A
Eventually someone was going to cave under the weight of the evidence.
I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
he is.
I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
he is.
All you apologists can shut up now.
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
L
Leo, from Europe
Guest
On May 7, 6:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
> he is.
I guess I am a 'jock sniffer' then, since I admire him more than, say,
a Floyd or Tyler.
Could you please explain which kind of jock sniffer I am?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jock+sniffer
Thanks!
wrote:
> I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
> he is.
I guess I am a 'jock sniffer' then, since I admire him more than, say,
a Floyd or Tyler.
Could you please explain which kind of jock sniffer I am?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jock+sniffer
Thanks!
S
Scott
Guest
On May 7, 9:14 am, "Leo, from Europe" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 7, 6:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
> > he is.
>
> I guess I am a 'jock sniffer' then, since I admire him more than, say,
> a Floyd or Tyler.
>
> Could you please explain which kind of jock sniffer I am?
>
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jock+sniffer
>
> Thanks!
Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
futile defense, all the while knowing he's guilty, when in fact he is
innocent and being railroaded by a corrupt system, why would you
admire a newly confessed doper more than him?
Maybe Floyd hasn't confessed because he knows he didn't do anything,
and perhaps Basso did confess 'cause he knows he's guilty as hell and
didn't have a chance in hell of salvaging his reputation or career any
other way than by confessing?
For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
S.
> On May 7, 6:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
> > he is.
>
> I guess I am a 'jock sniffer' then, since I admire him more than, say,
> a Floyd or Tyler.
>
> Could you please explain which kind of jock sniffer I am?
>
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jock+sniffer
>
> Thanks!
Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
futile defense, all the while knowing he's guilty, when in fact he is
innocent and being railroaded by a corrupt system, why would you
admire a newly confessed doper more than him?
Maybe Floyd hasn't confessed because he knows he didn't do anything,
and perhaps Basso did confess 'cause he knows he's guilty as hell and
didn't have a chance in hell of salvaging his reputation or career any
other way than by confessing?
For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
S.
L
Leo, from Europe
Guest
On May 7, 6:22 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
A big assumption.
> doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
confessed.
What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
requirement).
> Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
A big assumption.
> doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
confessed.
What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
requirement).
M
Mike Jacoubowsky
Guest
>> Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
>> that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
>> doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
>> found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
Excuse me? It was McQuaid, a couple days after the TdF, who announced that
the "worst case scenario" was upon us. Well before testing of the B samples.
And in violation of protocol. Hardly an indication of the other side keeping
their mouth shut. Floyd was being tried in the court of public opinion long
before he had a chance to begin to defend himself.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>> that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
>> doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
>> found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
Excuse me? It was McQuaid, a couple days after the TdF, who announced that
the "worst case scenario" was upon us. Well before testing of the B samples.
And in violation of protocol. Hardly an indication of the other side keeping
their mouth shut. Floyd was being tried in the court of public opinion long
before he had a chance to begin to defend himself.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
R
RicodJour
Guest
Leo, from Europe wrote:
> On May 7, 6:22 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> > that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
Those little flaps on the sides of your glasses are called blinders.
I think yours are adjusted far too narrowly. Leaking lab results and
DickPounding Landis to any camera or reporter with a recorder is
hardly keeping your mouth shut.
You don't have to like Floyd to admit that he has a right to voice his
side of the story and defend himself anyway he sees fit. Whether he's
guilty or not, whether you like it or not.
R
> On May 7, 6:22 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> > that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
Those little flaps on the sides of your glasses are called blinders.
I think yours are adjusted far too narrowly. Leaking lab results and
DickPounding Landis to any camera or reporter with a recorder is
hardly keeping your mouth shut.
You don't have to like Floyd to admit that he has a right to voice his
side of the story and defend himself anyway he sees fit. Whether he's
guilty or not, whether you like it or not.
R
S
Scott
Guest
On May 7, 10:03 am, "Leo, from Europe" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 7, 6:22 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> > that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
Floyd hasn't been found guilty. He's been charged. His hearing isn't
until next week. Time will tell if he's found guilty. We'll never
really know if he is in fact guilty, unless he confesses.
> On May 7, 6:22 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> > that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
Floyd hasn't been found guilty. He's been charged. His hearing isn't
until next week. Time will tell if he's found guilty. We'll never
really know if he is in fact guilty, unless he confesses.
L
Leo, from Europe
Guest
On May 7, 7:07 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Excuse me? It was McQuaid, a couple days after the TdF, who announced that
> the "worst case scenario" was upon us. Well before testing of the B samples.
> And in violation of protocol. Hardly an indication of the other side keeping
> their mouth shut. Floyd was being tried in the court of public opinion long
> before he had a chance to begin to defend himself.
Well, technically it was Floyd and his team.
But I am talking about now-a-days. He and his lawyers are pointing to
all sort of technical mistakes, procedure faults, unreliability of
methods, while his 'opponents' can't reply.
> Excuse me? It was McQuaid, a couple days after the TdF, who announced that
> the "worst case scenario" was upon us. Well before testing of the B samples.
> And in violation of protocol. Hardly an indication of the other side keeping
> their mouth shut. Floyd was being tried in the court of public opinion long
> before he had a chance to begin to defend himself.
Well, technically it was Floyd and his team.
But I am talking about now-a-days. He and his lawyers are pointing to
all sort of technical mistakes, procedure faults, unreliability of
methods, while his 'opponents' can't reply.
L
Leo, from Europe
Guest
On May 7, 7:08 pm, RicodJour <[email protected]> wrote:
> Those little flaps on the sides of your glasses are called blinders.
Not wearing glasses, thank you. Maybe I am getting blind.
> I think yours are adjusted far too narrowly. Leaking lab results and
> DickPounding Landis to any camera or reporter with a recorder is
> hardly keeping your mouth shut.
Not talking about Pound & McQuaid.
> You don't have to like Floyd to admit that he has a right to voice his
> side of the story and defend himself anyway he sees fit. Whether he's
> guilty or not, whether you like it or not.
You are perfectly right. And I am just saying I like Basso more than
Floyd.
> Those little flaps on the sides of your glasses are called blinders.
Not wearing glasses, thank you. Maybe I am getting blind.
> I think yours are adjusted far too narrowly. Leaking lab results and
> DickPounding Landis to any camera or reporter with a recorder is
> hardly keeping your mouth shut.
Not talking about Pound & McQuaid.
> You don't have to like Floyd to admit that he has a right to voice his
> side of the story and defend himself anyway he sees fit. Whether he's
> guilty or not, whether you like it or not.
You are perfectly right. And I am just saying I like Basso more than
Floyd.
R
RicodJour
Guest
Leo, from Europe wrote:
> On May 7, 7:08 pm, RicodJour <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Those little flaps on the sides of your glasses are called blinders.
>
> Not wearing glasses, thank you. Maybe I am getting blind.
Uh oh. It's happening to me, too. See what our parents told us when
we were kids is true! "Stop that or you'll go blind!"
> > I think yours are adjusted far too narrowly. Leaking lab results and
> > DickPounding Landis to any camera or reporter with a recorder is
> > hardly keeping your mouth shut.
>
> Not talking about Pound & McQuaid.
See? Blinders. If they'd kept their mouths shut and not tried to
convict through influencing public opinion, Floyd probably wouldn't
have tried to defend through public opinion.
> > You don't have to like Floyd to admit that he has a right to voice his
> > side of the story and defend himself anyway he sees fit. Whether he's
> > guilty or not, whether you like it or not.
>
> You are perfectly right. And I am just saying I like Basso more than
> Floyd.
I'm right? It was bound to happen sooner or later - wish I'd been
paying attention to what I was saying!
R
> On May 7, 7:08 pm, RicodJour <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Those little flaps on the sides of your glasses are called blinders.
>
> Not wearing glasses, thank you. Maybe I am getting blind.
Uh oh. It's happening to me, too. See what our parents told us when
we were kids is true! "Stop that or you'll go blind!"
> > I think yours are adjusted far too narrowly. Leaking lab results and
> > DickPounding Landis to any camera or reporter with a recorder is
> > hardly keeping your mouth shut.
>
> Not talking about Pound & McQuaid.
See? Blinders. If they'd kept their mouths shut and not tried to
convict through influencing public opinion, Floyd probably wouldn't
have tried to defend through public opinion.
> > You don't have to like Floyd to admit that he has a right to voice his
> > side of the story and defend himself anyway he sees fit. Whether he's
> > guilty or not, whether you like it or not.
>
> You are perfectly right. And I am just saying I like Basso more than
> Floyd.
I'm right? It was bound to happen sooner or later - wish I'd been
paying attention to what I was saying!
R
D
On May 7, 11:22 am, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
> For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
> he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
> that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
> doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
Justin Spinelli? Don't think he was ever caught with anything as I
recall.
Guys seem to do what they best for their situation. If you're at the
end of your career ... a suspension is the end, so you might as well
deny. Basso could take the suspension and race again. The Landis
thing is puzzling ... why would you blow through so much $ on legal
expenses fighting it ... when even if he wins it's doubtful he would
race again. And even if cleared would he ever make it up?
As much as I despise Pound ... he does have a point in the "deny,
deny, deny" statement.
B.
> For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
> he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
> that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
> doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
Justin Spinelli? Don't think he was ever caught with anything as I
recall.
Guys seem to do what they best for their situation. If you're at the
end of your career ... a suspension is the end, so you might as well
deny. Basso could take the suspension and race again. The Landis
thing is puzzling ... why would you blow through so much $ on legal
expenses fighting it ... when even if he wins it's doubtful he would
race again. And even if cleared would he ever make it up?
As much as I despise Pound ... he does have a point in the "deny,
deny, deny" statement.
B.
E
Ewoud Dronkert
Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
> had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
Close: Marc Lotz confessed to using EPO and showed the authorities the
ampoules in his freezer where they didn't find them during a house
search the day before. They weren't actually looking for EPO, "just"
steroids and pills.
Also see
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/jan07/jan24news (search
for Lotz) for a nice theory/allegation (not consistent with what Lotz
said, that his downstairs neighbour, a bodybuilder, ratted him out).
--
E. Dronkert
> Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
> had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
Close: Marc Lotz confessed to using EPO and showed the authorities the
ampoules in his freezer where they didn't find them during a house
search the day before. They weren't actually looking for EPO, "just"
steroids and pills.
Also see
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/jan07/jan24news (search
for Lotz) for a nice theory/allegation (not consistent with what Lotz
said, that his downstairs neighbour, a bodybuilder, ratted him out).
--
E. Dronkert
S
Scott
Guest
On May 7, 10:41 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 7, 11:22 am, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
> > he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
> > that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
> had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
>
> Justin Spinelli? Don't think he was ever caught with anything as I
> recall.
>
> Guys seem to do what they best for their situation. If you're at the
> end of your career ... a suspension is the end, so you might as well
> deny. Basso could take the suspension and race again. The Landis
> thing is puzzling ... why would you blow through so much $ on legal
> expenses fighting it ... when even if he wins it's doubtful he would
> race again. And even if cleared would he ever make it up?
>
> As much as I despise Pound ... he does have a point in the "deny,
> deny, deny" statement.
> B.
Floyd, if cleared, will make up lot's of money, if he can show that
there was any sort of deliberate effort to convict him in the absence
of evidence. He'll likely follow with a civil suit against Pound,
WADA, the French lab, etc... for lost wages, earning power, etc...
Plus, if he prevails, his book sales and speaking fees will bring in
mucho deniro.
> On May 7, 11:22 am, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
> > he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
> > that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
> had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
>
> Justin Spinelli? Don't think he was ever caught with anything as I
> recall.
>
> Guys seem to do what they best for their situation. If you're at the
> end of your career ... a suspension is the end, so you might as well
> deny. Basso could take the suspension and race again. The Landis
> thing is puzzling ... why would you blow through so much $ on legal
> expenses fighting it ... when even if he wins it's doubtful he would
> race again. And even if cleared would he ever make it up?
>
> As much as I despise Pound ... he does have a point in the "deny,
> deny, deny" statement.
> B.
Floyd, if cleared, will make up lot's of money, if he can show that
there was any sort of deliberate effort to convict him in the absence
of evidence. He'll likely follow with a civil suit against Pound,
WADA, the French lab, etc... for lost wages, earning power, etc...
Plus, if he prevails, his book sales and speaking fees will bring in
mucho deniro.
N
need more sun
Guest
On May 7, 7:01 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 7, 10:41 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 7, 11:22 am, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
> > > he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
> > > that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
> > > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> > Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
> > had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
>
> > Justin Spinelli? Don't think he was ever caught with anything as I
> > recall.
>
> > Guys seem to do what they best for their situation. If you're at the
> > end of your career ... a suspension is the end, so you might as well
> > deny. Basso could take the suspension and race again. The Landis
> > thing is puzzling ... why would you blow through so much $ on legal
> > expenses fighting it ... when even if he wins it's doubtful he would
> > race again. And even if cleared would he ever make it up?
>
> > As much as I despise Pound ... he does have a point in the "deny,
> > deny, deny" statement.
> > B.
>
> Floyd, if cleared, will make up lot's of money, if he can show that
> there was any sort of deliberate effort to convict him in the absence
> of evidence. He'll likely follow with a civil suit against Pound,
> WADA, the French lab, etc... for lost wages, earning power, etc...
>
> Plus, if he prevails, his book sales and speaking fees will bring in
> mucho deniro.
Without jumping to conclusions, let's look at the other possibility.
If he is guilty, he is a liar who cheated, caused his team to
collapse, has damaged cycling by being the only Tour winner to be
found positive, then has caused further damage to the sport by draging
the anti-doping processes through the mud. As well as having the cheek
to ask fans to pay for his defense.
I stress that I'm not saying he is guilty, (although I certainly
believe he doped in the past), but am laying out the facts as they
stand if he did indeed do it. In which case, I don't know how he
sleeps at night.
Only Floyd and a few others know the full truth. But, Floyd, if you
did do it, own the hell up. Because if you are lying, you are helping
to kill the sport you proport to love. Not just once, but many times
over.
If he is innocent, then all the above is irrelevant.
> On May 7, 10:41 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 7, 11:22 am, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > For me, admiration for Basso's confession would only be warranted if
> > > he'd confessed while under no suspicion whatsoever. Then I'd know
> > > that it was his conscience that got to him, not a sense of impending
> > > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> > Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
> > had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
>
> > Justin Spinelli? Don't think he was ever caught with anything as I
> > recall.
>
> > Guys seem to do what they best for their situation. If you're at the
> > end of your career ... a suspension is the end, so you might as well
> > deny. Basso could take the suspension and race again. The Landis
> > thing is puzzling ... why would you blow through so much $ on legal
> > expenses fighting it ... when even if he wins it's doubtful he would
> > race again. And even if cleared would he ever make it up?
>
> > As much as I despise Pound ... he does have a point in the "deny,
> > deny, deny" statement.
> > B.
>
> Floyd, if cleared, will make up lot's of money, if he can show that
> there was any sort of deliberate effort to convict him in the absence
> of evidence. He'll likely follow with a civil suit against Pound,
> WADA, the French lab, etc... for lost wages, earning power, etc...
>
> Plus, if he prevails, his book sales and speaking fees will bring in
> mucho deniro.
Without jumping to conclusions, let's look at the other possibility.
If he is guilty, he is a liar who cheated, caused his team to
collapse, has damaged cycling by being the only Tour winner to be
found positive, then has caused further damage to the sport by draging
the anti-doping processes through the mud. As well as having the cheek
to ask fans to pay for his defense.
I stress that I'm not saying he is guilty, (although I certainly
believe he doped in the past), but am laying out the facts as they
stand if he did indeed do it. In which case, I don't know how he
sleeps at night.
Only Floyd and a few others know the full truth. But, Floyd, if you
did do it, own the hell up. Because if you are lying, you are helping
to kill the sport you proport to love. Not just once, but many times
over.
If he is innocent, then all the above is irrelevant.
M
Michael Press
Guest
In article
<[email protected]>,
"Leo, from Europe" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 7, 6:22 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> > that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
The brass of the man, defending himself. That's grounds for
conviction on the face of it.
--
Michael Press
<[email protected]>,
"Leo, from Europe" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 7, 6:22 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you admire him more than Floyd? Assuming for even a moment
> > that Floyd's not the stupidest man alive and spending millions on a
>
> A big assumption.
>
> > doom. It's not that hard to confess when you know you're about to be
> > found guilty, anyway. Criminals do it all the time.
>
> Well Basso hasn't been found guilty yet. Floyd has, and hasn't
> confessed.
>
> What I don't like about Floyd is the fundraising, the hiring of top
> notch lawyers, the massive media campaign. This while the other side
> is obliged to keep the mouth shut (for now, they are removing this
> requirement).
The brass of the man, defending himself. That's grounds for
conviction on the face of it.
--
Michael Press
D
On May 7, 1:01 pm, Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
> Floyd, if cleared, will make up lot's of money, if he can show that
> there was any sort of deliberate effort to convict him in the absence
> of evidence. He'll likely follow with a civil suit against Pound,
> WADA, the French lab, etc... for lost wages, earning power, etc...
possibly ... seems like quite a gamble though, and any sort of lawsuit
would take years.
> Plus, if he prevails, his book sales and speaking fees will bring in
> mucho deniro
DeNiro will play him in a movie?
> Floyd, if cleared, will make up lot's of money, if he can show that
> there was any sort of deliberate effort to convict him in the absence
> of evidence. He'll likely follow with a civil suit against Pound,
> WADA, the French lab, etc... for lost wages, earning power, etc...
possibly ... seems like quite a gamble though, and any sort of lawsuit
would take years.
> Plus, if he prevails, his book sales and speaking fees will bring in
> mucho deniro
DeNiro will play him in a movie?
D
On May 7, 1:18 pm, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> The brass of the man, defending himself. That's grounds for
> conviction on the face of it.
It's not ... but on the other hand, I don't see how one can make any
decent conclusions based on what guys are saying, or whether we think
their doping wouldn't have made sense (Floyd taking T then winning),
or whether something is logical (Discovery wouldn't have signed Basso
if there wasn't a problem). Well, I suppose you can make a pretty
good conclusion when someone says it was for their dog.
B.
> The brass of the man, defending himself. That's grounds for
> conviction on the face of it.
It's not ... but on the other hand, I don't see how one can make any
decent conclusions based on what guys are saying, or whether we think
their doping wouldn't have made sense (Floyd taking T then winning),
or whether something is logical (Discovery wouldn't have signed Basso
if there wasn't a problem). Well, I suppose you can make a pretty
good conclusion when someone says it was for their dog.
B.
C
Curtis L. Russell
Guest
On 7 May 2007 09:41:26 -0700, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
>had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
Sure. Guy wrote a letter to the IRS, enclosed with a money order for $
150. The letter said, " I underpaid my taxes and feel so guilty, have
had trouble sleeping at night ever since. If I find I still can't get
to sleep, I'll send the rest."
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Has anyone confessed while under no suspicion (not counting guys who
>had quit, were retired, or were going to retire anyway)?
Sure. Guy wrote a letter to the IRS, enclosed with a money order for $
150. The letter said, " I underpaid my taxes and feel so guilty, have
had trouble sleeping at night ever since. If I find I still can't get
to sleep, I'll send the rest."
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
P
paolo
Guest
On May 7, 8:06 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Eventually someone was going to cave under the weight of the evidence.
>
> I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
> he is.
This was all somewhat predictable in light of his recent departure
from Discovery and the pending hearing with the italian olympic review
group. Either he did the right thing and saved Discovery some
embarrasment, or Discovery got some smarts and wrote something into
his contract linking his salary to the outcome of any futrue OP
results ...i.e. where he couldn't afford to get caught in a lie, and
stepped up and admitted his involvement (unlikely).
Mostlikely scenario is the authorities told his lawyer that he had a
better chance at a 1 year suspension if he "cooperated". Combined
with saving Discovery some angst, the least painful (and costly)
option was cooperate. 2007 is over for Basso....probably 2008.
My question now is, can he be stripped of any titles he picked-up last
year, i.e. the 2006 Giro! Or is this all just "implication" stuff and
we're now moving into 12 months of legal maneuvering. Speaking of
which, all these OP riders are probably watching how much Landis is
having to fork over to prove his case, and they're caving and asking
for leniency (1 vs 2 year suspensions).
It's all rather disheartening. Herera (Vuelta), Landis (TdF) and now
Basso (Giro). I find it funny that Armstrong blessed both Landis and
Basso over the last 12 months.
wrote:
> Eventually someone was going to cave under the weight of the evidence.
>
> I can't wait for all the jock sniffers to come out saying how "brave"
> he is.
This was all somewhat predictable in light of his recent departure
from Discovery and the pending hearing with the italian olympic review
group. Either he did the right thing and saved Discovery some
embarrasment, or Discovery got some smarts and wrote something into
his contract linking his salary to the outcome of any futrue OP
results ...i.e. where he couldn't afford to get caught in a lie, and
stepped up and admitted his involvement (unlikely).
Mostlikely scenario is the authorities told his lawyer that he had a
better chance at a 1 year suspension if he "cooperated". Combined
with saving Discovery some angst, the least painful (and costly)
option was cooperate. 2007 is over for Basso....probably 2008.
My question now is, can he be stripped of any titles he picked-up last
year, i.e. the 2006 Giro! Or is this all just "implication" stuff and
we're now moving into 12 months of legal maneuvering. Speaking of
which, all these OP riders are probably watching how much Landis is
having to fork over to prove his case, and they're caving and asking
for leniency (1 vs 2 year suspensions).
It's all rather disheartening. Herera (Vuelta), Landis (TdF) and now
Basso (Giro). I find it funny that Armstrong blessed both Landis and
Basso over the last 12 months.
L
Leo, from Europe
Guest
On May 7, 8:18 pm, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
> The brass of the man, defending himself. That's grounds for
> conviction on the face of it.
No, don't convict him for that, convict him for the evidence.
> The brass of the man, defending himself. That's grounds for
> conviction on the face of it.
No, don't convict him for that, convict him for the evidence.
