mangaman
Guest
He was racing in 1991-3. Was doping rampant in the peleton then?
Yes, and he didn't want to be part of it and became a mountain biker in the US - which is why you haven't heard of him.
Did you read the article?
He was racing in 1991-3. Was doping rampant in the peleton then?
Yes, and he didn't want to be part of it and became a mountain biker in the US - which is why you haven't heard of him.
Did you read the article?
Just read what Greg Lemond, Laurent Fignon, Andy Hampsten and other great riders had to say about it!He was racing in 1991-3. Was doping rampant in the peleton then?
Do you honestly and genuinely believe that Armstrong raced clean?
Vacuous? Morally vacuous? Hardly!I fear you're right. I thought it would be enough to see him exposed but now I'm filling with a slow outrage that he's showing no contrition and worse he's still playing the moral hero and feel some despair that people think that it's OK to hold up as an idol someone as morally vacuous as Armstrong. Whilst at the same time his sponsors, far from moving to distance themselves, continue the symbiotic feeding off the profits of his false idolatory.
Crackle 52:1022
Glad I got that off my chest.
I follow mountain biking as well and still don't recall him. Did he have any major wins? Sixth in the World Cross Country Championships seems to be his pinnacle.
You don't seem to have a point here apart from to try to personnally belittle anyone who is trying to do anything positive for the sport. You've already lost the argument on Armstrong (well, you never knew enough to be taken seriously on that anyway) and you not only don't have the good grace to back down a bit and admit you were wrong, you start attacking other people who are doing trying to do something. Unbelievable.
I fear you're right. I thought it would be enough to see him exposed but now I'm filling with a slow outrage that he's showing no contrition and worse he's still playing the moral hero and feel some despair that people think that it's OK to hold up as an idol someone as morally vacuous as Armstrong. Whilst at the same time his sponsors, far from moving to distance themselves, continue the symbiotic feeding off the profits of his false idolatory.
Crackle 52:1022
That's not the point - it's just not fair.
You're still missing the point - (is there a child stamping his foot smiley?) - has USADA got jurisdiction or not?
I was just trying to ascribe 'a lack of' to him and continuing the religious theme. I'm fully open to suggestions of how to describe him (I may also have misunderstood your post).Vacuous? Morally vacuous? Hardly!
Page 155 - 163 onwards "Results Management" has the answer you are looking forYou're still missing the point - (is there a child stamping his foot smiley?) - has USADA got jurisdiction or not?
has USADA got jurisdiction or not?