thenammagazine
Super Freak
Star Puffs vs. Nam round 27
I lost count.
Star Puffs vs. Nam round 27
It's hearsay until proven. It hasn't been proven.
You sound like an apologist. The problem is that these cyclists (pretty much all of them) are supposedly doping, yet not getting caught despite being tested multiple times. Chasing after the "winner" with accusations and hearsay is NOT going to fix the problem. Only a complete idiot would think it would.
Greg LeMond, who is in fact my hero, was devastated when he heard that Armstrong (Gunderson, his REAL name) was working with Michele Ferrari, who was a trainer who had been caught cheating before. Greg LeMond has no relationship with Armstrong. Apparently, Armstrong is kind of a prick when you get to know him. Greg LeMond feels that Armstrong hasn't really made many friends in cycling.The problem is that getting that level of proof is really freakin' hard when you aren't dealing with someone who is really inept. As was pointed out before, the "bad guys" who are hired to keep cheaters from being caught are likely being paid a hell of a lot more than the "good guys" who are trying to catch cheats. So who has the advantage? Nam, do you believe that 99% of NFL and pro rassler athletes don't juice? Because the evidence may not be there, but I would bet the house that it is happening.
Nam is making assumptions that Lance's former teammates/friends are all jealous liars, others believe those guys because it seems unlikely that so many would start saying the same thing, and about a guy who seemed inhumanly good for many years (which is extremely unlikely when you consider how hard it is to succeed at pro sports like cycling). Whatever belief you hold, it is informed by circumstantial evidence. I don't buy into the "innocent until proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt" POV here. It works in a court of law, but that does not always equate to what happens in reality.
The notion that passing his drug tests proves his innocence is spurious reasoning. Anyone cheating in cycling at the time knew they would be tested, so circumventing the tests had to be the prime consideration in any drugs used.
Also saying the ICU or Tour support Armstrong is weak at best. They have a vested interest of image and money in his being untainted. The USADA has no reason to target Armstrong other than genuine conviction in sportsmanship and/or the rules.
The flaw I see in the no proof theory is that half the dope used was some new version not being tested for at the time, hence they don't get caught - baseball and hgh come to mind. I believe EPO was not tested for at the time, but they found it now when his old blood work was retested.
Alot of the dope used in baseball at one time wasn't against baseball rules.
If it wasn't against racing rules at the time he did it, can they still hold that against him?
How long do they keep that blood that they can re-test it?
No, but if you want to accuse him of it, get a dirty test or shut the yap. If there are exploited loopholes in the testing system, these *******s would be better served figuring out how to close them instead of railing against public figures with nothing more than hearsay. Let's assume Lance cheated by exploiting the system. How is chasing after him to defame him publicly and have his achievements stripped fixing the problem?
As to Cena, I'm not gonna say either way because I neither know nor care. But I will ask, how many of the ****ing idiots here have accused Ski of juicing? He doesn't.
Blood doping has been against the rules before he even turned pro.
Besides, I don't know that there is even a way to test whether he boosted his blood. How can you test blood for a drug used to cheat when or if cheating wasn't even done using a drug?
Are you accusing him of blood doping?
Talk about flawed logic, that's a horrible comparison. There would be ******l trauma, transfer, etc. There'd still be evidence linking the suspect to the crime. Just because there's no semen, doesn't mean she wasn't raped.
There're a bunch of idiots claiming 911 was an inside job by Bush and the NWO/oil tycoons. You believe them?
Where's the proof?
And you're just bandwagoning. Again, where's the proof? There would be proof.
Alot of the dope used in baseball at one time wasn't against baseball rules.
If it wasn't against racing rules at the time he did it, can they still hold that against him?
How long do they keep that blood that they can re-test it?
Yes, I do. If these chicken**** organizations cannot provide proof, then they need to rethink their testing methods instead of demonizing public figures to cover up their ineptness. Nobody went after McGwire or Canseco (who openly admitted it in his book). Yet, they run down Bonds for it. Why not Sosa? Because Bonds is more popular. It's all bull****.
Any action they take against Armstrong now sends a signal of intent to competitors and fans of the sport that drug-taking in cycling will not be tolerated. It's part and parcel of cleaning up the sport. But yeah, Ween is right... where does it stop. If they followed this to its logical conclusion, we'd probably see the guy who rode in 242nd being awarded first place.
Cycling has got to run a close second to body building as a sport where *nod nod *wink wink the athletes competing are considered clean. Does anybody really care whether it's clean or not when everybody simply assumes it isn't, and hasn't been for many years?
*yawn.
True Ink. And spending a lot of money I'm sure. It's not like they can take his awards and give them to the next person in line because chances are, they'd find the same thing going on with that person......and so on. They should just concentrate on keeping the sport clean now.
Not really. It just means they're willing to tackle someone to get attention. They're not going after any other cyclists.