2009 TDF stage 18: Annecy - Annecy 40.5 km



bananabrain

New Member
Nov 7, 2005
16
0
0
Difficult to see anyway back now.
Unless Contador has a sans jour of monstrous proportions,
or gets disqualified, as other recent riders have been after such ludicrous displays of (apparent) brilliance. How surprised must Cancellara have been? Still, maybe we should extend young Alberto a wide margin of benefit of doubt, what with him being such an endearing lovely chap and all. Maybe next year he'll be going for green too.
the 2009 TDF is his.
The degree of politcally correct, worried neutrality and reticence among cycling commentators continues to surprise me. We had the same when Landis sprinted alone up to Morzine after almost dropping out with exhaustion the day before. Then again with Rasmussen - a man who hitherto had looked as if he was still learning how to ride a bike - oh so convincingly burning up the metal a couple of years ago.

Personally I despise these people (the riders, not the commentators), but feel free to argue the case for our new mighty conqueror.
 

poulidor

New Member
Jul 31, 2006
1,464
0
0
nonns said:
Have you ever ridden the Tour?
Have you ever become a Tour champion having suffered from a near temrinal illness experience?
Have you ever started a cancer charity?
Have you got the wit/nouse charisma etc. to pull together sufficient people to support you?

What a foul record LA has. Truly disgusting. I for one would kill to have such a CV. Blimey a grand champion and an all round good guy.

If he was such a terrible person people would steer clear. Enough people seem to wish to associate with him that whilst I can see that he might be a tiresome big mouth he's probably not all bad and by golly he can put up a fight.

What's he done that probably most of the pack hasn't other than won 7 times. Taken drugs? OK so every day we find yet another so called innocent being proved to have taken them in spite of claiming otherwise.

I fully support the guy. At least he's doing something worth while. For sheer entertainment he's good value and he's showing balls (err ball) in adversity also.

Whilst I'm certian that a lot of the stuff is hype enough of it is good that frankly I think he's to be lauded.

Why do you have such an epic chip on your shoulder about him? SOB is very strong. Has he hurt you?

It's not what you do which is important, it's how do you realize it! The rest if just lack of ethics. If you cheat because "everyone" do it, you are just an everyone not a great man.
But of course people who cheat tolerate them hoping others will tolerate their own fault.
 

nonns

New Member
Jul 10, 2006
223
2
0
I owuld disagree with that. If the whole world has chosen what is seen to be a dark path in one time and you realise that you haven't gone that route but decide you have to join then by definition all thats happened is the basis for competition has changed. If everyone cheats then noone is a cheat. If you then win whilst competing under the new basis then you are a great person once again.

In cycling I wouldn't be at all surprised if the vast majority of the TdF peloton were doping. When everyone is doping you can expect a fat thighed sprinter to still suffer near the back on a big climb whilst a sprightly chicken framed climber dancers up the cols. the pseeds may go up but the relative positioning wont change much.

The saddest thing is because no rider can be trusted it doesn't say much for the sport. Just assume they're all as bad as each other and either watch or don't watch.
 

nonns

New Member
Jul 10, 2006
223
2
0
Grater said:
You need to wake up and smell the roses. The facts are there!

Ullrich, Riis, Zabel etc never tested positive but they admitted to it.

yes with their backs against the wall an no further options they admitted to it. This doesn't make them heroes or honourable. When cornered likes rats in a trap they admitted it. Ulrich fought against it. Zabel wasn't graceful, Kohl admitted to it and said he wasn't going to give his jersey back as he knows how hard he worked for it.Kohl also did something particularly nasty to all of his colleagues in the pro peloton by saying something that more or less tarred them with the guilty brush regardless. A really snide and ****ty thing to do. Hey I'm going down but I'll take everyone with me.

Ricco was tested 13 times last year and only 2 showed he was positive when all 13 should have.

You can dope and not be caught. That's a given.
Yep so lets assume they're all doping and have done with it. At every interview the questions should be do you think with a different cocktail of drugs you may have been able to go slightly faster. Don't talk about the racing. Just suggest that they could have all done better with a different drugs cocktail.

Armstrong is not doing anything worthwhile. He has a lot of followers that worship him.

People typically follow people who they feel they can admire. If one digs one's head out of the sad for two minutes one should ask oneself why so many decide to follow LA. I mean ok so he's good at publicity but he can't pull the wool over everyones eyes.

Not worthwhile. Really he started a charity which is doing big things. You might not like the guy but it is doing those things and creating hope for many. Even if he uses it for photo oppos if the side effect is it helps others that for one is something i think he deserves.

He is getting "Blood Money" for his charity.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha even by LA hating standards this caused me to laugh. Blood money - you're having a laugh. That must have been tongue in cheek. With people saying stuff like this no wonder dopers end up with a defence.

He is parading around like he never has done anything wrong and cashing in on it for charity. That is a sign of a loser. Someone who loses at life. Lance is that person. He's a horrible person doing what he is doing.

I don't think it is a sign of a loser. Most big ego's have done lots wrong. They all parade around and cash in on it. As for making them losers this sounds like the jealousy of the have's for the have nots. These rich performing losers are running the world you and I live in and they all influence far more than we do. Get real. Calling them names just makes you a bitter person who refuses to grow up and stare reality in the face. That Lance may not be a saint is probably true. I'm not sure that he has ever claimed to be. I'm not even sure if he's actually said he doesn't take drugs.. He has made oblique references about feeling sorry for people who can't believe in dreams.

The sooner he gets caught, the better.
If he's doping now then yes I do hope so along with all the other dopers. That he shoudl be singled out - no.

How can you beat guys that were doped up clean? It's impossible! There's plenty of circumstantial evidence against him.

1. From 1999 - 2005 look at the tour podiums. Everyone that finished on the podium cheated, expect Lance? Come on!

So he cheated. He levelled the playing field and he was better than the other cheats.

2. His 1999 samples tested positive. Why won't he get them re-tested? He is guilty! That's why. Contamination yeah right. That's an excuse.

And why wont the cycling authorities call for them to be retested against LA's best wishes. It appears that the authorities are not sufficently sure of their case to want to risk things. That alone is cause for exoneration.

3. His former team-mates have admitted using EPO. Even if he rode clean he still had his team-mates helping him on EPO - that is cheating also.

Yes if LA specifically was responsible for them riding on EPO or if he had knowledge of it. Trouble is has anyone yet been convicted on this basis? Why wont the cycling authorities over rule him and strip him of his palmares. Why is LA the only cheat who has got positives who they're refusing to pursue. There's enough out there who hate him. Finally why wont the cyclign authorities get their sh*t together sufficiently to agree on a way forward? They're more hypociritcal than the riders. They know its happenign and they can't even work out things between themselves in nice comfortbale air conditioned office becase they're all trying to stick it to each other.

There are many many reasons why this guy is a cheat! Those are 3 of them. I'm sure people can list another 15.

The only reasons why this guy is a cheat are those samples. If they can be reopened and retested and found to convict him then he will be proved to be a cheat for the period to whch those samples applied otherwise sadly it doens't matter what you think LA is innocent in the eyes of the sport and the law unlike Mr Ullrich and many others.

The biggest question that has to be asked is why can't cycling get its act together at the adminsitrative level?
If the tests are so fool proof then why did they feel unabel to pursue LA?
If we assuem that LA was doping when everyone else who finsiehd on the podium was doping then why was LA not damned with the rest of them.

If you suggest that he's got everyone in his pocket then perhaps the guy has got something more special than the rest. The point being whichever way you cut it he still ends up a winner.

ban news eh?

Try showing me the riders who don't dope. Not the ones you like but the ones you can guarantee who haven't doped. Accroding to Kohl there aren't any!

Ho hum.
 

DV1976

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
419
0
0
nonns said:
I owuld disagree with that. If the whole world has chosen what is seen to be a dark path in one time and you realise that you haven't gone that route but decide you have to join then by definition all thats happened is the basis for competition has changed. If everyone cheats then noone is a cheat. If you then win whilst competing under the new basis then you are a great person once again.

.
Oh my... Lets redefine morality and ethics now for LA's sake. Where do we go from there? If its ok to cheat in cycling the its ok to cheat in sports in general right? Then if we can cheat in sports since its "moral" now that everyone does it why not in every day life as well? Hell why not starting shooting each other...
You really have to learn to think before you open your mouth. What you are saying is past stupid. Is downright dangerous
 

DV1976

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
419
0
0
nonns said:
The only reasons why this guy is a cheat are those samples. If they can be reopened and retested and found to convict him then he will be proved to be a cheat for the period to whch those samples applied otherwise sadly it doens't matter what you think LA is innocent in the eyes of the sport and the law unlike Mr Ullrich and many others.

The biggest question that has to be asked is why can't cycling get its act together at the adminsitrative level?
If the tests are so fool proof then why did they feel unabel to pursue LA?
If we assuem that LA was doping when everyone else who finsiehd on the podium was doping then why was LA not damned with the rest of them.

If you suggest that he's got everyone in his pocket then perhaps the guy has got something more special than the rest. The point being whichever way you cut it he still ends up a winner.

ban news eh?

Try showing me the riders who don't dope. Not the ones you like but the ones you can guarantee who haven't doped. Accroding to Kohl there aren't any!

Ho hum.
If i told some1 back in the 30s that Al Capone wasnt a mobster they would laugh on my face. His defence was more or less what you are saying for Armstrong. It couldnt be proved that he was a mobster so he wasnt one right? Nice one.
First of all you are ignorant. Even if the 99 samples are retested and he is proven guilty he cant be convicted of anything. Its against protocol.
Secondly, the tests arent foolproof. No they dont give "false positives" but its easy for some1 with the resources to manipulate the samples and their body chemistry to avoid detection. If you didnt know that then you have some reading to do.
Third its clear that UCI dont want to confront the problem. Not only UCI, IOC as well. Pound was portrayed as a maniac with a grudge to bear for his hard stance but he was the only one that tried to do something.
You have to be stupid to think that what you see is possible without the aid of PEDs. Not only in cycling but in all professional sports. In any sport. You may want to believe it and its your right to do so but you are stupid for doing so because the evidence for the contrary is out there. It may not be enough to convict people in a sports court but its more than enough for any logical person to see the truth.
When you have exercise physiologists with PhDs, hundreds of publications and years of experience telling you that the physiological differences between champions are miniscule and then one goes and destroys the rest who are doped to the gills then the only logical conclusion is that he cheats too. If you choose to ignore it there is something wrong with you.
 

doctorSpoc

New Member
Nov 18, 2005
1,488
4
38
bananabrain said:
or gets disqualified, as other recent riders have been after such ludicrous displays of (apparent) brilliance. How surprised must Cancellara have been? Still, maybe we should extend young Alberto a wide margin of benefit of doubt, what with him being such an endearing lovely chap and all. Maybe next year he'll be going for green too.
The degree of politcally correct, worried neutrality and reticence among cycling commentators continues to surprise me. We had the same when Landis sprinted alone up to Morzine after almost dropping out with exhaustion the day before. Then again with Rasmussen - a man who hitherto had looked as if he was still learning how to ride a bike - oh so convincingly burning up the metal a couple of years ago.

Personally I despise these people (the riders, not the commentators), but feel free to argue the case for our new mighty conqueror.

AH, SHUT THE HELL UP!! they are all juiced!! cycling is a dirty sport and always has been... if you don't like watching juiced up athletes slugging it out with each other you basically need to stop watching cycling... like Cancellara is all juiced up too? do you even fathom just how ridiculous your statements really are?? this is cycling.. it's entertainment.. people want/demand faster stronger longer and the athletes deliver... shut the hell up and enjoy it or just stop watching... even the new bio-passport **** is a joke.. notice the guys that are caught using aren't even the ones that were banned directly from the bio-passport? they were just "targeted".. it's a big expensive joke!

is anyone else getting tired of the BS that this guy is an A-hole and he is using for sure but this other guy over here who beat that guy but is a nice guy and runs a nice charity and take in orphans is not cheating and all the nice things he does proves it.. sorry for the rant but i find this so frigg'n annoying.. sit back, hold your nose if you need to and enjoy the racing.
 

tmctguer

New Member
Sep 9, 2003
201
0
0
Contador's performance was extraordinary. to beat Cancellara is nothing short of amazing.

i sure hope he isn't on the juice.......superhuman performances by dopers are getting caught more & more these days. given the time it took to flush out DeLuca's positive CERA test from the Giro, we may not know whether the Tour was clean for another month.

as for LA, i admire his performance for a 38 year old man just like I did all of Ekimov's Tours. But i wish LA would just stay home and let cycling move on without him. he is still riding well, but he is clearly not the rider he used to be. is it age, less/no drugs, 3 years off? who knows. 2010 won't be any easier for him, so why not just move on?
 

Mansmind

New Member
Aug 3, 2004
822
1
0
beloki said:
they all take something. Thats the only way you finish this race. Lance is the biggest cheater of all ( I hate the way he acts like Bonds "I never took anything" yeah right you cant tell me you can blow away Beloki,Ulrich,Basso,Kloden and they all took soemthing.


Lance is the biggest two face SOB I have ever seen
j

You can't have it both ways.. if they're all cheating he's no bigger a cheater than the rest of them.

Hate him if you want, I couldn't care less... but don't base what you think about his cheating on the way you feel about him.

"I hate him therefore he's a bigger cheater than the rest of the cheaters". Immature.
 

No_Positives

New Member
Aug 15, 2007
264
1
0
Lance should still be thinking about yellow. I'd bet anything that AC will be disqualified at some point. His performance is an embarrassment to the Tour (5 minutes or so on anyone else!!), and the organizers will find something to nail him with. It would be great if the DQ happened before the end of the Tour, so Phil and Paul could break open a bottle of champagne in the booth.
 

DV1976

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
419
0
0
No_Positives said:
Lance should still be thinking about yellow. I'd bet anything that AC will be disqualified at some point. His performance is an embarrassment to the Tour (5 minutes or so on anyone else!!), and the organizers will find something to nail him with. It would be great if the DQ happened before the end of the Tour, so Phil and Paul could break open a bottle of champagne in the booth.
Remind us pls what was the time difference last time Lance won?
 

jhuskey

Moderator
Oct 6, 2003
10,605
337
83
tmctguer said:
Contador's performance was extraordinary. to beat Cancellara is nothing short of amazing.

i sure hope he isn't on the juice.......superhuman performances by dopers are getting caught more & more these days. given the time it took to flush out DeLuca's positive CERA test from the Giro, we may not know whether the Tour was clean for another month.

as for LA, i admire his performance for a 38 year old man just like I did all of Ekimov's Tours. But i wish LA would just stay home and let cycling move on without him. he is still riding well, but he is clearly not the rider he used to be. is it age, less/no drugs, 3 years off? who knows. 2010 won't be any easier for him, so why not just move on?

Interesting view point. With his present standing and if he were 27 instead of 37 he would he looked upon as a great young talent and top contender for the future.
Age should not be a factor ,it's only a number.
It will be interesting which team he is with next year and maybe he his own team.
 

nonns

New Member
Jul 10, 2006
223
2
0
DV1976 said:
Oh my... Lets redefine morality and ethics now for LA's sake. Where do we go from there? If its ok to cheat in cycling the its ok to cheat in sports in general right? Then if we can cheat in sports since its "moral" now that everyone does it why not in every day life as well? Hell why not starting shooting each other...
You really have to learn to think before you open your mouth. What you are saying is past stupid. Is downright dangerous

Actually you're wrong and I did think.

I didn't comment on whether it was right or not. I commented on what happens. What is acceptable depends entirely on what the majority consider to be acceptable. This has been the case throughout civilisation. Its what happens when countries go to war and one side wins. History gets rewritten. Years later its acceptable. Bad behaviour at one time can end up being lauded at the next.

I think perhaps that you need to consider the messages people are trying to put across.

Ref the shooting comment. In the US it seems to be alright to shoot each other. It happens every day. It is not considered to be a bad enough thing to actually force the government to deny the right to bear arms. A right that was granted during the civil war when it was actually relevant. It was convenient and it became expedient. The fact that it now has a dire result matters little. Its acceptable collateral damage.
 

Ted B

New Member
Sep 12, 2003
625
0
0
Grater said:
Armstrong is not doing anything worthwhile.

Like him or not, he brings a tremendous amount of attention and sponsorship to the TdF, the likes of which no other rider has done or can do.

Grater said:
He's a horrible person doing what he is doing.

Aside from the fact that he's brought more attention and funding to worthwhile charitable causes than haters do in ten lifetimes.

Grater said:
The sooner he gets caught, the better.

I wouldn't hold my breath.
 

nonns

New Member
Jul 10, 2006
223
2
0
DV1976 said:
If i told some1 back in the 30s that Al Capone wasnt a mobster they would laugh on my face. His defence was more or less what you are saying for Armstrong. It couldnt be proved that he was a mobster so he wasnt one right? Nice one.
Lordy lummee. I accept he'd doped chr*st on a bike. The problem with people who have it is for LA is they dont read. I accept he's doped. I have a problem with the fact that he hasn't been convicted.

First of all you are ignorant. Even if the 99 samples are retested and he is proven guilty he cant be convicted of anything. Its against protocol.
Aaaahh so protocol lets people get away with offences and cheating. Superb.


Secondly, the tests arent foolproof. No they dont give "false positives" but its easy for some1 with the resources to manipulate the samples and their body chemistry to avoid detection. If you didnt know that then you have some reading to do.
This I know. I have read it numerous times already not just on these forums.

Third its clear that UCI dont want to confront the problem. Not only UCI, IOC as well. Pound was portrayed as a maniac with a grudge to bear for his hard stance but he was the only one that tried to do something.
Quite. The problem lies with the process and the organisations. Once they get their act together we're in with a chance.

You have to be stupid to think that what you see is possible without the aid of PEDs. Not only in cycling but in all professional sports. In any sport. You may want to believe it and its your right to do so but you are stupid for doing so because the evidence for the contrary is out there. It may not be enough to convict people in a sports court but its more than enough for any logical person to see the truth.

Stupid of course I'm stupid. I still watch sports which I know to be rife with drug takign. I'm, wasting my time on this forum talking to other fools who also know this.

When you have exercise physiologists with PhDs, hundreds of publications and years of experience telling you that the physiological differences between champions are miniscule and then one goes and destroys the rest who are doped to the gills then the only logical conclusion is that he cheats too. If you choose to ignore it there is something wrong with you.

In what way have I ignored it? I accept it. I've said let's consider that all these people are doping as you can't seperate those that do from those that don't right now.

As for my defence of LA it strikes me that the LA haters are very convinced that he is the one doping. That he can do no right. The guy isn't perfect. He might dope. but to suggest that he takes blood money is a bit much. Further to rubbish his performances in the context of all the other dopers he was competing against is decidedly one sided. To say that he does nothing worthwhile flies in the face of the charity work he does and the good works he has done (and whilst the LA haters might not like it he has done good work and given many people hope). The problem I have is that people are biased both ways.

I do not think its possible for LA to buy and control cycling Inc. He must have something that make so many people support him.
To say that he should gain nothing form the work he's done is totally unfair. Why shouldn't he get good publicity for doing charity work.
That he has been a cheat. Yes ok one of many but the vitriole that is spouted about the guy is out of all proportion.

My comments do not exonerate his doping. That there is evidence. Well hey according to the sources yes. That the authorities wish to pursue it well hey no thats not protocol. Lets let Al capone off because of protocol shall we.

Obvisouly you have the opinion that LA is a siubhuman with no morals.

I regard him as a great champion with a number of defects and character flaws. I wish I'd achieved as much as he has and for that I admire him.
 

Mansmind

New Member
Aug 3, 2004
822
1
0
nonns said:
Actually you're wrong and I did think.

Ref the shooting comment. In the US it seems to be alright to shoot each other. It happens every day. It is not considered to be a bad enough thing to actually force the government to deny the right to bear arms. A right that was granted during the civil war when it was actually relevant. It was convenient and it became expedient. The fact that it now has a dire result matters little. Its acceptable collateral damage.

The Bill of Rights happened long before the civil war. The right to bear arms has more to do with the country (and government) belonging to the people as opposed to the other way around...which can easily happen if you don't have that right. :)

Of course people get shot every day, but making firearms illegal won't affect that at all. The vast majority of murder occurs with illegal weapons anyway. A criminal couldn't care less if he's using an illegal gun vs. a legal one.
 

Ted B

New Member
Sep 12, 2003
625
0
0
nonns said:
... it strikes me that the LA haters are very convinced that he is the one doping. That he can do no right.

They've made up their minds regardless, simply because they're annoyed by the fact that he wins, and throwing stones makes them feel better about their own inadequacies.

LA isn't perfect, and he shouldn't be expected to be as such. He's contributed a great deal to the sport and continues to do so, like him or not.

Personally, I find Vino the easiest to dislike. I feel his suspension should have been longer, but I'm trying to be open minded.
 

DV1976

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
419
0
0
nonns said:
In what way have I ignored it? I accept it. I've said let's consider that all these people are doping as you can't seperate those that do from those that don't right now.

As for my defence of LA it strikes me that the LA haters are very convinced that he is the one doping. That he can do no right. The guy isn't perfect. He might dope. but to suggest that he takes blood money is a bit much. Further to rubbish his performances in the context of all the other dopers he was competing against is decidedly one sided. To say that he does nothing worthwhile flies in the face of the charity work he does and the good works he has done (and whilst the LA haters might not like it he has done good work and given many people hope). The problem I have is that people are biased both ways.

I do not think its possible for LA to buy and control cycling Inc. He must have something that make so many people support him.
To say that he should gain nothing form the work he's done is totally unfair. Why shouldn't he get good publicity for doing charity work.
That he has been a cheat. Yes ok one of many but the vitriole that is spouted about the guy is out of all proportion.

My comments do not exonerate his doping. That there is evidence. Well hey according to the sources yes. That the authorities wish to pursue it well hey no thats not protocol. Lets let Al capone off because of protocol shall we.

Obvisouly you have the opinion that LA is a siubhuman with no morals.

I regard him as a great champion with a number of defects and character flaws. I wish I'd achieved as much as he has and for that I admire him.
Just to clarify something. I used second person to generalize not to attack you specifically. I am sorry if it came across like that. I did quote you but i didnt reply specifically to you. It was a general argument. I dont think you are stupid or anything and the only thing that I really disagree with you and feel strongly about it is that perception defines morality and we should accept it. Even if they all dope our stance is that all should be banned for life. Cheating cannot be acceptable, because if it does become then it will become morally justified. Alas if this happens, LA will be the least of our problems.
 

swampy1970

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2008
10,057
183
63
You all sound like a bunch of old haggared housewives who haven't been laid in years.

Call the fecking whambulance will you...

Top story of the day:

Contadraft gets a motorpaced victory in TT.

Cancellara says motorcycles helped Contador - VeloNews

"(Contador) had two gendarmes motorcycle right in front of him,” Cancellara told VeloNews. “When I saw the time differences to Wiggins, I knew it was going to be close. When you watch, at the front, when you have two (motor) bikes, I don’t say it’s done. When I saw those motorbikes very close while watching on television, then I think, OK, then it’s over.”
Cancellara started 77th at 1:42 p.m. and set the early fast time 48:33, which stood until the very last rider on course – Contador – nipped by just three seconds.
Cancellara shook his head in disbelief as two French police motorcycles drove ahead of Contador through a sea of cheering fans. The big Swiss time trial specialist wasn’t making excuses, but he said the two bikes would provide an advantage that might have tipped the odds in Contador’s favor."

... now go back to bitching about doping and sounding like daddy took your iPhone, Barbies and "My Little Pony" toys away.
 

guncha

New Member
Jun 20, 2005
286
0
0
I am very disappointed with today's stage. I know that they all dope but Condator should have never won an ITT in TDF. I hate unreal performances when a rider who should never win mountaintop finish does it or a rider who should never win ITT does it. I also found it ridiculous when Heras showed phenomenal result in ITT in his last Vuelta and got disqualified afterwards.
This tour has lost the sense of reality after today's stage. Contador who have been a hero to me if he had lost 1 min or 1 min 30 sec to Cancellara. I have never wished something bad to anyone but it will fair if Contador will get DQ some day.