The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[Shaun]

I agree. Why does everyone else have to take avoiding action, especially when there is now an 'exclude from thread' tool available?

Because it's a personal preference - us mods don't know who likes who and who doesn't and we can't be expected to bias the discussion in the thread to suit the preferences of individuals or select groups. From my perspective I want to include everyone wherever possible - that's how a community works best.

That being said, sometimes people get blinkered into pedantry point scoring over a topic, or post, or "details" or even with other members personalities (to the exclusion of everyone else on the thread) so that's where a temporary thread exclusion can now help.

We'll carry on watching the thread and see how it goes.

 

[asterix]

Good grief. What has got into you? In any other part of this forum thread drift and expansions from points raised are all a normal part of thread development. Here they are a heinous crime. Step back and have a look at yourselves and your attempts to have anything you don't agree with censored and banned. Go out for a ride, switch off the computer for a few days, put me on ignore......but for God's sake get a sense of proportion back. Its only an internet forum.

As explained by Mr Paul my point was a simple one. For you to evade it was time-wasting and IMO discourteous. The act of a politician rather than someone who wants real debate.

The playing field is never level in this sport or in others unless the teams are all given the same budget, bikes etc. We have done so well in the Olympics and Paralympics because of a big budget and investment in good facilities and research. Our cyclists have spent hours in expensive wind tunnels for example perfecting equipment and positioning on the bike to give them an edge. Which is why they are dominating other nations at the moment. Swim suit material and design made a big difference to swimming when it was first introduced giving those who had access to it an advantage.

.

[QUOTE 2029178, member: 45"]Armstrong cheated. Teams having more money isn't cheating. Doping is. That's simple statement one.

And simple statement two is that not all riders are cheating. This level playing argument is nonsense. A rider at the top of the tree cheating blows the fair chance of anyone who doesn't, and also puts pressure on those playing fair to do the same.

It's not complicated, however much people try to complicate it.[/quote]

 

[Red Light]

As explained by Mr Paul my point was a simple one. For you to evade it was time-wasting and IMO discourteous. The act of a politician rather than someone who wants real debate.

My point was two fold. First just picking up on whether an all doped peleton is a level playing field or not, an undoped peleton is not a level playing field either because of all the other factors such as ability, money, equipment etc. so level playing field whether correct or not is a non-argument.

Second it got to this state because of the pressures on the individual to perform and if you want to get noticed and into one of the teams with money where you have a better chance of winning, then the pressure/temptation is there to do something to enhance your performance. That is how the whole doping thing started off rather than as a team initiated thing, Seems to me the teams got involved when most of their riders were already doping and by the time you got into a team like USPS you probably would have already been doping just to get to the level to be considered in those days. I haven't read Hamilton's book yet but the abstracts that have been published suggest that he was doping before he joined Armstrong/USPS rather than as a result of joining him.

Even today with many of the teams being fastidious about being clean the pressure will still be there on the individuals to do a little better to be able to join a top team and it will always be there.

HTH.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

When, if ever, are USADA going to give

a) the UCI
b) the IOP
c) the general public

access to all the available evidence and testimony?

The longer this drags on, and talk of 'truth and reconciliation' and 'amnesty' begins, the more worried I become that a deal is being done, behind closed doors, that protects certain vested interests ,which will mean Armstrong (who I believe to be a filthy dirty cheat) takes a sanction but doesn't lose all his TdeF titles.

 

[Boris Bajic]

Only another 113 pages of personal invective to go and we'll be back where we were. Hurrah!

Plus ca change, plus it's the same thing.

I like Cyclechat, but I worry that these Lance threads are taking some of the spice out of the usually very constructive and helpful helmet threads.

I think he doped, by the way. But I just love the crackle of a fully doped charge up an impossible mountain.

 

[just jim]

Only another 113 pages of personal invective to go and we'll be back where we were. Hurrah!

Plus ca change, plus it's the same thing.

I like Cyclechat, but I worry that these Lance threads are taking some of the spice out of the usually very constructive and helpful helmet threads.

I think he doped, by the way. But I just love the crackle of a fully doped charge up an impossible mountain.

Why don't you contribute something useful then?
Bu useful, I mean something insightful, informative - entertaining even.

 

[Red Light]

But I just love the crackle of a fully doped charge up an impossible mountain.

That crackle wasn't the doping, it was the electric motor and battery concealed in the down-tube arcing over under the strain

 

[Red Light]

When, if ever, are USADA going to give

a) the UCI
b) the IOP
c) the general public

access to all the available evidence and testimony?

The longer this drags on, and talk of 'truth and reconciliation' and 'amnesty' begins, the more worried I become that a deal is being done, behind closed doors, that protects certain vested interests ,which will mean Armstrong (who I believe to be a filthy dirty cheat) takes a sanction but doesn't lose all his TdeF titles.

Not sure what the delay is or why there needs to be one. You would hope the file would have been complete when they issued the Notice Letter three months ago on June 12. Providing copies should be no more than a trip to the copy room - or if their copier is broken down, the nearest Kinko shop - and it could have been out of there and on its way to UCI, the IOC, WADA and L'Equipe the next day. And yet two weeks after LA conceded in the case there is still no word of when it will be made available. The longer they delay the greater the suspicions that the file we will see is not the file of June 12 but a modified version thereof.

 

[MacB]

When, if ever, are USADA going to give

a) the UCI
b) the IOP
c) the general public

access to all the available evidence and testimony?

The longer this drags on, and talk of 'truth and reconciliation' and 'amnesty' begins, the more worried I become that a deal is being done, behind closed doors, that protects certain vested interests ,which will mean Armstrong (who I believe to be a filthy dirty cheat) takes a sanction but doesn't lose all his TdeF titles.

It's the money mate, there's too big a house of cards sitting on all this. I think the best we can hope for will be a couple of sacrificial lambs and some paid off early retirements. The rest will be left to time and natural retirement to sort out. That's only a guess but I can't see how the sort of cleanup, and appropriate level of sanction, needed could realistically be achieved.

I'd imagine this will be justified with the usual 'few bad apples', 'avoiding throwing the baby out with the bathwater' and various methods of implausible plausible deniability.

 

[Red Light]

It's the money mate, there's too big a house of cards sitting on all this. I think the best we can hope for will be a couple of sacrificial lambs and some paid off early retirements. The rest will be left to time and natural retirement to sort out. That's only a guess but I can't see how the sort of cleanup, and appropriate level of sanction, needed could realistically be achieved.

I'd imagine this will be justified with the usual 'few bad apples', 'avoiding throwing the baby out with the bathwater' and various methods of implausible plausible deniability.

But with the scale of what is emerging allegedly with Hamilton seemingly saying virtually everyone in the peleton doped and most of the teams were complicit in it as were some of the sporting bodies, you are either going to have a never ending investigation with a large proportion of the riders, managers, staff etc being implicated and an ongoing trial by media. There is not much point in a truth and reconciliation process as that will just feed the media frenzy and as is happening now with Geert Leinders highlighted earlier, people will lose their jobs because of the image problems of being associated with doping, not the regulatory processes. And its not clear who you are reconciling with anyway. Easier to attempt to draw a line under the whole episode and move on

 

[lukesdad]

I agree. Why does everyone else have to take avoiding action, especially when there is now an 'exclude from thread' tool available?

What's up, playground bullies not getting their own way ? I f you want a private debate do it by PM or frigging Email !

 

[MacB]

What's up, playground bullies not getting their own way ? I f you want a private debate do it by PM or frigging Email !

Nah, what we need is a counter, like you can see peoples post counts, likes, etc...we need one to show how many people are ignoring them

 

[lukesdad]

Nah, what we need is a counter, like you can see peoples post counts, likes, etc...we need one to show how many people are ignoring them

Can't really see any of the contributors to this thread being bothered about a popularity contest TBH.

 

[ufkacbln]

The extent of doping is in reality what needs to be investigated.... although this is unpopular with a few and usually dismissed as trying to get Armstrong off the hook by diverting attention.

Armstrong is simply a key to opening the box, what is needed is an independent assessment of the contents of that box.

None of the present agencies have come out of this well, and all have vested interests.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

The extent of doping is in reality what needs to be investigated.... although this is unpopular with a few and usually dismissed as trying to get Armstrong off the hook by diverting attention.

Who is it 'usually dismissed' by? It's unpopular with the UCI hierarchy for obvious reasons, but WADA has called for exactly this honest assessment and you will find that almost everyone here supports it.