Now UCI joins list as A##clowns!!! - Page 3

Wow you saw right through me Lim.

No, now you're hallucinating.

I'm just saying that if you already have the control sheets, all you have to do is go back and fix the urine to match and, voila, le dopeur is caught.
Magnifique, non?

This is like a game of hide the penny at a local carnival.
You'd have to be a rube to fall for this scam.
Pathetic.

And BTW, if he WAS doping in 1999, how did he keep getting better and better each year, despite many new tests being added?

__________________
Driven by whaz inside

Yes all you have to do is inject EPO into frozen urine samples to make them test positive ! Genius ! LOL ! I think there is a little more science behind it than that ! oh sorry you said fix the urine... and how might someone do that ? Drink the urine, inject EPO and then piss it out again ? You guys are stretching things beyond belief... accept the truth. Armstrong doped. Oh you meant change the labels ? So how did they know the labels to which they were changing it to were positive for EPO ? ohhhh to much..... Armstrong doped.


Why did Armstrong get better and better ? All we know is he doped in 1999 which brings the rest of his victories into question. We have proof of that. Chose for yourself. I know that I sleep better knowing the truth.

He may of not doped beyond 1999 but we do know that in 1999 he took EPO which is on the banned list and he cheated. He may of not been the only one but it doesn't change the fact that he cheated.

EOS.

err, no actually.

EPO cannot be artificially manifested within a urine sample.
WE have been over this before.


The only scam was Armstrongs continual denials of his cheating - he denied it when he was confronted in 1999 and he brazened it out when we all knew that his entire explanation for his "improvement" was a tissue of lies.

You really are an idiot.

how did he keep getting better and better each year

He didn't get better and better each year.

40.27 is greater than 39.55 - right?
Even you can understand that, i presume?

39.55kph is the average speed of the 2000 Tour de France
40.27kph is the average speed of the 1999 Tour de France.
3661 is the distance of the 2000 Tour de France.
The 1999 Tour de France was, err, a gigantic, 25 kms more in total.

Another ex-member posted the same rubbish some time ago and we covered it then, as we have covered it now.

Do us all a favour and try to think before you post.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it" - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

I think resorting to name calling is out of bounds. "You really are an idiot"
Anger issues?
Problems with the missus?
Maybe you should chat with the moderator.
And think before you post.
Now listen here laddy, we have been over this before and you cannot call names. Just because you are wrong doesnt mean you can take it out on us.

The total time of the Tour de France is not a very accurate measure of Lance's individual performances is it now laddy?

What is measurable of course is how fast he goes up mountains, how fast he time trials, and his gaps over rivals.

Clearly he made substantial gains in climbing speed from Sestriere 1999 to Hautacam 2000 to Alpe D'Huez 2001, prbably his athletic peak.
He also made ongoing gains in time trials with a few performances off, but overall improvement 99 to 2000, 2001, and I think his prologue this year was probably one of his fastest ITTs ever.

And of course his own performance measurements in VO2Max and Power output per kilogram. To quote him, Bruyneel, and Carmichael, his performance tests before the 2005 Tour de France showed him to be in "the form of his life." He showed it a week later in the prologue obviously.

So yeah he did get better, without drugs, so deal with it dude.

From Velonews 'But now it says that the doctor concerned in fact handed over 15 examples and knew that the angle of the article on Armstrong was to show that the Texan had never asked permission to take medication he required after suffering from cancer.'

Armstrong told Equipe in an interview in 1999 that he had no medical exemptions for products such as EPO. The UCI forms confirm this. The fact is that they also match 6 positive samples.

It'll be interesting to see what Armstrong has to say about it....

As he's been done over by an Italian doctor working for a Swiss organisation, he'll have to try something other than "The French are out to get me" this time.

There are plenty of other drugs or doping methods. Micro-dosing of Epo means that he could have continued to use Epo without getting caught. There is no test for hGH. He could have got his doses of corticosteroids right so that he didn't get caught again. He could have been using Phase III products from his personal sponsor Bristol-Myers Squibb, for which there is no test available yet. You can mix different corticosteroids or different anabolic steroids to get the overall desired effect but with each agent at a level below the cut off.

Any team with half a clue can read how the doping tests are done and what is being tested for and then dope so as not to get caught. It takes a stuff up by the team or the rider to get caught, a la Tyler.

Phase Three clinical trial material from his sponsor?
Your conspiracy theories astound me.
He was using cemalyt creme for a saddle sore guys.
UCI already confirmed that a long time ago.

You guys just cant believe.

Lets move on guys.

__________________
Driven by whaz inside

It is an accurate measure, laddy.

One that incidentally blows you and your alterego's theories out the door.


......and that's why he went slower in 2000 because his climbing improved.
Brilliant.

Do you and your alterego rent the same braincell?


Measurements taken by his employees : that's really impartial information.

Chris carmichael - isn't he the bloke that trained the other famous US dopeurs
like Alexi Grewal?



He is an idiot - given that we have been over this same ground.
Given that he offered the same excuses to explain his cheating hero, he is an idiot.
I make no apology for saying that he's an idiot.

Your hero - and his team mates (Hamilton, Heras) - his friend (Millar), his doctor (Ferarri), have all been buried in doping scandals.

The evidence is compelling and overwhelming.
Case closed.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it" - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

You keep posting this.

But you insist on trying to make the case for the cheaters like Armstrong and Hamilton.

Why don't YOU move on?

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it" - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

So Lance "being in the form" of his life managed to win just one stage, didn't win any mountain stages and "managed" to win 5 stages less than 2004 where he definitely wasn't in the form of his life...
Seriously now... Do you expect two guys that are responsible for Lance's preparation (along with a certain Italian doctor) to claim that he was anything else than "in the form of his life"? Especially Carmichael has made a ****load of money as the official "Lance's trainer" (which he wasn't in reality, just his log keeper) and you expect to publicly claim that Lance wasn't 100%?

I did not mean to suggest that a doping Tour de France is better then a non-doping Tour de France. But the majority of the "stars" of the sport that we all follow are probably dopers. I am willing to bet that the Tour de France would change dramatically if it was truly dope free. Putting the UCI or the Tour de France Society in charge of dope controls is kind of like putting Ronald McDonald in charge of the Heart Association....... WADA seems to be a step forward, but Pound does come off a little aggressive in his personality.
It is never in the best interest of the Tour de France to have doping allegations/convictions concerning the event. Chances are that the Tour de France has looked the other way many times...... The book "In High Gear" by Samuel Abt touches reveals some "interesting" rumours back in the 80's. One Tour de France rider who never had allegations of doping was Greg Lemond...... But then doping was not a big deal back then.
I prefer to be one of the "heads in the sand" type of fan. Personally, I love when the riders are known for their sprint , being able to attack and solo to a victory, etc. etc...... All the elements of a good race.

I will continue to defend Lance Armstrong. He has never been convicted. There are others who everyone points out as great racers when the convictions on that rider run sky high. It's just back then , suspensions were shorter and not so harsh. Nationality politics are part of cycling. Eddy Merckx was scared of riding in the Giro for fear of someone planting doping products in his water bottle. I find it interesting that it was a Italian individual that leaked the papers in the Armstrong case. Right now he is a hero in the hearts of the Italian cycing fans. He showed the Tour de France to be flawed. There is competition between the Tour de France & Giro. And it is big money competition. And we know that brings corruption.

__________________
"Since we started [selling the Livestrong wristbands], we've sold 75 million of these bracelets," said Armstrong. "What's different this year, is that anybody who buys a bracelet during the Tour, all the money stays here. I think it's important for people to understand that the money they spend - 1 Euro - is not going to Texas or the United States, it stays in France."

I have to agree with you here... there is a difference with Armstrong than most riders. Armstrong marketing himself on being a cancer survivor to which he is and a champion for their cause by winning the Tour 7 times. He also marketed the fact that he was a clean champion and made a lot of money for himself from the public and other cancer survivors by touting his ‘clean’ riding.

That’s what stinks about this issue. Armstrong authorized the doping sheets to be released because be 'believed' l'Equipe was going to write an article on how he was a 'clean' rider.... Armstrong media spin... when the story didn't go that way the paper all of sudden becomes ‘tabloid scum’ who had been attacking him for years... if they had done so why did he release the doping sheets to the paper ? Were they not ‘tabloid scum’ before the story ? Armstrong plays the advantages and for once he was caught with his pants down...... he knows he can’t defend it because it’s true.... its a sad story....

The real reason why a lot of you argue so hard for him is that YOU feel cheated by him for buying into the whole story. You feel stupid. That’s ok, its ok to be angry but the first step to getting over it is admitting he is a cheat and a bloody good one at that ! Get of it lads there is now a new generation of clean riders who are so much more entertaining than he ever was and you don’t have to by into the entire myth of ‘new training techniques’ to sell Carmichel training systems, new ‘advanced bicycles’ to sell TREK bikes, ‘special food supplements’ to sell his sports bars, lies about ‘reconnaissance of stages’ to sell books and being a patron of the peleton to sell books. He was a marketing machine. He was the most hated rider of the peleton. He only raced to win 21 days of the year. No one respected him and you will see when the season start proper no one will talk of him. He is forgotten. Bring on 2006 !

He was caught with a different corticosteroid in his urine than the one that was apparently being used for a saddle sore as per the post-dated TUE.
By the way, have you or anyone else used a corticosteroid cream for a saddle sore?
If you have used such creams, do you know how much gets absorbed trans-cutaneously - especially if being used on an area as small as the perineum?
Got the picture yet?

Thanks also for the laugh about conspiracy theories. This coming from you with your desperate attempts to make up conspiracy theories as to why Lance & Tyler are busted...

1. No, the corticosteroid was exactly the same...of course what was found in the urine was a metabolite.
Let me spell that for you m-e-t-a-b-o-l-i-t-e. Look it up.

2. Yes, I have used it and prescribed said corticosteroids for topical use in patients on saddle sores, idiot.

3. Yes, there is always systemic absorption of steroids, particularly if there is an area of tissue breakdown...duh, like say a SADDLE SORE, idiot.

I have the picture.
I have no idea what you are up to or why you post here or why you try to create specious arguments but you are a blowhard know nothing.

Look it up. Absorption of steroids from topical administration, or eyedrops even. Basic stuff really. Over and out.