|
On October 12 2012 01:01 Philozovic wrote:
If it was so easy why is he the only man in the history to have done so ?
I mean every single pro is on drug period. This is not a debate.
I've always supported him, and I always will. I knew he was on drug, they ALL are.
Did anyone watch the tdf since armstrong left ?
It's boring and lame as shit, the only storyline is Contador vs the Schlecks and it sucks dick.
Contador is on drug, one of the Schlecks is on drug ... so much for the "new and clean tdf" that they try to make us believe every single year.
Does anyone seriously believe that Wiggins doesn't do drugs ?
Yeah Lance used to takes drugs but god at that time watching it was AWESOME, I mean does anyone one remember the 2005 tdf ? It was soooooo good.
Yeah, I thought the tour this year was so boring. I don't know if Sky doped, but thanks to all the publicity about doping in the last five years I'm so hyper aware of it. I can't tell whether Wiggins is the best because he is doped, or because the UCI rigged the stages to give him a higher chance, or because Froome let him win, or simply because he was the best and was clean. And he has zero charisma, he's just not appealing.
And the favorites change every year, primarily because Contador is busy fighting more doping allegations, or because Schleck mysteriously is out of shape again etc. And without those two it's boring, since it seems like everyone is bad at cycling and has no energy whatsoever to be offensively minded and constantly attacking.
|
the nytims has a nice chart about past tdf dopers: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/08/24/sports/top-finishers-of-the-tour-de-france-tainted-by-doping.html
Concerning my own opinion about l.a.: I don't think anybody that has been intersted in cycling will be suprised that we finally have proof that l.a. cheated and doped himself to win the tdf 7 times. Why? First of all even before l.a. demolished the field it was pretty much obvious that this sport had a drug problem. The tdf became harder and harder while the cyclists finished the stages faster and faster. Often times you have the same or very similar stages every year and surprisingly those stages very finished a) faster overall and b) much faster on the last hill (like 5 kmh faster than 2-3 years ago - which is a world in this sport). So can you blame l.a. for that? You can because he was a big part of it, but it wouldn't be fair to say that only one person is guilty for making this apparent problem worse and worse as pretty much every team was part of the doping system.
So can you say that everybody cheated and l.a. just won when everybody fought under the same conditions? Well I can't answer that for sure because we don't know if everbody doped with the same drugs or the same intensity. But i have major doubts because a) l.a. team (us postal/ discovery) not only had this one amazing cyclist but rather 6-7 of them, making them the overall best team by far. Well maybe they just trained/prepared much better than other teams? Maybe but can you get ~50% better in a year by just joining a better team? Also l.a. is not only known to be a pioneer for cycling but a pioneer of doping. In the end we will never be able to say he was ?% better because he was this supertalent or ?% better because of better drugs/cheating. It might have been awesome looking at those guys back then and the tdf beeing my sports highlight of the year but after all those years (i have stopped watching the tdf and cycling for many years now) it just leaves a strange aftertaste realizing you have been lied to for so long. Imo this sport is just doomed because it craves to be something it cannot possibly be right now.
p.s. also i feel sorry for all those guys that tried to finish the tdf without cheating - while i highly doubt that anybody in the top50 at least didn't cheat.
|
On October 11 2012 21:35 RogerX wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2012 21:05 Doppelganger wrote:On October 11 2012 20:13 SACtheXchng wrote:You would have to go down the leaderboards VERY FAR to maybe find a teams' watercarrier who wasn't doped and is therefore the legitimate winner of the Tour. Many people in this world are twisted like that. You are probably quite right about that. But this makes me curious, how can you lead such a career of lies and be proud of it?
I don't know why you just chose to re-quote something when its been said many times before: when you know a lot of other people are doing or have done it you feel more calm to the situation and you're okay with it and you have to follow suit.
What doesn't kill me makes me stronger. I'm all for advancements in technology and medicine.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the doping itself is whatever. a competitive sport does not lose all of the competitive elements with the use of some drugs. they aleady use a lot of supplements and the line between allowable technical enhancement and nonallowable is murky.
the guy is a huge schemer though .
|
On October 12 2012 01:42 oneofthem wrote:
the doping itself is whatever. a competitive sport does not lose all of the competitive elements with the use of some drugs. they aleady use a lot of supplements and the line between allowable technical enhancement and nonallowable is murky.
the guy is a huge schemer though .
the competition becomes who can drug the most/best, and who is better at hiding it, nothing to do with sports anymore. It becomes a medical competition.
not really a competition worth watching, or something you would want your kids to be interested in.
|
On October 12 2012 02:18 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 01:42 oneofthem wrote:
the doping itself is whatever. a competitive sport does not lose all of the competitive elements with the use of some drugs. they aleady use a lot of supplements and the line between allowable technical enhancement and nonallowable is murky.
the guy is a huge schemer though . the competition becomes who can drug the most/best, and who is better at hiding it, nothing to do with sports anymore. It becomes a medical competition. not really a competition worth watching, or something you would want your kids to be interested in.
Problem is that they were for a long time already. Sports now is much more about entertainment value than competition.
The recent 30 for 30: 9.79 is really interesting in light of it.
On the other hand, F1 was all about technology since forever, and it still very popular.
|
On October 12 2012 02:18 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 01:42 oneofthem wrote:
the doping itself is whatever. a competitive sport does not lose all of the competitive elements with the use of some drugs. they aleady use a lot of supplements and the line between allowable technical enhancement and nonallowable is murky.
the guy is a huge schemer though . the competition becomes who can drug the most/best, and who is better at hiding it, nothing to do with sports anymore. It becomes a medical competition. not really a competition worth watching, or something you would want your kids to be interested in.
I think there are still hope for classics (I enjoy them much more compared to stage races) as even you are the strongest rider, you can lose the race
|
On October 12 2012 02:18 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 01:42 oneofthem wrote:
the doping itself is whatever. a competitive sport does not lose all of the competitive elements with the use of some drugs. they aleady use a lot of supplements and the line between allowable technical enhancement and nonallowable is murky.
the guy is a huge schemer though . the competition becomes who can drug the most/best, and who is better at hiding it, nothing to do with sports anymore. It becomes a medical competition. not really a competition worth watching, or something you would want your kids to be interested in.
The bigger problem is that people will be rewarded for taking dangerous drugs that happen to increase their performance. Experimental drugs would effectively get tested on athletes with connections, thus allowing them to win while simultaneously harming themselves.
We want people to compete at their best without literally killing themselves.
|
He only competed against other doped people anyway.. still his accomplishment. But doping is the reason I dont watch cycling or any other endurance/power sports anymore.
|
Poland3769 Posts
Maybe all the results in Cycling in past decade or two should be cancelled, the federation should be disbanded and executives be trialed for mismanagement as they effectively killed the sport part in cycling. After that the new Cycling should start from scratch.
|
On October 12 2012 04:58 Yuljan wrote:
He only competed against other doped people anyway.. still his accomplishment. But doping is the reason I dont watch cycling or any other endurance/power sports anymore.
you are deluding yourself if you think it isn't like that in almost every sport.
I strongly believe they should start testing EVERY1. Tennis players, football players, hockey players, you name it. Heck they should test every athlete before every competition. Make the ones that gets tested positive pay for all the tests, by issuing huge fines.
|
On October 12 2012 01:01 Philozovic wrote:
If it was so easy why is he the only man in the history to have done so ?
I mean every single pro is on drug period. This is not a debate.
I've always supported him, and I always will. I knew he was on drug, they ALL are.
Did anyone watch the tdf since armstrong left ?
It's boring and lame as shit, the only storyline is Contador vs the Schlecks and it sucks dick.
Contador is on drug, one of the Schlecks is on drug ... so much for the "new and clean tdf" that they try to make us believe every single year.
Does anyone seriously believe that Wiggins doesn't do drugs ?
Yeah Lance used to takes drugs but god at that time watching it was AWESOME, I mean does anyone one remember the 2005 tdf ? It was soooooo good.
Doping just did cycling so entertaining back in the days. Armstrong / Ulrich times mountain stages were so fun to watch. There were so much more attacks between the top climbers. Even if the attack failed they usually were good to go again in 2 minutes later. Back to back mountain stages didn't seem to have any effect to them either.
Nowadays it's usually 1-2 attacks in the last kilometer of the last mountain. Sometimes you see someone taking a risk and making a move earlier but it usually never works anymore. Often it ruins the whole tour for the attacker because they just don't recover from it for the next days stages.
Tour / Giro / Vuelta organizers should gather up and think a ways to make it more exiting to watch now when the cyclist aren't as doped as before.
|
On October 12 2012 22:17 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 04:58 Yuljan wrote:
He only competed against other doped people anyway.. still his accomplishment. But doping is the reason I dont watch cycling or any other endurance/power sports anymore. you are deluding yourself if you think it isn't like that in almost every sport. I strongly believe they should start testing EVERY1. Tennis players, football players, hockey players, you name it. Heck they should test every athlete before every competition. Make the ones that gets tested positive pay for all the tests, by issuing huge fines.
I don't think you are aware of exactly how advanced its become. In other words, it's literally impossible to track everything. It's a farce.
|
Give the guy a gold medal for cheating, he's worth it for sure. Seriously, that takes dedication.
|
Poland3769 Posts
On October 12 2012 23:31 Poltergeist- wrote:
Give the guy a gold medal for cheating, he's worth it for sure. Seriously, that takes dedication.
Maybe model of Erythropoietin made of gold :D
|
On October 12 2012 23:26 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 22:17 Nizaris wrote:On October 12 2012 04:58 Yuljan wrote:
He only competed against other doped people anyway.. still his accomplishment. But doping is the reason I dont watch cycling or any other endurance/power sports anymore. you are deluding yourself if you think it isn't like that in almost every sport. I strongly believe they should start testing EVERY1. Tennis players, football players, hockey players, you name it. Heck they should test every athlete before every competition. Make the ones that gets tested positive pay for all the tests, by issuing huge fines. I don't think you are aware of exactly how advanced its become. In other words, it's literally impossible to track everything. It's a farce.
Well that's depressing. I never knew it was this widespread before reading Armstrong's story...they have to get serious with the rules then. If they want cycling to be seen as a legitimate sport, then maybe they have to start enacting much more invasive measures, because I don't see how else anything is going to change. If it continues to be a farce, who is going to keep watching? There has to be *some* way to control them, I don't know what draconian measures would be involved, but they need something.
|
On October 13 2012 02:30 radscorpion9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 23:26 StarStruck wrote:On October 12 2012 22:17 Nizaris wrote:On October 12 2012 04:58 Yuljan wrote:
He only competed against other doped people anyway.. still his accomplishment. But doping is the reason I dont watch cycling or any other endurance/power sports anymore. you are deluding yourself if you think it isn't like that in almost every sport. I strongly believe they should start testing EVERY1. Tennis players, football players, hockey players, you name it. Heck they should test every athlete before every competition. Make the ones that gets tested positive pay for all the tests, by issuing huge fines. I don't think you are aware of exactly how advanced its become. In other words, it's literally impossible to track everything. It's a farce. Well that's depressing. I never knew it was this widespread before reading Armstrong's story...they have to get serious with the rules then. If they want cycling to be seen as a legitimate sport, then maybe they have to start enacting much more invasive measures, because I don't see how else anything is going to change. If it continues to be a farce, who is going to keep watching? There has to be *some* way to control them, I don't know what draconian measures would be involved, but they need something.
And yet it would much rather watch the "farce" that was Lance winning 7 times in exciting races with attacks then the current snooze fest where no one makes a move and even tries to beat his opponents
|
Innocent until proven guilty. Passed all of their tests and never failed once. What more do you need?
|
The tours with lance where the best by far of the past 20 years.
Cycling needs heros with big storys, not a different person every time who is forgotten the next year.
Preferably 2 heros who fight with eachoter, like lance and ulrich.
That the french (and quiet a few others) hated him made it even better
Noone who knew cycling expected lance or anny of the others to be clean,though i can imagine this is a huge disapointment for people who where less into cycling.
Its just like when you are a kid, and discover that santa claus doesnt exist, or when you a little bit older and discover that all politicians lie and manny police is corrupt.
The world becomes a bit less beautifull place at thoose moments, wich is always sad.
|
On October 13 2012 03:39 m1rk3 wrote:
Innocent until proven guilty. Passed all of their tests and never failed once. What more do you need?
Nope. Not true.
On October 12 2012 04:58 Yuljan wrote:
He only competed against other doped people anyway.. still his accomplishment. But doping is the reason I dont watch cycling or any other endurance/power sports anymore.
Yes and no. It's true he beat everyone else, and almost everyone else was indeed doping. The only caveat here is that people respond to drugs differently. If you have riders A and B who are equally talented clean, its possible that with the same doping regimen rider A will now significantly outperform rider B because he is more of a responder to the drugs.
In other words, in a field of doped cyclists Lance was clearly the undisputed best. However, we cannot say that in a field of all clean cyclists Lance would still have been the best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
