Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
26-07.-2004, 11:37 PM
|
#16 | |
|
Community Team
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,487
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
You claimed that it was harder to dope. I disagree - I think that doping is still going on and I suggest that Balco shows that drugs have been used which we undetectable. To conclude that doping is getting harder, doesn't make sense given that none of us can quantify how many drugs are going undetected. |
|
|
|
|
26-07.-2004, 11:55 PM
|
#17 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 552
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
Testing has become more thorough, more sophisticated. There are only so many analogs of banned compounds, so many ways to dope. As for what and how much is going undetected, it brings us back to that all-familiar-word that describes a great deal of what is posted in this forum - "speculation". |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:01 AM
|
#18 | |
|
Community Team
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,487
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
I never denied that testing had become more thorough. THG proves that there are other drugs being developed and used which went undetected for 7 years. Not knowing how many drugs are being developed and used - for which there are no tests - makes, in this instance, your statement speculative. |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:11 AM
|
#19 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 552
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
Likewise, not being able to prove just who in the peloton is doping, whether it be anyone or everyone, renders many of your assertions, assumptions, and accusations purely speculative. Pot, meet kettle... |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:16 AM
|
#20 | |
|
Community Team
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,487
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
I have stated repeatedly that none of us are with these people 24/7. But I have also stated that the reasons that Armstrongs gives for his improvement do ring true either. Of course, we're speculating - all posts here are speculative. But based on what we know, we can form an opinion. You have your opinion. I have my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:27 AM
|
#21 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pickering
Posts: 23
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
I agree. This whole evidentiary debate is a red herring. It is none of our jobs to provide evidence while we struggle with our own lives and spend only a bit of our time on our sport/hobby. As I stated in the other post on this matter, here in Canada we have developed an attitude that most elite athletes take performance enhancers. This is due to the investigation in this country that followed the whole Ben Johnson, Seoul 1988 scandal. We may be wrong, but we generally have no trouble accepting that others - Marion Jones, etc - also take drugs without admitting it. We have actually gone past any moral judgement on this issue. Just this morning, on a Toronto radio station, an announcer took the position that "so what if LA is taking drugs? This doesn't minimize his accomplishments since all his main competitors also take drugs." The only practical opposition to this position is that this reduces the emphasis somewhat on pure cycling prowess and increases our rewards to those who are good pharmacologists. Anyone want to bite? |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:32 AM
|
#22 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 552
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
My opinion is that whomever is found guilty of doping through hard evidence should be banned from the sport, period. I don't care if said party is the highest of the highs or is bringing up the rear. If support staff is found guilty, let them follow suit. However, I don't pass judgment until I see irrefutable evidence, and my opinions are not driven by an agenda to promote hatred toward any rider. |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:40 AM
|
#23 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pickering
Posts: 23
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
But could they be driven by an agenda to support a winner?  Also, does your stance include past riders like Greg Lemond? |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:44 AM
|
#24 | |
|
Community Team
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,487
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
Just to clarify, I am not promoting hatred toward Lance Armstrong. I want a sport that is beyond reproach. I want a sport that we can be sure is clean. This may seem idealistic but this should be what we all want. As it now stands the reputation of this sport and it's credibility is valueless. You only have to look at how the general public view cycling. Their perception is correct - this sport has big problems. |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 12:51 AM
|
#25 | ||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 552
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
My opinions are not driven by anything but facts. I am neither biased toward nor against LA or any other rider. Quote:
Absolutely. Why should Lemond, Indurain, et al receive special consideration if they were found to have been doping? Of course, being that we are years after the fact, this is almost purely hypothetical. |
||
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 01:57 AM
|
#26 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Big square state next to NJ
Posts: 231
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
lemond is a douche and just bitter about not being able to come close to LA
__________________
-2003 Airborne Valk-17.5lbs Raced -1999 Fisher Mt. Tam- 28.5 lbs Punished -1999 Trek Y22-24.5 lbs Newly Pampered |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 02:11 AM
|
#27 | ||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pickering
Posts: 23
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
Ted, if this is true, you are truly unique.  Quote:
I'm not so sure that it is hypothetical. What if LA was found to in contravention of the drug protocols in, say, five years time - with solid evidence (although signed receipts or videotapes are hardly likely)? Should then his record 6, or 7, or . . TsdF victories be stricken from the history books? The questions for now are: 1. Do we want awards for pure cycling and not pharmacology? Is this even a proper distinction? 2. Where is the legal line to be drawn between nutrition/therapy and disallowed chemical help? 3. How do we properly fund and support enforcement? 4. How does the UCI (or other governing bodies) deal with the common knowledge of the public that there is a meaningful time lag between new drugs and reliable testing for those drugs? I don't know about you, but the last question makes me query the motives of any athlete who denies knowledge of doping. |
||
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 02:15 AM
|
#28 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 552
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
I feel doping is too serious of an issue to allow any personal favoritism or disdain to compromise what basic ethics. Besides, I don't harbor enough feelings of either with respect to who wins what to sway my opinion one way or another. As for your final statement, I don't know of any athlete who would openly deny knowledge of doping. |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 02:20 AM
|
#29 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 32
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quote:
Which is exactly why I think the zero tolerance policy on doping has to go. We need people to be able to name names. People like David Millar, who clearly has some natural talent but used EPO to get on the podium. If you enforce a one strike you are out policy, then he is not going to give up any useful information. You need a carrot and not just a stick. Imagine that you catch the getaway man for the mob and you say mob-related, that's life.. DO you think he is going to help you out. Millar should lose his title and hopefully get something like six months on condition that he name names. Give everyone else the same deal. I think there should be a limit on how far back people get stripped of titles. For example last worlds, I think if people started squealing then maybe you could sort out the big dopers... but look at how many times jan ullrich is on the podium... so if lance dopes (possible) and Pantani dopes (probable) and we strike their records, suppose Jan doesn't dope (possible) or no evidence comes forward (probable), then Jan retroactively joins the five time club.. |
|
|
|
|
|
27-07.-2004, 02:33 AM
|
#30 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 32
|
Re: Andy Hampsten supports GregLeMond
Quick clarification on what I find disturbing about Jan joining the five time club... Mostly the idea of him winning the tour next time and becoming a six timer...also to me at least lance won as much because of his team and tactics as his physical ability.
It's a damn butterfly effect sort of thing. If lance and postal weren't there breaking people's backs then the whole race changes and tactics are different. An impression I get from Jan, in his diaries, is that he is a nice guy, who is almost a big kid. He is just a little too optimistic. Compare this to lance who is more mean, calculating and possibly paranoid... If lance hadn't overtaken Jan in those 3 tours, I think someone else may have risen to the ocassion during one of them. (e.g. I think Jan would have had 3 or 4 but not 5 tours by now... And bizarrely if it weren't for Lance, I think Ulrich may have won this tour... because he would have had a lot more hope of winning and I don't think basso would have taken as much time out of him, and Klödi probably wouldn't have ridden ahead the first two days but worked with ulrich. It would be better for TMO to have ULI first and Klödi 2nd or 3rd than vice versa.) Last edited by kgruscho : 27-07.-2004 at 02:34 AM. Reason: typo, wrote lance when I met Jan, DOH |
|
|
|
Linear Mode
