View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage

		Cycling Forums > Other Stuff > Doping
Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Mark Forums Read

Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.

Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Reply

Page 20 of 64

20

Search this Thread

13-10.-2004, 09:05 PM	#288
jhuskey Registered User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Great Smoky Mountains, TN USA Posts: 6,559	Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no Lot's of empirical evidence for those to view.[/QUOTE] I would not agree with this view. Priori knowledge yes as it relate to Armstrong's unusual abilities that transcends his apponents. Mathematical possibilities ,as in, mathematically there must be life on other worlds but it is yet to be proven despite unconfirmed rumors and sightings of UFO's Putting aside rumors the fact that he is so superior, at least in the tour, seems to be his most damning aspect. __________________ Whenever I can't get excited about riding I just fantasize about someone else's bike.

14-10.-2004, 01:25 AM	#289
Cyclist14 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Charlotte, North Carolina Posts: 556	Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no NO!! Why would someone who went through cancer cheat

14-10.-2004, 01:28 AM	#290
Virenque Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Posts: 1,213	Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no Why? To make all that he made..

Old

14-10.-2004, 02:18 AM

#291

tamman2000

Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: Ithaca, NY

Posts: 89

Default

Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

It appears that BEASTT does not have a "knack for the obvious". That's a fine world to live in. You can easily discard all of the empirical evidence of the doping problem in sport. How you do it, I would know.

The same can be said of you. You lack the ability to see that circumstansial evidence is not proof, this is obvious to most people. Is it obvious to you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

Maybe you and Sally Jenkins can get more corporate PR work. That's the skill set that is required. Focus only on themes, and do not allow the doping environment to influence your judgment.

You focus only on the theme of guilt by association. Logical Fallacy...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

Do not let all the sick and dying, and dead athlete's in any way cause you to reason that perhaps there is a direct trendline in sports?

Again with the guilt by association?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

In today elite sports world, it is not about which athlete is the best, rather it is which "set-up" is the best. Very much like auto racing and Formula 1. It is an doping arms race, and the best medical support crew and budget may determine the winner. Equipment benefits are irrelevant when compared with drugs.

You are using the conclusion of your argument to support it. Circulus in demonstrando. Logical fallacy...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

If Lance's is on daily medications, then he will eventually suffer some sort of breakdown. At least, that's what I think might occur, just as synthetic hormones have caused health problems in so many other athletes, eg: Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Mike Ditka, Lawrence Taylor, Jack Tatum, OJ Simpson, Ken Caminetti, Jose Concesco, and on and on. Plus the dozens of dead pro cyclists, all dead by age 37.

This one is a mix of guilt by association, and ad numerum. Logical fallacies...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

So we'll just stay tuned. Meanwhile do avoid reading any of the increasingly disturbing stories of busted athletes and their sad denials. That drum beat will continue regardless of our banter.

More guilt by association...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

Discussion of doping in sports, and Lance in specific, is very helpful to promote greater awareness. Many newer cyclists are simply not aware that powerful trauma doping has plagued road & track cycling for over 100 years. Today, the drugs are even more powerful and mostly undetectable. If athletes are super competitive, under pressure for results, are subjected to peer pressure, and have the access, they will use drugs.

Another circular argument...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyer

Awareness of current doping practices is something fans can grasp onto, if they wish to gain a clearer understanding for how the sport functions at the top levels. WADA & IOC can not stop doping. And the athletes will not stop doping either. The drug companies will continue rolling out new product too.

Accepting this sad fact of life helps to frame the context of the spectacle will are so passionate about.

That is the history of our sport.

As NIKE proclaims; Just do it!!! Winning or Doping to win??? Is that the right metaphor??

Be good.

Every argument you have presented as to why you believe Lance must be doping is a logical fallacy. You present reasons to be interested in whether or not an individual is doping, but you have fail to grasp that none of this is proof. All BEASTT is saying is that there is no proof of Lance doping, and to insist otherwise is foolish. Dispite who much you disagree, by any objective measure, he is correct.

tamman2000 is offline

Reply With Quote

14-10.-2004, 02:35 AM	#292
meehs Registered User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota Posts: 1,848	Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no I can't believe you guys are still going around and around with this! It's obvious that for some individuals; the cricumstancial evidence, speculation and hearsay (which is what much of the current "evidence" is: evidence based not on a witness's personal knowledge but on another's statement not made under oath) is all the proof they need to be of the opinion that LA is guilty of using PED's and for others that's simply not enough. You guys could go back and forth and around and around forever! At least until some type of "concrete" evidence surfaces that will tip the scales one way or the other. And these are some incredibly wordy posts too. You guys are expending way too much time and energy on an argument that really can't be won.

14-10.-2004, 03:33 AM	#293
jhuskey Registered User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Great Smoky Mountains, TN USA Posts: 6,559	Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no And these are some incredibly wordy posts too. You guys are expending way too much time and energy on an argument that really can't be won.[/QUOTE] I just like to throw in a comment here and there to stir the pot. __________________ Whenever I can't get excited about riding I just fantasize about someone else's bike.

Old

14-10.-2004, 05:40 AM

#294

antoineg

Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 246

Default

Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamman2000

You present reasons to be interested in whether or not an individual is doping, but you have fail to grasp that none of this is proof. All BEASTT is saying is that there is no proof of Lance doping, and to insist otherwise is foolish. Dispite [sic] who [sic] much you disagree, by any objective measure, he is correct.

And I'd reply that this forum is not about "proof", and is not a U.S. court of law, as Beastt keeps implying it should be. This is about Do you think Lance is doping. So take your complaints about proof elsewhere. Plenty of circumstantial evidence would rightfully lead one to think Lance is doping, proof or no. Deal with that instead of changing the context of the discussion to "proved" or "not proved."

antoineg is offline

Reply With Quote

14-10.-2004, 05:47 AM	#295
Ray R Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: San Diego Posts: 21	Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no No. He is a freak of nature and the most tested athlete on the planet. If Lance somehow isn't clean, then he's the greatest cheat in Sporting History. I was, however, more shocked by Tyler Hamilton's positive tests than I would have been had Lance tested positive. I'm still hoping, somehow, that Tyler is clean. Tell us it ain't so, Tyler!

Old

14-10.-2004, 05:48 AM

#296

antoineg

Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 246

Default

Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhuskey

Putting aside rumors the fact that he is so superior, at least in the tour, seems to be his most damning aspect.

Bzzzt. Wrong. This is what the doping apologists really want to believe -- that anyone who thinks LA might be doping is really deep-down secretly envious and jealous of his success, talent, and cycling acumen, and want to bring him down a peg.

This is because their own feelings toward LA are inherently personal -- they want to "own" the image of Lance as a hero because it makes them feel good inside.

In reality, speaking for myself, I subscribe to the "if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, well then it's probably a duck." And there is way too much first-hand reporting about Lance and doping topics, and way too much circumstantial evidence, for me to think that the duck I'm looking at is anything but a duck.

antoineg is offline

Reply With Quote

Old

14-10.-2004, 05:53 AM

#297

tamman2000

Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: Ithaca, NY

Posts: 89

Default

Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Quote:

Originally Posted by antoineg

And I'd reply that this forum is not about "proof", and is not a U.S. court of law, as Beastt keeps implying it should be. This is about Do you think Lance is doping. So take your complaints about proof elsewhere. Plenty of circumstantial evidence would rightfully lead one to think Lance is doping, proof or no. Deal with that instead of changing the context of the discussion to "proved" or "not proved."

If people were saying "I think he is doping for these reasons..." I wouldn't have reacted. I am responding to the contingent stating, as fact, that Lance is doped, and that you have to be blind to not see it. Flyer (to name one) is responding to posts, that do not claim Lance is clean attacking the posters for thier "lack of ability to see the obvious".

tamman2000 is offline

Reply With Quote

Old

14-10.-2004, 05:56 AM

#298

jhuskey

Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2003

Location: Great Smoky Mountains, TN USA

Posts: 6,559

Default

Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Quote:

Originally Posted by antoineg

Bzzzt. Wrong. This is what the doping apologists really want to believe -- that anyone who thinks LA might be doping is really deep-down secretly envious and jealous of his success, talent, and cycling acumen, and want to bring him down a peg.

This is because their own feelings toward LA are inherently personal -- they want to "own" the image of Lance as a hero because it makes them feel good inside.

In reality, speaking for myself, I subscribe to the "if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, well then it's probably a duck." And there is way too much first-hand reporting about Lance and doping topics, and way too much circumstantial evidence, for me to think that the duck I'm looking at is anything but a duck.

Well BZZZZT your wrong. I guess we disagree.

__________________
Whenever I can't get excited about riding I just fantasize about someone else's bike.

jhuskey is offline

Reply With Quote

Old

14-10.-2004, 07:08 AM

#299

antoineg

Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 246

Default

Re: Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Quote:

Originally Posted by tamman2000

If people were saying "I think he is doping for these reasons..." I wouldn't have reacted. I am responding to the contingent stating, as fact, that Lance is doped, and that you have to be blind to not see it. Flyer (to name one) is responding to posts, that do not claim Lance is clean attacking the posters for thier "lack of ability to see the obvious".

I would term it "lack of willingness to see the probable."

antoineg is offline

Reply With Quote

Reply

Page 20 of 64

20

« Previous Thread | Archive | Next Thread »

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts vB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +10. The time now is 05:32 PM.

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet