|
Armstrong Back!!!!!!!
|
| t-baum |
Posted on 24-09-2008 21:33
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2153
Joined: 07-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Crue deleted my post 
EDIT: Hassel,
He is not coming back to win, he is coming back to spread cancer awareness and if you would of read the post that was 2 posts in front of that you would have known that.
sorry for yelling at you
Sorry but that is utter and total shit. He wouldn't come back if he didn't think he could do anything. I think the world is pretty "aware" of cancer. The only reason you actually believe him is because you're American and American cycling fans would kiss his ass if he asked.
Bull shit, i hate armstrong, and of course he wouldn't come back if wouldn't do any good but thats not why he came back.
Macquet wrote:
"We all know that wasn't the real footage of the Worlds anyway. That was just the staged footage to perpetuate the coverup that it was actually Vinokourov that won the race." |
| |
|
|
| Wiggo |
Posted on 24-09-2008 21:36
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3212
Joined: 07-06-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
t-baum wrote:
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Crue deleted my post
EDIT: Hassel,
He is not coming back to win, he is coming back to spread cancer awareness and if you would of read the post that was 2 posts in front of that you would have known that.
sorry for yelling at you
Sorry but that is utter and total shit. He wouldn't come back if he didn't think he could do anything. I think the world is pretty "aware" of cancer. The only reason you actually believe him is because you're American and American cycling fans would kiss his ass if he asked.
Bull shit, i hate armstrong, and of course he wouldn't come back if wouldn't do any good but thats not why he came back.
The why did he come back? I can't believe it is completely cancer related. Money has got to be involved. So has publicity for the companies he owns. Maybe he had nothing to do. It just can't be fully about the cancer. |
| |
|
|
| t-baum |
Posted on 24-09-2008 21:40
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2153
Joined: 07-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Crue deleted my post
EDIT: Hassel,
He is not coming back to win, he is coming back to spread cancer awareness and if you would of read the post that was 2 posts in front of that you would have known that.
sorry for yelling at you
Sorry but that is utter and total shit. He wouldn't come back if he didn't think he could do anything. I think the world is pretty "aware" of cancer. The only reason you actually believe him is because you're American and American cycling fans would kiss his ass if he asked.
Bull shit, i hate armstrong, and of course he wouldn't come back if wouldn't do any good but thats not why he came back.
The why did he come back? I can't believe it is completely cancer related. Money has got to be involved. So has publicity for the companies he owns. Maybe he had nothing to do. It just can't be fully about the cancer.
I never said it was fully about cancer, did i?
Macquet wrote:
"We all know that wasn't the real footage of the Worlds anyway. That was just the staged footage to perpetuate the coverup that it was actually Vinokourov that won the race."
|
| |
|
|
| Wiggo |
Posted on 24-09-2008 21:42
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3212
Joined: 07-06-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
t-baum wrote:
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Crue deleted my post
EDIT: Hassel,
He is not coming back to win, he is coming back to spread cancer awareness and if you would of read the post that was 2 posts in front of that you would have known that.
sorry for yelling at you
Sorry but that is utter and total shit. He wouldn't come back if he didn't think he could do anything. I think the world is pretty "aware" of cancer. The only reason you actually believe him is because you're American and American cycling fans would kiss his ass if he asked.
Bull shit, i hate armstrong, and of course he wouldn't come back if wouldn't do any good but thats not why he came back.
The why did he come back? I can't believe it is completely cancer related. Money has got to be involved. So has publicity for the companies he owns. Maybe he had nothing to do. It just can't be fully about the cancer.
I never said it was fully about cancer, did i?
I never said you said it was fully about cancer. So ner. |
| |
|
|
| t-baum |
Posted on 24-09-2008 21:42
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2153
Joined: 07-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Maggot wrote:
t-baum wrote:
Crue deleted my post
EDIT: Hassel,
He is not coming back to win, he is coming back to spread cancer awareness and if you would of read the post that was 2 posts in front of that you would have known that.
sorry for yelling at you
Sorry but that is utter and total shit. He wouldn't come back if he didn't think he could do anything. I think the world is pretty "aware" of cancer. The only reason you actually believe him is because you're American and American cycling fans would kiss his ass if he asked.
Bull shit, i hate armstrong, and of course he wouldn't come back if wouldn't do any good but thats not why he came back.
The why did he come back? I can't believe it is completely cancer related. Money has got to be involved. So has publicity for the companies he owns. Maybe he had nothing to do. It just can't be fully about the cancer.
I never said it was fully about cancer, did i?
I never said you said it was fully about cancer. So ner.
Touche
Macquet wrote:
"We all know that wasn't the real footage of the Worlds anyway. That was just the staged footage to perpetuate the coverup that it was actually Vinokourov that won the race."
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 25-09-2008 08:57
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
"I would love to do the Giro, it's the 100th anniversary [next year], and it's a significant event,"
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| CrueTrue |
Posted on 25-09-2008 09:00
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 29989
Joined: 20-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
"I would love to do the Giro, it's the 100th anniversary [next year], and it's a significant event,"
Yeah, I would have mentioned that yesterday. It's quite interesting. Armstrong doing other races than the Tour? Crazy  |
| |
|
|
| Smoothie |
Posted on 25-09-2008 09:04
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6622
Joined: 04-02-2007
PCM$: 300.00
|
I suppose this year is is going to have to do different races. |
| |
|
|
| mesq |
Posted on 25-09-2008 09:25
|
Junior Rider
Posts: 33
Joined: 28-08-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
If Lance won the Tour - or the Giro -, I couldn't help thinking they must have discovered some really powerful stuff there. A Top 10 finish and a fine exploit in a stage or two should be all he's wishing for in order to fulfill his self-proposed ends.
Anyway, this will always be more a publicity stunt than about sports...
Which is why it'd be a rather odd decision to me if Astana decided to offload Contador in order to make room for a publicity stunt. The Comeback would be mired in controversy from the start.
Edited by mesq on 25-09-2008 12:45
|
| |
|
|
| tate |
Posted on 25-09-2008 10:18
|
Under 23
Posts: 78
Joined: 29-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
They wont let Contador leave as I dont think Lance is so sure can win and Contador will be there for a good few more years than this one season Armstrong will do. If he win either Giro or Tour it will show that he was the greatest and still is and that the new lot are not anywhere near as good as they have looked. Think Contador will win the tour but Lance will be in top 5. |
| |
|
|
| Hasselinhoo |
Posted on 25-09-2008 12:43
|
Stagiare
Posts: 215
Joined: 29-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
t-baum wrote:
Crue deleted my post
EDIT: Hassel,
He is not coming back to win, he is coming back to spread cancer awareness and if you would of read the post that was 2 posts in front of that you would have known that.
sorry for yelling at you what is what he is saying for the fans but i think the people are aware of cancer ...let's just say he wants publicity.. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 05:57
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| ABridgeTooFar |
Posted on 25-09-2008 19:03
|
Domestique
Posts: 463
Joined: 17-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Haters, haters, haters. We American fans may be blinded by our love of Armstrong. But the Armstrong haters are certainly blinded by their disdain for him. Sure, attack him for the doping thing, no big deal. I know you are frustrated that you or other people that are a lot smarter than you can not prove that he doped. Even among his fans there is some doubt whether he did or did not. But why attack him on the cancer thing. So he wants to raise awareness (read as money for research/treatment not as awareness)? |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 25-09-2008 19:10
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
For once in my life I find myself agreeing with Hasselinho
There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the cancer awareness is a convenient excuse. That's not an attack. It's my opinion.
As Jon Vaughters put it: "He left the sport under a suspicious light. he wants to re-leave so he can be seen to retire under a better light"
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 25-09-2008 19:12
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
ABridgeTooFar wrote:
Haters, haters, haters. We American fans may be blinded by our love of Armstrong. But the Armstrong haters are certainly blinded by their disdain for him. Sure, attack him for the doping thing, no big deal. I know you are frustrated that you or other people that are a lot smarter than you can not prove that he doped. Even among his fans there is some doubt whether he did or did not. But why attack him on the cancer thing. So he wants to raise awareness (read as money for research/treatment not as awareness)? Yeah, well, "only the blinds can't see" or something like that.
I agree about the cancer thing though, that's very honourable from him, it's a noble cause. People shouldn't pick at him for trying to raise money for the fight against cancer.
and whatever the real reasons and motivations for his come-back, it'll help fighting cancer, no matter that it's a provokation against whoever, a miss of cycling or anything
Edited by Aquarius on 25-09-2008 19:13
|
| |
|
|
| ABridgeTooFar |
Posted on 25-09-2008 20:09
|
Domestique
Posts: 463
Joined: 17-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
For once in my life I find myself agreeing with Hasselinho
There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that the cancer awareness is a convenient excuse. That's not an attack. It's my opinion.
As Jon Vaughters put it: "He left the sport under a suspicious light. he wants to re-leave so he can be seen to retire under a better light"
The only problem with the above theory (his supposed theory, not yours) is that he will have to win. If he races and loses then there will be the accusation that he is not doping now (losing) and he did dope then (winning). If he wins now at the age of 37/38, will the public be willing to believe that he is clean? In his first comeback, no one believed that someone with cancer could race, so therefore he must be doping. If he wins at this age then will we say "there's no way that someone can win at 38, so he must be doping." It has been three years since he raced. That is a lot of time to find another miracle drug that there is not a test for.
Edited by ABridgeTooFar on 25-09-2008 20:11
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 25-09-2008 20:14
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
He could also be doping and not win, I can't see where the problem with that idea is ?
Also, doping probably didn't evolve that much (well there are new types of EPO, steroids, etc.), it's more of a matter of proper timing (take a product whose effects will last for weeks, like growth hormon, it can only be found during a couple of hours).
And how does the three years interfer here ? I mean he had top doping three years ago, he'll have top doping now too (if he takes some), I mean top doping of 2009, not of 2005.
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 25-09-2008 20:19
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mike got me the interview with Betsy Andreu the other day. The best part was when she described in detail Lance's first contact with his doctors for the cancer treatment.
Especially the part where the doctor suddenly goes "Have you ever taken performance-enhancing drugs?"
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| ABridgeTooFar |
Posted on 25-09-2008 20:29
|
Domestique
Posts: 463
Joined: 17-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
He could also be doping and not win, I can't see where the problem with that idea is ?
Also, doping probably didn't evolve that much (well there are new types of EPO, steroids, etc.), it's more of a matter of proper timing (take a product whose effects will last for weeks, like growth hormon, it can only be found during a couple of hours).
And how does the three years interfer here ? I mean he had top doping three years ago, he'll have top doping now too (if he takes some), I mean top doping of 2009, not of 2005.
Sorry, Aquarius. I wasn't really trying to make a point about new drugs. I was just having fun and being a smartass because Armstrong was accused of using a wonder drug since he was not failing drug tests but people were convinced he was doping. (Please no one submit a post about Armstrong failing a drug test, we have all been down that road before).
Edited by ABridgeTooFar on 25-09-2008 20:29
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 25-09-2008 20:31
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
ABridgeTooFar wrote:
(Please no one submit a post about Armstrong failing a drug test, we have all been down that road before).
Actually there's one little-HUGE thing that I've never seen mentioned referring to that subject and that I haven't mentioned either 
(since I usually stay away from that subject)
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| ABridgeTooFar |
Posted on 25-09-2008 20:42
|
Domestique
Posts: 463
Joined: 17-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
Mike got me the interview with Betsy Andreu the other day. The best part was when she described in detail Lance's first contact with his doctors for the cancer treatment.
Especially the part where the doctor suddenly goes "Have you ever taken performance-enhancing drugs?"
The only problem is that the testimony was ripped apart in court/depositions. An Oakley representative was also in the room during the conversation. She (the rep) reportedly told Greg LeMond and a sports photographer on different occasions that the doping admission by Armstrong did take place. However, while under oath, she denied that the conversation ever took place.
I find it hard to believe that Armstrong would confess to doctors (who were not even his oncologists) in a room full of people (some he knew and some he did not). Betsy was not married to Frankie at the time. They were dating. My opinion, doesn't mean that he doped, doesn't mean that he did not. It is just not good evidence. A grade above gossip, I would say. |
| |
|
