Do you think lance is doping? yes or no

Don Shipp

I think that if a rider wanted to beat the tests, he could. I suspect that the tests are there to reassure people rather than to catch the dopers out. When riders do test positive, it tends to be for something silly like steroids in eye drops or hay fever treatments, rather than for anything that would actually boost the performance of a fit, healthy athelete. Riders are caught out when the coaches car is searched rather than when their urine is screened.
I am not taking part in the actual poll because there is only the yes/no option. Like a lot of other people I would prefer to answer "don't ask".

__________________
"Boudreaux pissed me off, what should I do?"
"Nothing, just shut up and take his advice."

3_days

Beast:

I'm not taking a side - I hope Armstrong is 100% clean ... but I also understand the pressure put on a competitive cyclist - the margin between good and great is so high up on the curve, even a little improvement means a whole lot at their level. At Armstrong's level, every single move he makes, all day, every day MUST be designed to gear up his cycling level.

... and I'm not saying Armstrong is dirty ... for the UCI's purposes, as of today, he's 100% clean!

But there are arguments out there with facts to support either side - I've viewed both sides, got my head spinning and decided to refrain from making any judgment.

I simply watch them ride.

meehs

I agree with what you say about Flyer. I respect the passion that he has with regard to the doping issue. But frankly that doesn't make it okay for him to act like an indignant ass and to treat anyone that "dares to question him" with complete condescednece and disrespect. Biscayne did nothing more than ask Flyer a simple question and for that our "resident doping expert" belittled him and called him names. It's childish and it serioulsy takes away from Flyer's credibility.

Oh and Flyer... you can go ahead and respond by listing the names of dead riders and sign-off with "Tous Dope" if you want (in fact it's expected). But just to be clear I'm not a doping apologist and I don't disageee with many of the points you continue to make. I'm just a guy that would like to see you stop behaving like a childish dink.

Beastt

As I've come to expect, meehs, this is very well stated and I couldn't agree more. In any situation where evidence exists which supports both sides, any hard-headed acceptance of either side requires an act of pure denial to the evidence for one side, combined with blind acceptance of evidence on the other side. Simply stated; it requires an unsupported bias.

That's not to say that I don't have my personal bias. I'm aware that with the level of doping in the sport, Lance may well be involved. But to systematically dismiss the evidence to the contrary and proclaim any true knowledge concerning his guilt or innocence should instantly be recognized as nothing but pure personal bias and be treated with an appropriate level of credibility.

Felt_Rider

I hope to never discuss names about anyone unless I was there and personally saw the needle in the glute with my own eyes. I do not like to go by hear say. Like most of you, I agree that PED'S are used in general, but until I know for sure I will not nor do I hope to ever name specific names.

Here is the reason.
I think by now most of you know of my former involvement with anabolics.
I can stand up and say to you that I used and if someone wants to call me a low life cheater than fine. I can accept that, but since I did have a involvement and I used to be around top level athletes I can say that there were a few that were not using drugs and yet they were accused. Knowing them personally I can't tell you how badly that hurt their emotions.

Case in point. I shared an apartment with two females and both had the rarest of genetics. One is currently an IFBB Pro bodybuilder and the other has set world weightlifting records a few years ago. The pro bodybuilder did not use drugs at that particular time and used to preach at me all the time for using, but when we would go out in public everyone pointed at her and some were bold enough to accuse outloud in public, "she must be on steroids."

I used to watch her cry for hours in the apartment because of those false accusations. She was just blessed with the best genetics for building muscle. Same story for the other female and she had to take blood tests to compete in international weightlifting competitions throughout the year, but in the public there were constant jealous accusations against her and I saw her cry for hours. I guess it doesn't hurt the person(s) dishing out accusations, but it sure does hurt those who receive them. For me when people accused me I would simply say, "when you can squat your own bodyweight I will listen to you." It didn't bother me because the accusations were true, but it really pissed me off when I heard the false accusations against my friends.

I don't say this to stiffle the agenda here, however my method is a bit different. I try to compassionately divert people from becoming users. I tell them of the things that happened in my past with hopes they will decide not to use. If they decide to go forward that is their choice and I don't condemn them.

snyper0311

Hey, that's a good story. But why don't you tell us the one about the time you took on ten secret service ninjas as they tried to force you to drink Gatoraid and feed you twinkies! Oh wait, I love the one about you being a top cat 4, or was it 3 racer who won the tour de STUPID a record ten times straight!

Beastt

I would urge anyone who is tempted to believe the blatant lies spread by Flyer to do their own research before believing anything he posts. Firstly, he knows nothing of where I live or, for that matter, what I believe other than what has been discussed on this forum.

Secondly, anyone who looks into the supposed illegal substance abuse he blatantly refers to as, "testing positive for illegal drugs", in 1999, by Armstrong was nothing of the sort. Flyer is well aware that the only wrong-doing was that the paperwork to be filed by the team doctor was filed after medication rather than before. Lance had developed a saddle-sore and medicated cream was applied so that he could continue to ride. The amount that turned up was one-fifth the allowable limit so there was nothing about the blood test which showed anything in Armstrong's blood that would have been any kind of violation. The only violation regarded the paperwork.

This is a classic example of why Flyer's credibility continues to plunge. He won't allow himself to see anything at an objective level. Anything which might be considered circumstantial evidence against Armstrong is instantly converted to proof of guilt in Flyer's mind and that seems to be the only way he can present anything. Nothing seems to escape the spin he places on any and every point he brings forward.

It's everywhere you look -- Armstrong has never tested positive for any illegal substance in his blood. That doesn't mean he's never used any substance or any procedure which would cause him to be disqualified, but nothing of the sort has ever been detected. In some countries, no evidence means a presumption of innocence. In Flyer's mind, it's as good as a conviction.

jhuskey

Just to show what good knock down, kick a** debates use to take place I though to would bump this thread back to life, if only for a brief moment.
I really do miss some of this old crap.

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

charming

some cyclist do drugs because it makes them perform better than those who don't

and there are the knowns - testing follows the drug (window of free use)

and the known unknowns - so we will never wholly trust any winner again

Froze

Originally I wasn't going to post about what I'm about to tell you all, but I'm tired of everyone slamming Lance around like some kind of punching bag for all you jealous whinners that only dream they could ride as well as he could and still does!

Yes, Lance is not perfect...Oh no I said that about about Lance! I don't agree with his choice of women or that he divorced Kristin Richard but that's his personal business and he has a right to do whatever he feels he should do and that goes for Kristen whom I always liked-more so then Lance! Now get your minds out of the gutter because that's not the kind of like I'm implying.

BUT, when it comes to all this doping crap...well it's just that pure crap. I have spoken to Chris Carmichael on several different occasions, and on one of those occasions the doping problem came up. At one time Carmichael had dealings with a one Michele Ferrari who did extensive doping on her clients one of which was Lance. BUT this was before the cancer occured in Lance. When Carmichael questioned Ferrari about the possibility that the doping could have caused the cancer she replied that cancer could be one of the side effects. After that Carmichael SWORE OFF EVER USING ANY FORM OF ILLEGAL DOPING EVER AGAIN-and he never has.

Thus after the cancer Lance never doped again, and Carmichael made sure of that as well as making sure no one on the US Postal team did ever by doing surprise and frequent testing.

But I'm just lying about all the above, so don't bother calling me that because I've already taken care of that for you. Now go to bed.

__________________
84 Trek 660 Suntour Superbe

Crankyfeet

Nice bump jdog. I wonder what the poll results would be if it was retaken today.

__________________