Reasons to suspect Armstrong...

[Steven]

[email protected] (Skuyte Hamrell) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I believe Lance Armstrong is clean. But I understand why people
> suspect him:
>
> 1) He is so much better than everybody else.

During 3 weeks in July....


> 2) Not one bad day in 6 years of Tour de France racing.

What? I count at least 3 last year. Atleast 1 in 2001

> 3) Connections to alleged dope doctor Ferrari.

Yes being loosely connected to a guy who has been allegedly connected
to doping is really solid proof.

> 4) He is the best in cycling, a tradidionally dope-infested sport.

Traditionally a dope infested sport? What about football, what about
baseball, what about hockey....

> 5) Recent track&field doping scandals have proven that Americans can
> be just as big cheaters as anyone.

As to the old ass scandals that involved Americans! You need BALCO to
make you think that americans cheat? 7% of all baseball players failed
an announced and scheduled drug test!!!!!

> 6) Anti-American sentiments the last couple of years.

The last couple of years?

> 7) Some surprisingly ungentlemanly behaviour from the gentleman LA,
> like chasing Simeoni in this year's tour, or cutting across a field
> after Beloki's accident last year.

Yes, having the skill and luck to avoid another racer who crashed sure
is unsportsmenly of him! Dang must be on drugs....Are people really
this stupid?

>
> But, as I said, I think Armstrong is clean. He is just extremely
> talented, and has an extremely professional attitude to what he is
> doing. And he is the most dope-tested athlete there is today.

Again I need a farm house....

 

[Richard Adams]

"Jim Flom" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<5R7Oc.117848$Rf.116546@edtnps84>...
> "SMMB" wrote ...
> >
> > You didn't add anything new. Which is nothing new, here. Score = 2
> > factoids.
>
> I give you credit for trying to turn this thing around, Sandy (only saw it
> now). As I said earlier (about piling up assertions, & I am confident
> you'll agree), it's not the quantity but the quality. 2 pretty significant
> factoids.
>
> J "too busy to hunt up others" F


What's missing here are all the allegations and innuendoes that he's
clean.

My testimonial:

I, Richard J. Adams, have never seen Lance Armstrong, or members of
the US Postal Pro Cylcing Team, take any substances banned by the
USCF, UCI or WADA. I have also not been approached for the purpose of
obtaining banned substances or pharmacuticals by, nor offered any such
to Lance Armstrong, or members of the US Postal Pro Cylcing Team.

My allegations and innuendoes:

I, Richard J. Adams, have in person seen Lance Armstrong, Tyler
Hamilton, George Hincapie, Viatcheslav Ekimov, Steffen Kjaergaard,
Stephen Barthe, Robbie Ventura, Dylan Casey and Kenny Labbe without
any suspect doping products about their persons. I highly suspect
they were all clean and the time.

 

[Dan Connelly]

Steven wrote:

> Hey jackass it is impossible to create evidence of a negative! To
> prove a negative one most prove the absense of a positive.

Can you prove it?

 

[Hank Sniadoch]

Lance takes drugs ..... Lance doesn't take drugs ..... Lance takes drugs
..... Lance doesn't take drugs ..... people ...... get a life ..... try some
hobbies .... get a job ..... stop collecting unemployment ..... do me a
favor ..... go do something constructive in your life and stop worrying
about whether Lance takes drugs or not ..... don't you have something better
to do with your life ?? BTW, Lance must get a kick out of the stupidity of
this type of thread when he reads it ...... I have to laugh at you morons.

"Steven" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > "SMMB" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de :
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > > Lemond heard him say that everyone uses EPO. Emma O'Reilly heard him
say
> > > > that he's doing 'what everyone does'. Interesting facts.
> > >
> > > True, but Lafferty has covered this. We need facts to support Lance's
> > side
> > > !
> > > Really ? No one else can contribute ?
> >
> > The reason it needs to be repeated is because it has been repeated ad
> > nauseum that there is no 'evidence' against Armstrong. Such evidence
does
> > exist however.
> >
> > > --
> > > Bonne route,
> > >
> > > Sandy
> > > Paris FR
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> Hey jackass it is impossible to create evidence of a negative! To
> prove a negative one most prove the absense of a positive.
>
> Therefore the evidence that armstrong doesn't dope is that the
> evidence that he does dope is paltry to non-existent...
>
> I really gotta buy a farm in the country....