What about the good things Lance Armstrong did?



R

Ryan Cousineau

Guest
Fat Cyclist's rather remarkable post today deserves to be noted here:

http://www.fatcyclist.com/2007/05/25/why-i-am-not-writing-a-fake-news-pie
ce-about-doping-today/

"If I were going to write a fake news piece today, it would be about how
scientists discovered a parallel universe today that is identical to
ours in every single way except that in this parallel universe, Lance
Armstrong was a doper, just like ‹ as it increasingly seems, with the
admission of Bjarne Riis today ‹ all the other top cyclists in recent
memory."

....

"Here¹s the thing. A couple of weeks ago, I went over to the LiveStrong
site. In the Cancer Support section, I filled out a form detailing
what¹s up with Susan and the kind of help we would like.

I expected maybe a form letter back in a couple weeks, maybe a list of
local resources I could contact on my own.

Instead, the next day, I got a call from a lady who stayed on the phone
with me for 90 minutes, heaping practical help."

It's worth reading the rest.


And that's just the thing. Maybe other people have other experiences
with the LAF, or can show me that it's one of those top-heavy charities
where 80% of the cash goes into fundraising and administrative expenses,
but this seems like a pretty good vote of confidence.

I'm probably like a lot of you: friends and family always ask me "they
were talking about [insert cycling dope scandal here] on the news today
.. . . so did Lance dope too?"

Of all the people in cycling, there's a lot of circumstantial evidence
that Lance might be among those with the weirdest, least-likeable
personalities possible. He dumped his wife for an ugly rock star. He
tends to have explosive personal and professional relationships, and
when you cross him, you're instantly on the enemies list, and that lasts
for at least a decade. His biographers have their share of these stories
to pick from. He wants to "win the handshake." He Blackberry-stalked Jan
Ullrich. He seems to feed on the emnity of others.

And yet. The most fiercely competitive guy in cycling has always made a
point of putting huge amounts of time and energy into his good cause,
and the post above suggests that it has done a lot of good. A great many
smiling and affable men in this world have done far less.

Okay, enough kindness. My pick for the last doped year is 1999. After
that I think he had to race clean because he was afraid of getting
caught.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
 
On May 26, 9:36 am, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> Fat Cyclist's rather remarkable post today deserves to be noted here:
>
> http://www.fatcyclist.com/2007/05/25/why-i-am-not-writing-a-fake-news...
> ce-about-doping-today/


> And yet. The most fiercely competitive guy in cycling has always made a
> point of putting huge amounts of time and energy into his good cause,
> and the post above suggests that it has done a lot of good. A great many
> smiling and affable men in this world have done far less.


Dumbass,

LANCE is evil. Everyone knows this, because the world is actually
black and white. You cannot be a doper and ever do anything good
unless, of course, you admit to doping and implicate others in which
case you retroactively become a saint, in the past, now, and
forevermore. Therefore, the LAF is a front for evil. Please make a
note of this.
 
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> Fat Cyclist's rather remarkable post today deserves to be noted here:
>>
>> http://www.fatcyclist.com/2007/05/25/why-i-am-not-writing-a-fake-news...
>> ce-about-doping-today/


rechungREMOVETHIS wrote:
> LANCE is evil. Everyone knows this, because the world is actually
> black and white. You cannot be a doper and ever do anything good
> unless, of course, you admit to doping and implicate others in which
> case you retroactively become a saint, in the past, now, and
> forevermore. Therefore, the LAF is a front for evil. Please make a
> note of this.


Does this mean he is blackballed from LIVEDRUNK ?
 
Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> Fat Cyclist's rather remarkable post today deserves to be noted here:


> http://www.fatcyclist.com/2007/05/25/why-i-am-not-writing-a-fake-news-pie
> ce-about-doping-today/


> "If I were going to write a fake news piece today, it would be about how
> scientists discovered a parallel universe today that is identical to
> ours in every single way except that in this parallel universe, Lance
> Armstrong was a doper, just like ? as it increasingly seems, with the
> admission of Bjarne Riis today ? all the other top cyclists in recent
> memory."


> ...


> "Here¹s the thing. A couple of weeks ago, I went over to the LiveStrong
> site. In the Cancer Support section, I filled out a form detailing
> what¹s up with Susan and the kind of help we would like.


> I expected maybe a form letter back in a couple weeks, maybe a list of
> local resources I could contact on my own.


> Instead, the next day, I got a call from a lady who stayed on the phone
> with me for 90 minutes, heaping practical help."


> It's worth reading the rest.



> And that's just the thing. Maybe other people have other experiences
> with the LAF, or can show me that it's one of those top-heavy charities
> where 80% of the cash goes into fundraising and administrative expenses,
> but this seems like a pretty good vote of confidence.


> I'm probably like a lot of you: friends and family always ask me "they
> were talking about [insert cycling dope scandal here] on the news today
> . . . so did Lance dope too?"


> Of all the people in cycling, there's a lot of circumstantial evidence
> that Lance might be among those with the weirdest, least-likeable
> personalities possible. He dumped his wife for an ugly rock star. He
> tends to have explosive personal and professional relationships, and
> when you cross him, you're instantly on the enemies list, and that lasts
> for at least a decade. His biographers have their share of these stories
> to pick from. He wants to "win the handshake." He Blackberry-stalked Jan
> Ullrich. He seems to feed on the emnity of others.


> And yet. The most fiercely competitive guy in cycling has always made a
> point of putting huge amounts of time and energy into his good cause,
> and the post above suggests that it has done a lot of good. A great many
> smiling and affable men in this world have done far less.


> Okay, enough kindness. My pick for the last doped year is 1999. After
> that I think he had to race clean because he was afraid of getting
> caught.


********, now we now that it was posible to dope using epo and
bloddoping without getting caught up until 2006. How many of the
speculated implicated riders from operation puerto has been caught in
a doping test?

_two_, both of them was only caught because they where stupid enough
to inject someone elses blod.

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.
 
On Sat, 26 May 2007 10:41:31 +0200, Donald Munro <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>> Fat Cyclist's rather remarkable post today deserves to be noted here:
>>>
>>> http://www.fatcyclist.com/2007/05/25/why-i-am-not-writing-a-fake-news...
>>> ce-about-doping-today/

>
>rechungREMOVETHIS wrote:
>> LANCE is evil. Everyone knows this, because the world is actually
>> black and white. You cannot be a doper and ever do anything good
>> unless, of course, you admit to doping and implicate others in which
>> case you retroactively become a saint, in the past, now, and
>> forevermore. Therefore, the LAF is a front for evil. Please make a
>> note of this.

>
>Does this mean he is blackballed from LIVEDRUNK ?


Only if he's sober.

Ron
 
in message <[email protected]>, Ryan Cousineau
('[email protected]') wrote:

> Okay, enough kindness. My pick for the last doped year is 1999. After
> that I think he had to race clean because he was afraid of getting
> caught.


I'm with you all the way to there. But... Armstrong, of course, never did
claim any exemption for prescribed cancer medication. But, given his
condition, he could legitimately have had - for good clinical reasons -
prescriptions for both EPO and testosterone. He never looked or acted like
a man with low testosterone. He never looked or acted like a man with low
haematocrit. And the one time he was caught with an in competition drug
test, he retrospectively produced a legitimate prescription.

So my personal ill-informed guess: he was doping all through his career,
but after the cancer, he had legitimate prescriptions for all the drugs he
was using, which would have been produced if needed. I have no evidence
for this guess, apart from Armstrong's observed behaviour.

If he was taking legitimately prescribed medication, is this cheating?
Someone recovering from cancer needs medication. Adjusting the dose so
that it gives them exactly enough to counteract the effects of their
illness and the side-effects of their other medication is clearly a very
delicate balance, and any reasonable doctor will err on the side that
promotes the patient's health. Does this mean the patient can never be
allowed to compete as an athlete? I have no answer to this questions. I
think it's a profoundly difficult question about the nature of athletics.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/


... a mild, inoffensive sadist...
 
On May 29, 7:11 am, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

> So my personal ill-informed guess: he was doping all through his career,
> but after the cancer, he had legitimate prescriptions for all the drugs he
> was using, which would have been produced if needed. I have no evidence
> for this guess, apart from Armstrong's observed behaviour.


dumbass,

the original stated purpose of the ressiot story was to show that
armstrong did not have a TUE for any performance enhancing drug. this
is why armstrong himself approved the UCI releasing the doping forms
which were used to connect lance to the positive tests from the 1999
samples.
 
On May 26, 12:36 am, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

> Of all the people in cycling, there's a lot of circumstantial evidence
> that Lance might be among those with the weirdest, least-likeable
> personalities possible. He dumped his wife for an ugly rock star. He
> tends to have explosive personal and professional relationships, and
> when you cross him, you're instantly on the enemies list, and that lasts
> for at least a decade. His biographers have their share of these stories
> to pick from. He wants to "win the handshake." He Blackberry-stalked Jan
> Ullrich. He seems to feed on the emnity of others.



Have you considered dropping bike racing as an interest? Instead, you
could just get pregnant and watch soap operas all day. Just a
suggestion...
 
In article <[email protected]>,
SLAVE of THE STATE <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 26, 12:36 am, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Of all the people in cycling, there's a lot of circumstantial evidence
> > that Lance might be among those with the weirdest, least-likeable
> > personalities possible. He dumped his wife for an ugly rock star. He
> > tends to have explosive personal and professional relationships, and
> > when you cross him, you're instantly on the enemies list, and that lasts
> > for at least a decade. His biographers have their share of these stories
> > to pick from. He wants to "win the handshake." He Blackberry-stalked Jan
> > Ullrich. He seems to feed on the emnity of others.

>
>
> Have you considered dropping bike racing as an interest? Instead, you
> could just get pregnant and watch soap operas all day. Just a
> suggestion...


It would be harder for me to have a baby than for the Olympics host city
to make money.

(A no-prize to the first person to point out which Olympics that would
be).

Dumbass: I like pro bike racing _because_ the participants are crazy.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos