Then he had the balls to make commercials like this:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[/quote]
Very.
They are all doped to the gills.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[/quote]
Very.
They are all doped to the gills. [/quote]
Then you didn’t really read what I said.
I’m very aware that any present (and most past) Mr Olympias are ‘doped to the gills’. OP said every elite athlete on the planet is. He also made claims about his own genetic gifts. My point was that his lack of awareness of how gifted some individuals are clouds his judgement on the prevalence of steroids in pro sports.
ftr, on the bodybuilding side of things, I think one could assume that every Mr Olympia contestant (not just winner) for the last 40+ years has been on steroids. Bodybuilding is not representative of sports in general in that respect.
Def on the roids…
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[/quote]
Very.
They are all doped to the gills. [/quote]
Then you didn’t really read what I said.
I’m very aware that any present (and most past) Mr Olympias are ‘doped to the gills’. OP said every elite athlete on the planet is. He also made claims about his own genetic gifts. My point was that his lack of awareness of how gifted some individuals are clouds his judgement on the prevalence of steroids in pro sports.
ftr, on the bodybuilding side of things, I think one could assume that every Mr Olympia contestant (not just winner) for the last 40+ years has been on steroids. Bodybuilding is not representative of sports in general in that respect.
[/quote]
This young man went to my school. He was in 10th grade, never juiced. Weighed 165 and squated 540. Im agreeing with flipcollar on this one.
[quote]Jaycuts wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[/quote]
Very.
They are all doped to the gills. [/quote]
Then you didn’t really read what I said.
I’m very aware that any present (and most past) Mr Olympias are ‘doped to the gills’. OP said every elite athlete on the planet is. He also made claims about his own genetic gifts. My point was that his lack of awareness of how gifted some individuals are clouds his judgement on the prevalence of steroids in pro sports.
ftr, on the bodybuilding side of things, I think one could assume that every Mr Olympia contestant (not just winner) for the last 40+ years has been on steroids. Bodybuilding is not representative of sports in general in that respect.
[/quote]
This young man went to my school. He was in 10th grade, never juiced. Weighed 165 and squated 540. Im agreeing with flipcollar on this one. [/quote]
You can bet that some running backs or receivers on short routes got a hell of a surprise when they ran into that little middle linebacker and it turned out he was a freight train. There were some guys like that on my HS football team. The little ones always hit a little harder anyways.
Re: Lance
I always come back to LiveStrong. No amount of lying, dope, lawsuits, assbaggery, or anything is going to take away all the good that organization did for cancer… That organization wouldn’t have been as big without Lance and without those wins.
So, in the end, it doesn’t matter, he has done enough good to overwrite the bad IMO.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Re: Lance
I always come back to LiveStrong. No amount of lying, dope, lawsuits, assbaggery, or anything is going to take away all the good that organization did for cancer… That organization wouldn’t have been as big without Lance and without those wins.
So, in the end, it doesn’t matter, he has done enough good to overwrite the bad IMO. [/quote]
I don’t believe the good he did with Livestrong should be measured by how much money it has raised. We should be looking at the differential between what Livestrong raised and what would have likely been raised for cancer research through other organizations, and where the money likely would have gone had it not gone to Livestrong (potentially other non-profits).
Just because his organization is large doesn’t mean it provided a greater good for the world than smaller organizations would have. It’s certainly possible that Livestrong detracted from donations to, say, the Susan G Komen funds (for breast cancer, based in Dallas).
82% of Livestrong’s money actually goes back into the program. There are many organizations that have much higher efficiency (in the 90+ range). I contribute the bulk of my charitable donations to one such organization (My Possibilites, an org servicing adults with disabilities). They’re over 90%. And they haven’t destroyed a single person’s career to do it.
Just some food for thought.
[quote]csulli wrote:
I’ll take the opposite stance. Obviously I’ve never met Lance Armstrong, and he could be the biggest douche in the world for all I know. But in the same way that he screwed people over by suing them, weren’t they trying to screw up his life? I mean if I were Lance, I’d be thinking fuck them. Who do they think they are trying to shit all over me and my accomplishments? The doping level in cycling is near 100% at the top. He outworked them and out trained them, and here are some people choosing to fuck with him and not the rest. Why couldn’t they just let him be or go after everyone equitably?
What if I arbitrarily started going after top powerlifters or olympians who compete in drug tested competitions? I’d be a fucking dick that’s what. Because I know just like those people know that they’re all taking drugs and if you try to bring one of them down you’re not doing it out of some morally superior position, championing truth and fighting against cheating. You’re doing it out of malice, because you just don’t like the guy or you’re jealous.
So fuck them.[/quote]
I get what your saying and if it was someone simply outing him to get some money or 15 minutes of fame by doing it then I’d say the same as you. However, a lot of the people who were attacked by Lance or his supporters said something because they were subpoenad and had to testify under oath as to what they knew. So I wouldn’t say they were doing anything wrong.
I’m not sure why LA is admitting to doping now. I would hope some of his reasons come from a good place but I can’t help but think on some level he’s got to feel better now. I would think it’s really hard to live with that kind of deception going on especially with his family.
[quote]WolverineRage wrote:
So this begs the question: Why are people even surprised? To keep the answer as simple as possible, it is because most people are stupid and are out of touch with reality. Coming from a nut like me, that’s really saying something.
[/quote]
I don’t think it’s being out of touch with reality, exactly. For some reason our society places the expectation on athletes that they have to be the paradigm of generally-accepted morality. Just look at the completely overblown reactions to Tiger Woods cheating and Michael Phelps smoking a little weed. Tons of people smoke or have smoked pot, and cheated, which isn’t even illegal. We merely gossip about the crazy shit Hollywood celebs do, but our reactions change as soon as a sports icon does it. And in terms of being socially acceptable, PEDs are pretty damn far down the list for most people.
Is it delusional? Maybe a little. But there’s nothing more human than believing what we want to for as long as we can, and shutting out all evidence to the contrary by singing “LALALALALA” while holding our hands over our ears. Just look at Scientologists…
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Re: Lance
I always come back to LiveStrong. No amount of lying, dope, lawsuits, assbaggery, or anything is going to take away all the good that organization did for cancer… That organization wouldn’t have been as big without Lance and without those wins.
So, in the end, it doesn’t matter, he has done enough good to overwrite the bad IMO. [/quote]
I don’t believe the good he did with Livestrong should be measured by how much money it has raised. We should be looking at the differential between what Livestrong raised and what would have likely been raised for cancer research through other organizations, and where the money likely would have gone had it not gone to Livestrong (potentially other non-profits).
Just because his organization is large doesn’t mean it provided a greater good for the world than smaller organizations would have. It’s certainly possible that Livestrong detracted from donations to, say, the Susan G Komen funds (for breast cancer, based in Dallas).
82% of Livestrong’s money actually goes back into the program. There are many organizations that have much higher efficiency (in the 90+ range). I contribute the bulk of my charitable donations to one such organization (My Possibilites, an org servicing adults with disabilities). They’re over 90%. And they haven’t destroyed a single person’s career to do it.
Just some food for thought.[/quote]
Um yeah… The day I sit back and say, “your name attacked to this organization, without a doubt in my mind, brought more money and attention to help people with cancer than ever would have come this organization’s way, that helps people with cancer, if you weren’t famous and won those races, may not actually be good enough. I mean its cool and all, some people got help, but other, smaller organizations that can’t reach near as many people or have half the influence might be marginally better with their money, so therefor your contribution to mankind, which makes my donation seem like a piss in the ocean, isn’t actually as wonderful as the rest of mankind and common sense indicates it is,” is the day I become such an asshole I will never recover.
Jesus christ.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Re: Lance
I always come back to LiveStrong. No amount of lying, dope, lawsuits, assbaggery, or anything is going to take away all the good that organization did for cancer… That organization wouldn’t have been as big without Lance and without those wins.
So, in the end, it doesn’t matter, he has done enough good to overwrite the bad IMO. [/quote]
I don’t believe the good he did with Livestrong should be measured by how much money it has raised. We should be looking at the differential between what Livestrong raised and what would have likely been raised for cancer research through other organizations, and where the money likely would have gone had it not gone to Livestrong (potentially other non-profits).
Just because his organization is large doesn’t mean it provided a greater good for the world than smaller organizations would have. It’s certainly possible that Livestrong detracted from donations to, say, the Susan G Komen funds (for breast cancer, based in Dallas).
82% of Livestrong’s money actually goes back into the program. There are many organizations that have much higher efficiency (in the 90+ range). I contribute the bulk of my charitable donations to one such organization (My Possibilites, an org servicing adults with disabilities). They’re over 90%. And they haven’t destroyed a single person’s career to do it.
Just some food for thought.[/quote]
Also, I didn’t mention money once, not a single time in my post, and look at your first sentence…
[quote]Jaycuts wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[/quote]
Very.
They are all doped to the gills. [/quote]
Then you didn’t really read what I said.
I’m very aware that any present (and most past) Mr Olympias are ‘doped to the gills’. OP said every elite athlete on the planet is. He also made claims about his own genetic gifts. My point was that his lack of awareness of how gifted some individuals are clouds his judgement on the prevalence of steroids in pro sports.
ftr, on the bodybuilding side of things, I think one could assume that every Mr Olympia contestant (not just winner) for the last 40+ years has been on steroids. Bodybuilding is not representative of sports in general in that respect.
[/quote]
This young man went to my school. He was in 10th grade, never juiced. Weighed 165 and squated 540. Im agreeing with flipcollar on this one. [/quote]
Are you serious with this video?
The guy walked out shaky and unstable as hell, his “spotter” was holding his torso the whole time and I didn’t see a single squat to depth. He might as well have been doing a standing leg press and he would have actually been able to measure the reps and progress he actually achieved. The guy looks like the average lean high school athlete. I don’t see what your point is posting this video.
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]Jaycuts wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[/quote]
Very.
They are all doped to the gills. [/quote]
Then you didn’t really read what I said.
I’m very aware that any present (and most past) Mr Olympias are ‘doped to the gills’. OP said every elite athlete on the planet is. He also made claims about his own genetic gifts. My point was that his lack of awareness of how gifted some individuals are clouds his judgement on the prevalence of steroids in pro sports.
ftr, on the bodybuilding side of things, I think one could assume that every Mr Olympia contestant (not just winner) for the last 40+ years has been on steroids. Bodybuilding is not representative of sports in general in that respect.
[/quote]
This young man went to my school. He was in 10th grade, never juiced. Weighed 165 and squated 540. Im agreeing with flipcollar on this one. [/quote]
Are you serious with this video?
The guy walked out shaky and unstable as hell, his “spotter” was holding his torso the whole time and I didn’t see a single squat to depth. He might as well have been doing a standing leg press and he would have actually been able to measure the reps and progress he actually achieved. The guy looks like the average lean high school athlete. I don’t see what your point is posting this video.[/quote]
I see what you’re saying, kinda. He could get one good rep with that five set. But maybe if you weren’t a lazy little shit and didnt judge so quick and maybe READ you’d understand why I posted this. Reason being he held his torso is because it’s manditory… hes on the football team, 10th grade, it drops on him lawsuit… Get it now? Lol average lean student…this kids a monster. Why so quick to judge everyone? Maybe someone insecure inside 
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Re: Lance
I always come back to LiveStrong. No amount of lying, dope, lawsuits, assbaggery, or anything is going to take away all the good that organization did for cancer… That organization wouldn’t have been as big without Lance and without those wins.
So, in the end, it doesn’t matter, he has done enough good to overwrite the bad IMO. [/quote]
I don’t believe the good he did with Livestrong should be measured by how much money it has raised. We should be looking at the differential between what Livestrong raised and what would have likely been raised for cancer research through other organizations, and where the money likely would have gone had it not gone to Livestrong (potentially other non-profits).
Just because his organization is large doesn’t mean it provided a greater good for the world than smaller organizations would have. It’s certainly possible that Livestrong detracted from donations to, say, the Susan G Komen funds (for breast cancer, based in Dallas).
82% of Livestrong’s money actually goes back into the program. There are many organizations that have much higher efficiency (in the 90+ range). I contribute the bulk of my charitable donations to one such organization (My Possibilites, an org servicing adults with disabilities). They’re over 90%. And they haven’t destroyed a single person’s career to do it.
Just some food for thought.[/quote]
Also, I didn’t mention money once, not a single time in my post, and look at your first sentence…[/quote]
Good point, I was obviously wrong to think that you meant the good that Livestrong did had anything to do with the money it raised. You were clearly talking about the AWARENESS that Livestrong raised. Because awareness funds cancer research, not money. And yellow bracelets. My bad, carry on.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
Good point, I was obviously wrong to think that you meant the good that Livestrong did had anything to do with the money it raised. [/quote]
If you were so quite to discredit livestrong because of your feelings about Lance you would know that yes, part of my point included money collected.
I just found it funny that money is where you jumped to in your attempt to “bring back to Earth” livestrong.
I know you get it because here where you’re trying to be flippant:
You actually make my point for me. So in your attempt at a wise ass responce, you actually made my point, thank you.
Do yourself a favor, look up iconography. After that take to 2 mins to think about how much awareness does add, and how awareness does infact fund research, because awareness prompts people to give money.
You are smarter than this.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I also want to throw this out there: I know this thread has basically just gone in the direction of the thread title, but I take issue with the content of the original post.
I’ll get this out of the way first: personal anecdotes are valueless, I have no desire to discuss your friend’s story.
You clearly have misconceptions about pro sports. To say that every professional athlete is taking steroids is absolutely a foolish assertion. Maybe you’re saying this to justify your own weakness or inabilities.
Or maybe (probably) you’re just not aware of what it actually means to be genetically gifted. I watched your videos. For you to say that you’re a natural bodybuilder with possibly “great genetics” is laughable. Maybe you’ve just got a bunch of really little/weak people in your gym, who knows. It just seems like your perspective on elite athleticism is incredibly skewed. Are you aware that there are guys out there who can dead lift 400 the very first time they try a dead lift? How about the high school kids who can run 4.5- 4.7 40’s? Are they on steroids too?[/quote]
No clean Tour de France winner, no clean Mr Olympia either.
Period.
Maybe 30 years ago, not now.
No way, no how. [/quote]
Can’t tell if serious…
[/quote]
Very.
They are all doped to the gills. [/quote]
I am undecided about Usain Bolt, but otherwise I would wager that their hasn’t been a world record set in the last 30 years that wasn’t aided.