|
Armstrong stops fighting doping charges - USADA wants him banned and stripped for titles
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 18-12-2025 11:05
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Strydz |
Posted on 11-01-2013 20:26
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5885
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 1625.00
|
I also gather you don't believe in the moon landing yeah?
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald
https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/ |
| |
|
|
| Lachi |
Posted on 11-01-2013 21:26
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8360
Joined: 29-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
jseadog1: There will never be 100% proof, not even if you would have seen it yourself. How could you proof what he injected?
The same goes for blood tests, somebody could always claim that the samples have been swaped or the like.
But there is something you can do is counting the facts.
There are people testifying that they have seen him using drugs, have talked with him about drugs, have seen positive blood samples, ...
And the list goes on an on. Is it pure coincidental Are they all liars? Why should they lie? |
| |
|
|
| Strydz |
Posted on 11-01-2013 22:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5885
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 1625.00
|
Lachi wrote:
jseadog1: There will never be 100% proof, not even if you would have seen it yourself. How could you proof what he injected?
The same goes for blood tests, somebody could always claim that the samples have been swaped or the like.
But there is something you can do is counting the facts.
There are people testifying that they have seen him using drugs, have talked with him about drugs, have seen positive blood samples, ...
And the list goes on an on. Is it pure coincidental Are they all liars? Why should they lie?
Good point Lachi
Landis and Hamilton had nothing to lose coming forward, but Vande Velde, Danielson and Zabriskie why would they come forward? Hincapie a well celebrated cyclist had a S#*T LOAD to lose yet he came forward. It is pretty straight
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald
https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/ |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 11-01-2013 22:49
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Corticosteroids in 1999, EPO in Suisse 2001, EPO in TDF 1999 (2005 testing). Use of Actovegin in 1999 or 2000 (or 2001 ? not sure - doesn't matter).
If that's not doping, what is it ? Opinions ? |
| |
|
|
| Schleck96 |
Posted on 11-01-2013 22:55
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1410
Joined: 10-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Lachi wrote:
jseadog1: There will never be 100% proof, not even if you would have seen it yourself. How could you proof what he injected?
The same goes for blood tests, somebody could always claim that the samples have been swaped or the like.
But there is something you can do is counting the facts.
There are people testifying that they have seen him using drugs, have talked with him about drugs, have seen positive blood samples, ...
And the list goes on an on. Is it pure coincidental Are they all liars? Why should they lie?
They could've been paid... The thing is, we'll never be 100% sure of something about this story. That's pretty much it. |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 11-01-2013 23:05
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 19134
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
If the available mountain of evidence is considered insufficient to prove Armstrong doped, then there is effectively no way to prove my nickname is issoisso or that the sky is blue
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 11-01-2013 23:11
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
maybe issoisso wrote:
If the available mountain of evidence is considered insufficient to prove Armstrong doped, then there is effectively no way to prove my nickname is issoisso or that the sky is blue
It's only blue on television, probably because of a conspiracy. It's always grey when I check it out here.  |
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 11-01-2013 23:13
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I love the people who go on saying that "witnesses aren't evidence!"
No, they're not... if you look away from every single court room in the known world.
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 12-01-2013 07:57
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8205
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Flair wrote:
Smart money says that if he does confess (and I still feel he might actually just run the "everyone hates me and its a witch hunt and I did nothing wrong" line) its going to be pure and brilliantly annoying spin.
"After recovering from cancer, I felt I had to do something. In order to beat cancer, we needed a profile and to get that profile I had to win. Maybe people will say that was wrong. Personally, I feel Lance Arm... I mean beating cancer, is more important then a bike race."
Reading David Walsh's new book (which is magnificent and should be read by everyone who wants a close look at the way Armstrong was able to control the media and anyone who would come forward against him) that is essentially the conclusion I reached. It seems that this is how the team initially justified it to themselves and all he has to do is say that and his disciples will ensure he has some sort of legacy.
|
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 12-01-2013 09:56
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I don't know why he's going on Oprah to relieve something, but I have a theory:
If he simply wanted to come clean (sort of, anyway) why not issue a press release? Or a press conference? If it's ratings he's worried about go on CNN, 60 Minutes, etc.
The only reason why he's going on Oprah (a show famed for cycling reports) is so he can grab a few more wads of cash before he's done for good. They have probably payed through their nose to get him on the show.
I can only imagine what it's going to be like with Oprah at the end of the show "You're getting some EPO, and you're getting some EPO! Look under your chairs, you're all getting EPO!"
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
|
| Crommy |
Posted on 12-01-2013 11:01
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8755
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
cactus-jack wrote:
I don't know why he's going on Oprah to relieve something, but I have a theory:
If he simply wanted to come clean (sort of, anyway) why not issue a press release? Or a press conference? If it's ratings he's worried about go on CNN, 60 Minutes, etc.
The only reason why he's going on Oprah (a show famed for cycling reports) is so he can grab a few more wads of cash before he's done for good. They have probably payed through their nose to get him on the show.
I can only imagine what it's going to be like with Oprah at the end of the show "You're getting some EPO, and you're getting some EPO! Look under your chairs, you're all getting EPO!"
The reason he's going on Oprah is it will allow him to spin this how he wants it. From Oprah, I don't exactly expect the Spanish Inquisition
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 12-01-2013 11:35
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Apparently he'd be going to admit using doping during his career, but without giving any detail. No "who", "what", "how" or anything like that.
"I've come clean now. Can I go back doing triathlon ?" |
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 12-01-2013 11:38
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Crommy wrote:
cactus-jack wrote:
I don't know why he's going on Oprah to relieve something, but I have a theory:
If he simply wanted to come clean (sort of, anyway) why not issue a press release? Or a press conference? If it's ratings he's worried about go on CNN, 60 Minutes, etc.
The only reason why he's going on Oprah (a show famed for cycling reports) is so he can grab a few more wads of cash before he's done for good. They have probably payed through their nose to get him on the show.
I can only imagine what it's going to be like with Oprah at the end of the show "You're getting some EPO, and you're getting some EPO! Look under your chairs, you're all getting EPO!"
The reason he's going on Oprah is it will allow him to spin this how he wants it. From Oprah, I don't exactly expect the Spanish Inquisition
I haven't seen that much of Oprah (I did it once and my testosterone-level went down to 50%), but I'm guessing it's going to be more about his family-life and what brand of toothpaste he uses.
Where did inquisitve journalism go?
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 12-01-2013 12:13
|
Team Manager
Posts: 31706
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
While I dont raise up much hope for a great interview - theres a chance it might not all be easy questions. The producer of the show has been in contact with the likes of David Walsh, Kathy Lemond and Betsy Andreu to find out what questions they would ask Lance.
|
| |
|
|
| lluuiiggii |
Posted on 12-01-2013 12:29
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8425
Joined: 30-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
One thing - doesn't confessing on doping on his career would get Armstrong under a lot of legal trouble, since that would mean he lied under oath? Therefore he sort of can't confess?
|
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 12-01-2013 12:37
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
He'll find some legal-schmegal way of weaseling his way out of trouble.
Edited by cactus-jack on 12-01-2013 12:37
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 12-01-2013 12:41
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8205
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Everyone should read this:
https://www.guardi...CMP=twt_gu
Ten questions Oprah probably will ask Lance... Such as:
7 Looking back, how badly did the death of your dog when you were seven years old affect you? Looking at this picture of your dog can you feel the tears welling up, the anger coming out? Can you feel the tears for your dog? Would you like to reach out and pat the dog? Pat the dog, Lance. Cry. Cry and pat the dog.
|
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 12-01-2013 13:00
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
And this:
10 questions Oprah Winfrey should ask"
https://www.guardi...-armstrong
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
|
| ShortsNL |
Posted on 12-01-2013 13:43
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 875
Joined: 17-11-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
I don't know the guardian very well, is it a tabloid paper? cause it seems so.
The questions in both linked articles are terribly loaded and truly unworthy for sports journalism. The first article from CountArach I can see as possibly satirical but even in the second article from cactus-jack, that states which questions should be asked, is just horribly horribly loaded. Nearly every question is completely biased and undermines the entire point of the interview.
It would have been much more valuable if the two journalists who wrote this did some actual research to see if they could actually find the real questions in the interview, and then seriously predict the answers Lance is gonna give based on proper analysis of all the history by a senior sports journalist.
Honestly, I can see that it's a blog and all, but even as a journalist writing a blog you can at least uphold your profession and do a proper analysis instead of just trying to be a clown. |
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 12-01-2013 13:53
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Satire, ShortsNL! Do you speak it?!
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
