiot who stereotypes instead of looking at facts, you think I don't trust anyone. Say it as many times as you want. It still won't make it true.
I was under the assumption that you and I had come to a mutual understanding. That line is not pointing the finger at anyone in particular, certainly not you Isso.
issoisso wrote:
Levi4life wrote:
And, yes Isso, I am biased, I like to give the athlete the benefit of the doubt.
Provided they're american or ride for an american team
Find me one instance were I have bashed a rider who had not been proven guilty. You won't find it. I am a believer in the rule of law and the rule of law states (In the USA) that the accused is innocent until proven guilty.
issoisso wrote:
Levi4life wrote:
Fact: Rock Racing has never had a failed dope test.
Neither did Festina or Telekom
And neither Festina nor Telekom had an internal anti-doping program, or were tested at nearly the same level, or were exposed to the same scrutiny as Rock Racing.
Oliuj wrote:
Now you're just being stupid. When I made my comment, I was obviously refering to the riders linked with dope. Also, I don't care if Rock Racing has the same anti-doping programme as Garmin and BMC. That doesn't mean nothing, because that doesn't mean the anti-doping program is reliable. It seems like Garmin is now the example of anti-doping and everyone associated with them is now clean.
PS: I do trust in people, but only in the people that I truly know.
So you insult my intelligence and that makes the facts of the matter favorable to you?
You obviously said that Rock Racing was full of suspicious riders. That is what you said. You only changed your meaning after I called you out on it.
The amazing thing about Rock Racing is that Michael Ball is allowing these few riders who have either served their sentences (Hamilton) or are refugees of a very controversial Operacion Puerto, a second chance. Tyler Hamilton (say what you will about him) served his two year sentence. Will you not allow him to move on?
If you fucked up would you like a second chance? I thought so.
Edited by Levi4life on 21-11-2008 21:21
).
