[quote]spk wrote:
everyone on lances teams in his winnning years either got caught taking drugs, or finally admitted to taking drugs,(even though they passed all the tests)… i guess lance was the only one on all those teams that didnt take drugs… hahahaha…[/quote]
Your speculation still doesn’t change the fact that what Black Angus said is true. He has never been caught or tested positive.
[quote]spk wrote:
oboile… well put… very well put…i hate cheates. when i was in belgium as a pro racer seeing all the division 3 pros taking so many drugs, i hated it. they got good and went to level 2, some level 1 and i bet some full pros where you make some good $$$. i hated suffering in the back of all my races hanging on for dear life, but i knew i went as high as i could go and gave it my all with my tallent…
[/quote]
Sure, you would have been a winner if you took drugs like those guys… GTFO.
Please don’t start with the “he has never been caught” or “all the others were on dope as well” shit again. You are ignorant at best about the topic.
[quote]black_angus1 wrote:
Since when did Lance get caught? He never once tested positive. Not fucking once. That should be the end of the story right there. The constitution has a pretty big section about “innocent until proven guilty”, but I guess that goes out the window here, right?
America’s drug and sport culture is a fucking joke. We are the only culture to actively chases after our own athletes, and then persecute them based on nothing but conjecture and hearsay.[/quote]
Uh, he has been proven guilty. Physical evidence isn’t the only thing that can lead to a conviction.
He also has tested positive.
The reason using steroids is ‘illegal’ and drinking protein shakes is legal is because using steroids might have serious side effects (shrinking balls, hairloss, high blood pressure, breast enlargment etc) that protein shakes dont have.
I dont think anyone should look like the russian strenght athletes in the 80’s. They look like white professor X with vagina.
Also fairness, that everyone has equal opportunities. Hardly using tons on quality drugs a year is possible for everyone either.
Idea with sports competitions in general is to encourage young people to move and enjoy exercising in a healthy manner.
All the drugs used in sports are originally are researched/funded for medicine; cancer-patiens etc. Illeagal sports doping is hardly affecting this ‘technological advancement’.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]FarmerBrett wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I am not a fan of the way our current society seems to see the act of striving for physical enhancement and performance.
In the short term, it makes self righteous lesser accomplished people feel better about their own mediocrity. In the long term, it decreases the advancement of human performance and development on a grand scale.[/quote]
Reading between the lines are you advocating no drug testing in all sports?[/quote]
I am advocating not letting soccer moms and elderly politicians dictate the way humanity progresses and develops into the future.
This isn’t just about sports. This is about how all of this denial of advancement will hold the entire human race back in the long run.
The problem is people ONLY thinking as far as sports.[/quote]
The society you dream of is a long held fascination of science fiction authors.
Augmentation will come in the future, however it has dark paths.
If research into muscle enhancement were to occur, the armies of the world would pump vast funds into the endeavour to create super soldiers, what then?
Illegal narcotics that enhance your strength, speed and the like?
It might be seen as science fiction but 100 years ago they dreamt of the moon as a place for science fiction dreams, we’re now aiming to colonise it and then go to Mars. Things change.
He is only thinking about a confession if it’s clearly in his best interest. He will not be the least bit remorseful, you can bet on that. It will be some lame confession like, " The evil Europeans were all doing EPO and blood transfusions, and I had no other choice if I wanted to compete with these guys".
More than anything, he is probably confessiing so his current ban will be reduced so he can compete at the Iron Man competition. Lance just loves being in the spotlight. He will probably be doped to the gills in that event as well, and then tell all Livestrong supporters how he has changed and become the new anti-doping spokesman for sports.
Lance has always doped ( re: Team Subaru 1990), and will continue to dope if he is allowed to compete again.
Two thoughts on this – first, regarding some of the themes that Professor X brought up:
I kind of understand his point. Research into some of these agents is often left rather nebulous simply because of their current ‘taboo’ status. Yeah, we’re getting a little more research into testosterone, which is great, but because of the ham-fisted approach towards ‘performance enhancing drugs’ that we’ve seen in the past decade in particular and two decades in general, research into the broader category of AAS seems a little more sporadic. When information does come out, it seems that more often than not, performance enhancing qualities are listed as incidental side-effects with further direct research being less common.
Yeah, we do have all of these designer pro-hormones/pro-steroids, but some of the research on these products seems equally dodgy as they’re being shoved into the market with a little less testing than I’m comfortable with.
Better than nothing, sure…but hardly ideal. And it seems much of this less than ideal situation stems from society’s momentary terror over PED’s.
I appreciate harrypotter’s concerns, as any good student of Sci-Fi and philosophical futurism would, but frankly I’d prefer it if politicians of less than stellar intellectual capacity weren’t the ones to make the determinations as to what chemicals can even be researched.
As for Lance Armstrong himself:
This seems like a PR firm’s intentional information leak, designed to test how well the public would react to this confession.
If that (possibly big and erroneous) assumption is true, then I ask, what’s the difference between suggesting a confession, and an actual confession?
That is, as far as we’re concerned, isn’t this a de facto confession even if he never officially testifies in front of a governing body?
[quote]OBoile wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I am more worried that anyone gives a shit enough to strip him of a title.
I am not a fan of the way our current society seems to see the act of striving for physical enhancement and performance.
In the short term, it makes self righteous lesser accomplished people feel better about their own mediocrity. In the long term, it decreases the advancement of human performance and development on a grand scale.[/quote]
Why wouldn’t people “give a shit”? He cheated. He got caught. He pays the consequenses.
Frankly, I’m more concerned about people like you who don’t seem to value things like honesty and fair play.[/quote]
Except theres no such thing.
Even if we lived in a fantasy land where you could actually have effective testing (you won’t, ever, A) theres too much corruption and B) the athletes are always 5 steps ahead of the testing procedures, test comes out, switch to new drug) and nobody used anything, do you really believe this would produce a even playing field?
It would not.
One athlete would have a genetic advantage over another athlete.
And call me crazy but being born with an advantage just by being lucky enough to have parents with ideal genetics for your endeavor seems less fair than someone who had to use drugs and work hard just to hope to be at the same level.
[quote]OBoile wrote:
[quote]black_angus1 wrote:
Since when did Lance get caught? He never once tested positive. Not fucking once. That should be the end of the story right there. The constitution has a pretty big section about “innocent until proven guilty”, but I guess that goes out the window here, right?
America’s drug and sport culture is a fucking joke. We are the only culture to actively chases after our own athletes, and then persecute them based on nothing but conjecture and hearsay.[/quote]
Uh, he has been proven guilty. Physical evidence isn’t the only thing that can lead to a conviction.
He also has tested positive.[/quote]
Nope he hasn’t 
Well he has, but the test was later deemed inaccurate and dismissed.
To me this is purely a philosophical question. I don’t give a shit if he doped or not.
But I do give shit about the fact that as soon as one accomplishes someone he becomes “free game”. I mean you can literally hunt him down, just because he is not average. This just sickens me.
And Armstrong’s doping “case” is really nothing but a fucking witch hunt. You could scrape up that kind of evidence about ANY top athlete.
gregron… go play some flag football… you know nothing about cycling and this topic…nothing about the true lifestyle of a cyclist…nothing at all…wonder why all his teammates passed these doping tests, but then when they all heard jail time, they finally admitted to taking drugs…they passed all their tests, but then finally admitted taking drugs…these tests are so ez to pass…i guess non cyclists just go by what they read in the paper and news. i was there, watching these guys dope. i seen guys i was killing blast by me on a cobbled climb… in the big chainring!! guys i was beating 6 months earlier…read paul kimmages book “a rough ride”… look up “doping in cycling” on wikipedia. every cyclist that ever raced has been caught… not lance though…lol!! you’ll see when this cheat finally admits it…then his name will be on the list with 1000000 other cyclists…i love the sport. its so so frickin hard… and the years i spent over in belgium i wouldnt trade in for nothing… hanging on at break neck speeds. hours of suffering.finishing every race…never won, but being clean, i did very well. always @ the same time as the winner, or a few minutes back in 100+ mile races…
JACKED71. great post … so true…
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]spk wrote:
everyone on lances teams in his winnning years either got caught taking drugs, or finally admitted to taking drugs,(even though they passed all the tests)… i guess lance was the only one on all those teams that didnt take drugs… hahahaha…[/quote]
Your speculation still doesn’t change the fact that what Black Angus said is true. He has never been caught or tested positive.[/quote]
Are you fucking dense? He didn’t test positive because he was manipulating his tests (as in, the cheaters were one step ahead of the testers as always) or because he was outright bribing the doping officials.
I am so SICK of this attitude and it smacks of a complete lack of awareness of the problem. All you are saying is that it is only wrong if you get caught. Does that apply to everything, or only people who use PEDs? I should certainly hope not.
This isn’t about the “evils” of PEDs in and of themselves, although many people on here will try to distort the doping officials’ arguments any way they can so that it DOES turn into that sort of an issue so they can then defend the use of PEDs. But that is NOT what this is about and never has been. It’s about the negative effect PED use has on the integrity of sports. Most of these doping officials could care less about what sort of potential side effects PEDs can have on the athletes. They simply don’t want to enable a sport in which the PED use is so rampant that no athlete who isn’t on them has no chance to win.
Let’s face it, while there isn’t a whole lot of evidence to suggest that moderate PED use is inherently bad for people’s health, we don’t know for sure yet whether that really is the case or not. People say anabolic steroids aren’t bad for you. FIne. But having an enlarged heart because you’re carrying around 50 more lbs than your frame is meant for IS bad and a comparatively quick way to gain that sort of weight is through steroid use. So while the alcohol itself didn’t kill the drunk driver who went through his windshield at 80mph with a BAC of .29 and the pole that split his cranium open did, you’d be a fool to deny any link between his death and alcohol. The same goes for many of these former or current steroid user deaths.
There is certainly some hypocrisy and a certain level of ignorance when it comes to the policing of steroids in sports, especially a sport like cycling. But Armstrong wasn’t your typical doper by any means. He was such a heavy, systematic cheater of the system that even other dopers had no chance against him. It’s not like taking some EPO and some enanthate all of a suddent puts a doper on the same level of every other doper; they do it to different degrees and Armstrong was doing it to an extreme degree.
It isn’t fair to cyclists who don’t want to take steps that drastic, regardless of how dubious the evidence that it is unhealthy for them in the long run is. There is at least SOME risk in taking the exotic, massive blend of steroids that Armstrong was taking and sports shouldn’t require athletes to take that sort of risk simply to keep up with a blatant cheater like Armstrong.
Call that a pretty normative take on the subject if you want, but cheating is cheating. If Armstrong and others think that the rules are pointless and that doping represents no significant health risks, fine. Instead of spending all that time and money getting around what they think is an archaic, pointless rule, why not invest some money into lobbying against such rules in the first place? If it’s a stupid rule, why not just come right out and fight the rule openly instead of taking all these back-alley steps to get around it and then deny, deny, deny when faced with OVERWHELMING evidence that you’ve been breaking it?
[quote]black_angus1 wrote:
The constitution has a pretty big section about “innocent until proven guilty”
[/quote]
Uh, no it doesn’t.
[quote]doogie wrote:
[quote]black_angus1 wrote:
The constitution has a pretty big section about “innocent until proven guilty”
[/quote]
Uh, no it doesn’t.
[/quote]
Yeah, and, uh, last time I checked the FFC and the UCI wasn’t beholden to the Constitution anyways.
wonder what all these clowns posting in on this topic will say whenever the cheat lance armstrong finally admits he did take a ton of enhancing drugs his whole career…
DBCOOPER… great post. hope lance fries…
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I am more worried that anyone gives a shit enough to strip him of a title.
I am not a fan of the way our current society seems to see the act of striving for physical enhancement and performance.
In the short term, it makes self righteous lesser accomplished people feel better about their own mediocrity. In the long term, it decreases the advancement of human performance and development on a grand scale.[/quote]
Why wouldn’t people “give a shit”? He cheated. He got caught. He pays the consequenses.
Frankly, I’m more concerned about people like you who don’t seem to value things like honesty and fair play.[/quote]
Except theres no such thing.
Even if we lived in a fantasy land where you could actually have effective testing (you won’t, ever, A) theres too much corruption and B) the athletes are always 5 steps ahead of the testing procedures, test comes out, switch to new drug) and nobody used anything, do you really believe this would produce a even playing field?
It would not.
One athlete would have a genetic advantage over another athlete.
And call me crazy but being born with an advantage just by being lucky enough to have parents with ideal genetics for your endeavor seems less fair than someone who had to use drugs and work hard just to hope to be at the same level.[/quote]
Sure there is (such thing). Just not so much in pro sports.
If you don’t like the rules (and I’m not a particular fan of them myself) then petition to get them changed, or pick a different sport. If you break the rules, then you are a cheat.
As for your last statement on genetics: that’s life and it isn’t supposed to be fair despite what your parents told you. Not all people are born equal. There are no rules against having good genetics.
[quote]Toohard wrote:
[quote]OBoile wrote:
[quote]black_angus1 wrote:
Since when did Lance get caught? He never once tested positive. Not fucking once. That should be the end of the story right there. The constitution has a pretty big section about “innocent until proven guilty”, but I guess that goes out the window here, right?
America’s drug and sport culture is a fucking joke. We are the only culture to actively chases after our own athletes, and then persecute them based on nothing but conjecture and hearsay.[/quote]
Uh, he has been proven guilty. Physical evidence isn’t the only thing that can lead to a conviction.
He also has tested positive.[/quote]
Nope he hasn’t Well he has, but the test was later deemed inaccurate and dismissed.
To me this is purely a philosophical question. I don’t give a shit if he doped or not.
But I do give shit about the fact that as soon as one accomplishes someone he becomes “free game”. I mean you can literally hunt him down, just because he is not average. This just sickens me.
And Armstrong’s doping “case” is really nothing but a fucking witch hunt. You could scrape up that kind of evidence about ANY top athlete.[/quote]
Heaven forbid that an organization who’s purpose is to go after cheats actually goes after cheats. The Horror!
Armstrong was one of the most high profile cheats out there and thus attracts a large amount of attention (kind of like how the FBI puts more resources into catching high profile criminals, are you upset that the USA spent so much time/effort going after OBL or Al Capone?). Big deal. He’s not the only one they go after. Virtually every top cyclist from Lance’s era has also been caught. There’s a reason why they aren’t giving his titles to anyone else.
[quote]Toohard wrote:
But I do give shit about the fact that as soon as one accomplishes someone he becomes “free game”. I mean you can literally hunt him down, just because he is not average. This just sickens me.
And Armstrong’s doping “case” is really nothing but a fucking witch hunt. You could scrape up that kind of evidence about ANY top athlete.[/quote]
LOL
you should be embarrassed and ashamed at your ignorance and stupidity.
one of the dumbest posts ever.