|
On August 24 2012 12:17 Ansinjunger wrote:
If it's true that everyone dopes (or almost everyone), condemning Lance Armstrong is certainly an easier option than condemning the whole sport.
The testing has gotten pretty good lately and one of the funny results is that a lot of winning times from the last few years are notably worse than earlier years. I guess some people finally decided it wasn't worth the risk.
The tricky thing is that they even if you can pass all the current tests, they can keep your blood in a freezer and test you years later. So you can never be sure to get away with it except in the short term anymore.
|
It's a witch hunt. Nothing more, nothing less. His guilt or innocence doesn't matter at this point to me. All cycling has to do is basically acknowledge that that era might've been slightly tainted and they're going to do their best in the future to prevent any doping. Move on. Use MLB as an example and get past the issue.
|
Good God I hate all of the "everyone else does it too" type defence going on in this thread. If you cheat (note the if, not saying he did, I don't know and neither does anyone else here) then you are a scumbag and deserve all the public hate that you will get. Even if everyone else does it and you have no chance to win without doing it yourself. It doesn't make it right. There are rules to every game, when it comes to sport one of those rules is that you don't take performance-enhancing drugs. Pretty simple really.
On the other hand if he didn't do it then I feel sorry for the guy for being put through all of this for nothing. Either way hopefully the truth will come out eventually.
|
On August 24 2012 13:50 chaos021 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:40 TheAmazombie wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 24 2012 13:34 chaos021 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:27 TheAmazombie wrote:
People still think that he is innocent and I really don't. I do not think this was a witch hunt or anything at all and they would not have spent so much time and effort if they did not have damning evidence of some type. No person working for the Justice department wants to tear apart an American Hero. I honestly, personally, want to believe him innocent, but I don't think he is in my heart. Well, if you believe it in your heart, I guess that's enough for me. Show nested quote +I am sure that they have actual evidence if they have been pursuing this for so long, as opposed to what Lance says. If there is no evidence, then fight it. With his money and legal team, I am sure it does not affect his time too much to be worth defending his legacy. I just don't by the whole "I didn't fail a test" argument. Neither did Barry Bonds, but he clearly cheated and there was an entire book written on how he successfully cheated with all sorts of evidence. That sure is a lot of supposition. Are you fabulously wealthy and have had experience defending your name in a court of law? Show nested quote +I wish someone like Bonds or Armstrong would turn this type of stuff into a positive example, admit their mistake, admit how they did it, and help the governing bodies with shutting it down for the future. As much as we are, Americans are really very forgiving when it comes to people who admit their mistakes. It is people who refuse to admit it and change things that we forget about, like OJ or Robert Blake, or Barry Bonds. If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. In all seriousness, what makes you believe he did it besides your "heart." And on another note, I believe Michael Vick has already gone down that road. I can't see someone sitting around going "You know what we should do? Take someone that is considered an American hero and tear him apart, even though he is innocent, just to set an example and to witch hunt." It just doesn't make sense. Because that's never been done before. By all means, run with your feelings. They're clearly leading you to great things.
There is no reason to be insulting. I am not saying it hasn't been done before, but even then it still didn't make sense and I prefer to believe that most people are generally good in this world. I also think that *most* conspiracy theories are a damn joke with lack of evidence, but the fact is that they have a ton of evidence, including large amount of his team members who admitted they doped, and that they saw him doping. Why is his word worth more than other people? It is called having a healthy skepticism, but in this case, with the state of the sport both now and at the time, doping was the norm and if you go caught, you were just dumb and bad at it. It is how it is in a ton of competitive sports.
I can see them going after him to set an example, but only if they believed he was guilty, not if he was innocent.
|
You kids need to learn to read the damn article before posting all the 'good riddance cheaters are rubbish' bullshit. Nothing was proved, he didn't get convicted of anything and he didn't fail any damn drugs tests. He just decided he was sick of disputing these claims for the last 10 years, and his decision not to contest the arbitration process was for some reason construed as a definite declaration of guilt.
|
On August 24 2012 13:17 AceDSS wrote: OGODMYSIDES but on another note i dont kno why steroids are such a big deal, its definitely not a free win button u have to work at least as hard as the other guy to win. i do not condone steroids but i don't see why we ban them when people just sneak it anyways. lance's achievements and donations still stand no matter how this lands
Without some kind of barriers it becomes a war of escalation. EPO, blood doping, and other things have they all have massive benefits for endurance. If it was legal, every single racer who could afford it would store up blood for months and be spending their time between every leg of the race getting blood transfusions. It gets silly real fast.
|
everyone in cycling dopes. lance is a better cyclist than others, and those others also dope
anyone who thinks professional athletes don't use PEDs need a reality check
|
On August 24 2012 13:55 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
It's a witch hunt. Nothing more, nothing less. His guilt or innocence doesn't matter at this point to me. All cycling has to do is basically acknowledge that that era might've been slightly tainted and they're going to do their best in the future to prevent any doping. Move on. Use MLB as an example and get past the issue.
Good luck with that. They already made examples of plenty of athletes but they really want Lance as the ultimate scapegoat and this era of doping you speak of. Athletes are always on stuff man. As Chael said you change one molecute and what do you know. Safe zone.
It's a wild goose chase. Things that were used back then were arguably legal. Ten years later they make the ban list because it's always evolving.
|
On August 24 2012 12:10 Cornstarched wrote:
don't worry guys. No one in the world will ever take this seriously. Lance Armstrong will go down in history as a 7 time Tour De France Winner, and will never be forgotton. This is politically motivated and won't stand up to any normal mans scrutinity. He is a hero and will always be one.
We Will Remember
I actually don't understand. Politically motivated? Who is motivated and what will they gain politically for this?
|
so, for those who haven't kept up with this, more or less what happened is that lance doesn't give a fuck what they think anymore. he hasn't been racing for years and these sandy vaginas have been trying to get him since he started dominating them at their favorite past-time. they have found nothing and are simply attempting to claim his lack of desire to continue to defending himself is an admission of guilt.
more or less they are doing everything in their power to erase him from history. the sad reality is that if he was cheating and getting away with it, so was everyone else. i don't know what they hope to prove, but this type of thing is not uncommon in elitist sports.
edit: he was the most tested professonial athelete in history at one point. i'm not sure if that is still true. they are still using old samples to try to prove he was cheating. that should be a pretty big indicator of their motives... i mean who fucking cares at this point? cycling is dead again anyways. he was the best thing that ever happened to them.
|
I can understand how Lance Armstrong felt... have gone through hell to beat cancer, became the iconic figure for the sport and the tour. I would want some peace and quiet instead of having to spend the rest of my life trying to proof my innocent, and new accusations would raise unendingly.
He has became a beacon of hope for a lot of cancer patients out there. Now a fallen hero.
Why haven't/didn't they say "yo, this guy duped, gotta DQ him" within a reasonable time frame after he has won his first medal? Even if Armstrong did really cheated, the one who have to carry the burden of shattering the idol of many people in the world lies on the shoulders of the drug testers.
Who did Armstrong piss off to have people still try to destroy his name after so many years?
|
On August 24 2012 14:02 multiversed wrote:
so, for those who haven't kept up with this, more or less what happened is that lance doesn't give a fuck what they think anymore. he hasn't been racing for years and these sandy vaginas have been trying to get him since he started dominating them at their favorite past-time. they have found nothing and are simply attempting to claim his lack of desire to continue to defending himself is an admission of guilt.
more or less they are doing everything in their power to erase him from history. the sad reality is that if he was cheating and getting away with it, so was everyone else. i don't know what they hope to prove, but this type of thing is not uncommon in elitist sports.
They've found enough to get all the bad publicity that comes with attacking this beloved athlete. If you read link two they also have email conversations, testimony, and blood tests from 2009/2010 that show blood doping...
|
Very saddened to hear this
|
On August 24 2012 13:55 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
It's a witch hunt. Nothing more, nothing less. His guilt or innocence doesn't matter at this point to me. All cycling has to do is basically acknowledge that that era might've been slightly tainted and they're going to do their best in the future to prevent any doping. Move on. Use MLB as an example and get past the issue.
MLB getting past the issue? That's the most hilarious thing you could possibly say after what transpired the last two weeks.
|
On August 24 2012 13:58 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:55 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
It's a witch hunt. Nothing more, nothing less. His guilt or innocence doesn't matter at this point to me. All cycling has to do is basically acknowledge that that era might've been slightly tainted and they're going to do their best in the future to prevent any doping. Move on. Use MLB as an example and get past the issue. Good luck with that. They already made examples of plenty of athletes but they really want Lance as the ultimate scapegoat and this era of doping you speak of. Athletes are always on stuff man. As Chael said you change one molecute and what do you know. Safe zone. It's a wild goose chase. Things that were used back then were arguably legal. Ten years later they make the ban list because it's always evolving.
Athletes are always on stuff. Which is exactly why the USADA should do what I said. Admit there was probably shit going on without making direct accusations and simply try to improve for the future. They'll never just allow a free-for-all for drug use so they have to continue in adding to lists and making things known. It's the best you can do at the moment.
|
Its kinda funny people posting about him being guilty when the GOVERNING BODY OF CYCLING SUPPORTED HIS LAWSUIT!
I don't know if he did it but hell it kind of sounds like the US org is trying to make a name for itself or something.
|
On August 24 2012 13:56 Ryder. wrote:
You kids need to learn to read the damn article before posting all the 'good riddance cheaters are rubbish' bullshit. Nothing was proved, he didn't get convicted of anything and he didn't fail any damn drugs tests. He just decided he was sick of disputing these claims for the last 10 years, and his decision not to contest the arbitration process was for some reason construed as a definite declaration of guilt.
This is not the only article about it in the world...
Also perhaps its you who should read the articel again.
Only some points:
-He take proven epo and blood transfusion in 09 and 10
-Most people that where close to him, confessed he was doped every time.
-Only the people who are also accused of dealing with epo, say hes innocent.
-Many of his "ok blood results" are fishey / 0 epo in tests ( a body only have 0 epo, if you take epo constant over years and stopped doing so short before the test)
-They wanted to publish the test results at the trial but before they could do so, he lay down his defence
-He lay down his defence 3 day after he lost at court and must face a public trial.
-Laying down your defence on this trial end 100% in a guilty. So its equal to admit you are guilty
In the end they take the medals from him!
why should they do this if he did not dope?
He is an American hero and in the past, American doping organisation even try to cover up doping e.g. Olympics .
Perhaps they just start to do their job, even if they know that most people cant handle the obvious truth.
|
On August 24 2012 14:08 skeldark wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 13:56 Ryder. wrote:
You kids need to learn to read the damn article before posting all the 'good riddance cheaters are rubbish' bullshit. Nothing was proved, he didn't get convicted of anything and he didn't fail any damn drugs tests. He just decided he was sick of disputing these claims for the last 10 years, and his decision not to contest the arbitration process was for some reason construed as a definite declaration of guilt. This is not the only article about it in the world... -He take proven epo and blood transfusion in 09 and 10 -Most people that where close to him, confessed he was doped every time. -Only the people who are also accused of dealing with epo, say hes innocent. -Many of his "ok blood results" are fishey / 0 epo in tests ( a body only have 0 epo, if you take epo constant over years and stopped doing so short before the test) -They wanted to publish the test results at the trial but before they could do so, he lay down his defence -He lay down his defence 3 day after he lost at court and must face a public trial. -Laying down your defence on this trial end 100% in a guilty. So its equal to admit you are guilty
Even if he was doping in 09/10 it really doesn't have any bearing on previous accomplishments unless they have proof he did it while he was winning. The the International Cycling Union backs Armstrong and his claim that they can't strip him of shit anyway.
|
On August 24 2012 13:57 Silidons wrote:
everyone in cycling dopes. lance is a better cyclist than others, and those others also dope
anyone who thinks professional athletes don't use PEDs need a reality check
At last someone knows what he s talking about.
Also cyclists take the most stuff out there due to the nature of the sport.
|
On August 24 2012 13:56 TheAmazombie wrote:
There is no reason to be insulting. I am not saying it hasn't been done before, but even then it still didn't make sense and I prefer to believe that most people are generally good in this world. I also think that *most* conspiracy theories are a damn joke with lack of evidence, but the fact is that they have a ton of evidence, including large amount of his team members who admitted they doped, and that they saw him doping. Why is his word worth more than other people? It is called having a healthy skepticism, but in this case, with the state of the sport both now and at the time, doping was the norm and if you go caught, you were just dumb and bad at it. It is how it is in a ton of competitive sports.
I can see them going after him to set an example, but only if they believed he was guilty, not if he was innocent.
All they've done is tell the readers that they have evidence that Armstrong cheated just like every previous organization that tried to convict him in the court of public opinion. Every single time he has defended himself. So now you're going to tell me that just because they told us they have evidence and a bunch of people around him said he did it, I guess he did it. If they had conclusive evidence that's so damning, why wait for arbitration to prove Armstrong is guilty unless there are rules against doing just that?
Oh wai, because your heart said so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
