Ditkaless Wonders Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Eddie Merckx and Bernard Hinault are the only who come to mind because he eclipsed their record of titles, but neither is remotely in danger of being shoved into irrelevence among the fans of the sport. So, I don't think that's an issue. Indurain won a bunch in a row, but he's certainly got the cloud of doping over his head as well. Screw Hinault. Whining and beggin ones way into a title is pathetic. Using the respect someone else has for the traditions of the sport to convince that person to step aside in the name of team harmony when he himself had no appreciation for those traditions makes him an ass. I spit on the Badger. He disgraces all other Badgers just by association. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DisplacedMercs Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Who cares? He "won". You can't go back & say someone else won... it's like a vacated Heisman. The biggest complainer is a guy who also had his title stripped... guess he failed a test. Nothing to see here, move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheikYerbuti Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 I'd like to take this opportunity to announce that I, Sheik Yerbuti, am stripping the Boston Red Sox of their 2004 and 2007 World Series Championships. And since they aren't challenging me on this, I will take it as an admission of their guilt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Frankly that sounds like a bit of a right wing political sound bite that isn't warranted here. Isn't warranted here? This has nothing to do w/ politics. This is / was a witch hunt. I have a problem with Ben Johnson winning a gold medal while doped to the gills, I have a problem with Bernie Maddof making a fortune while defrauding his investors, I have a problem with a scrabble player keeping a couple of blank tiles in his pocket to win. Me too. If you don't remember, the whistleblower on Madoff is a friend of mine; he and I had been discussing for years that Madoff was a con-man, and I had personally advised dozens of people who were invested with him that I thought he was a fraudster. Do you have a problem with people making false accusations? Or, a problem with people making accusations they cannot prove? What if you're being forcibly required to pay the costs of someone making accusations they cannot prove (the USADA is US taxpayer funded)? As someone who has been falsely accused in a public forum, I have a big problem with false accusations. While I certainly respect anyone's opinion that Lance did not cheat, as it is not an open and shut case, the issue is not 'success envy' here. The issue is cheating. The issue is not cheating, the issue is proving guilt. The USADA didn't prove it. They have testimony (exclusively, I believe) from people who have tested positive for doping who are trying to get a little of the stink that's on them onto Lancey-One-Ball. They couldn't beat him while they were riding, and so he must have been doping. Except for the fact that he never tested positive and nobody has any physical evidence of any type. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Isn't the issue proving he cheated? <snip> Why the witch hunt? <snip> Exactly. This sure smells like a witch hunt to me, and a taxpayer-funded one at that just pisses me off more. Part of the issue is condemning without any physical evidence whatsoever. Yup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 I think the issue that Dr. has with what Muck said. Well, at least it's the issue I have, is the implied motive. That, we simply can't stand the fact that someone is great, so we just have to break them down. I was thrilled that Armstrong was housing the tour. I would really rather believe that he did so cleanly. I loved that Armstrong was destroying the field. Nobody accused Babe Ruth of doping, yet he was soooo far ahead of everyone else who was swining a bat in the 1910s and 1920s it was sick. It is possible for an athlete to so dominate his competition that it appears to be 'aided' by something ... it's possible that the athlete is being aided by natural ability and a phenomenal body, capable of things that nobody else on the planet can do (strength, speed, endurance, quickness, leaping ability, etc.). I think the motive is, it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, so there were some guys hell-bent on proving it's a duck. ...and when they couldn't, they resorted to bending/breaking all their own rules and trying to intimidate others, in an effort to pin something on a private citizen, no longer competing in the sport. That's a witchhunt. Now, if its proven later that he actually did dope, then I'm for pulling his titles. But today, based on the lack of physical evidence (despite the extreme lengths taken to get said physical evidence), I can't convict him and nobody else here should either. And, if you can justify taking them because you personally feel that he doped, you're wrong -- he's not guilty w/o evidence. Now, if you can't prove it, you can't prove it, and at some point you've got to move on. But implying that it was some deep-seated hatred of greatness seems to go too far. Really? The USADA was never going to stop using their nearly unlimited resources to try to bury a private citizen. Just because the private citizen is a douchebag isn't a reason to publicly accuse him without any physical evidence of a series of actions that, if proven true, would entirely destroy his legacy in a sport to which he dedicated the majority of his adult life...as well as a substantial portion of the legacy of his public persona. Maybe muck is in the midst of a re-read of the Collected Works of Ayn Rand. I've never read anything by Ayn Rand. Who cares? He "won". You can't go back & say someone else won... it's like a vacated Heisman. The biggest complainer is a guy who also had his title stripped... guess he failed a test. Nothing to see here, move on. Exactly. And why was the biggest complainer complaining? To try to get stink off of him and on to LA...and if he couldn't get stink off of him and on to LA, then he was going to make LA stink too. Why? Jealousy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 I believe Armstrong was doping, but have no proof of that belief. I believe an extremely high % of his competitors were doping as well, so that he gained no unfair advantage. I believe the reason he was not caught by testing is that testing always lags behind the cutting edge in dopping science. The test check for known substances from years past, they do not check for the current years latest and greatest twist which just came out. Armstrong's teams had sufficient resources to always be on the untested cutting edge. I believe that if you establish a testing program you ought to live by the results of that incredibly intrusive program. I believe that the reason Armstrong dominated the field was that he looked at pedaling rate in a whole new light. He and Brunnel reimagined cycling. I believe that on a level playing field, all doping or all clean, that Armstrong was the best rider in the Tour De France in his era. I would like to see all testing stopped. Testing has not cleaned up sport, it has just made a mockery of things. I believe we ought to encourage athletes to alter their bodies in dangerous ways to achieve their maximum potential for my entertainment. If they want hormones, steroids, to suck the life and stem cells out of new bornes, or to surgically alter their bodies I say go for it. Lets see just haw far we can take it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Frankly that sounds like a bit of a right wing political sound bite that isn't warranted here. I have a problem with Ben Johnson winning a gold medal while doped to the gills, I have a problem with Bernie Maddof making a fortune while defrauding his investors, I have a problem with a scrabble player keeping a couple of blank tiles in his pocket to win. While I certainly respect anyone's opinion that Lance did not cheat, as it is not an open and shut case, the issue is not 'success envy' here. The issue is cheating. Leave BPwallace out of this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsfan Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Roger Clemens had to prove his innocence as well. The McCarthyism of our government over sports, politics, terrorism, free-speach, etc. has certainly stepped it up the last couple years. The American public certainly doesn't seem to care. “Experience has shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.” - Thomas Jefferson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheikYerbuti Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 I've never read anything by Ayn Rand. That shouldn't deter you in the slightest from getting on the soapbox and flaming her for being pure evil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) I agree this is sort of a witch hunt, but at this point I don't agree with the sentiment that the evidence against him is weak. they had 10 teammates lined up to testify against him. now when it was just one or two guys -- floyd landis and tyler hamilton, both of whom had been busted doping themselves after leaving postal and both of whom had serious fallings out with lance -- it's pretty easy to take their accusations with a grain of salt if they are not corroborated with physical evidence. but 10 guys? including guys like george hincapie? sorry, at some point the adamant denials just aren't enough any more. the fact that he never tested positive? even the busted cheaters pass hundreds of piss tests before they slip up and do something stupid and get caught. they've always known what the tests are even as they've evolved, which means they've been able to find ways around them. timing, masking agents, moving on to the next thing they don't test for. no, lance doped, at this point I have almost zero doubt. my issue with the whole thing is this guy raced 10 years ago, in an era when virtually every one else he competed against has already been busted for doping, in a sport that has been plagued by doping since its very inception. lance has always been the white whale of these doping crusaders, and I'm just not sure what that accomplishes. it seems like the focus ought to be on forcing the peloton to be clean going forward. I think what muck said about tearing down the tallest is something that applies here. I also do think lance would be viewed differently by many if he weren't a brash amercian who dominated a "european" sport. marco pantani was doped to the gills his entire career, and he's a cycling folk hero. Edited August 25, 2012 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Screw Hinault. Whining and beggin ones way into a title is pathetic. Using the respect someone else has for the traditions of the sport to convince that person to step aside in the name of team harmony when he himself had no appreciation for those traditions makes him an ass. I spit on the Badger. He disgraces all other Badgers just by association. As a fan of Lemond, I'm certainly not going to take up for Hinault, but that doesn't change the fact that he's an icon among fans of the Tour and that was my point. That being said, I just started reading "Slaying The Badger" which is the story of the 86 Tour. The one that Hinault was supposedly going to help LeMond win after Lemond sacrificed what could have been the win in 85, only to back-stab him and try and go for another. At any rate, you'll probably love the first two pages. Apparently Lemond got ahold of some bad food and finished the last 60K of a stage with a totally messed up stomach. At the end of the race, he desperately was trying to find a place to take a crap and shuffled in his cleats over to the team RV, assuming there was a bathroom in there. There wasn't. They'd ripped it out to make more room for all the boxes of stuff they had. So, he just found a box, opened it up, and let it go right in there. The box was full of pormotional post cards with photos of Hinault on them. Or so the story goes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DisplacedMercs Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 I would like to see all testing stopped. Testing has not cleaned up sport, it has just made a mockery of things. I believe we ought to encourage athletes to alter their bodies in dangerous ways to achieve their maximum potential for my entertainment. If they want hormones, steroids, to suck the life and stem cells out of new bornes, or to surgically alter their bodies I say go for it. Lets see just haw far we can take it. Nice to see that American Exceptionalism is NOT dead to everyone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 marco pantani was doped to the gills his entire career, and he's a cycling folk hero. One of the greatest admittedly cruel, but still hilarious nicknames ever....Armstrong dubbed him "Elephantino" because of his big ears. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 I would like to see all testing stopped. Testing has not cleaned up sport, it has just made a mockery of things. I believe we ought to encourage athletes to alter their bodies in dangerous ways to achieve their maximum potential for my entertainment. If they want hormones, steroids, to suck the life and stem cells out of new bornes, or to surgically alter their bodies I say go for it. Lets see just haw far we can take it. all drug-olympics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Nice to see that American Exceptionalism is NOT dead to everyone Human Growth Hormone is so last millenium. I advocate Simian Growth Hormone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 Should Armstrong be stripped of all his titles here would be the Tour winners. LOL 1999 Zulle, Escartin, Dufaux 2000 Ullrich, Beloki, Moreau 2001 Ullrich, Beloki, Kivilev 2002 Beloki, Rumsas, Botero 2003 Ullrich, Vinokourov, Hamilton 2004 Kloden, Basso, Ullrich 2005 Basso, Mancebo, Vinokourov This would mean that Ullrich, counting his win in '97 would have 4 titles, becoming the 5th most succesful rider of the tour, right behind Anquetil, Mercx, Hinault, and Indurain, ahead of Lemond and Bobet. This is in fact the biggest problem of this whole story in my mind. While I have no doubt that Armstrong is guilty, so were the others, and there certainly is very tangible proof against all these runner ups. I can't abide by a cheater winning, but I just don't see how to untangle this web. I think the only solution is to break out a bunch of asterisks to put next to everyone's name in the books....which of course gets complicated by the fact that as Az notes earlier, all of our champions of yore also were doped to the gills. Must admit that even a solomonic ruling on this, regardless of the legal one, is really hard to come up with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheikYerbuti Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 Should Armstrong be stripped of all his titles here would be the Tour winners. LOL 1999 Zulle, Escartin, Dufaux 2000 Ullrich, Beloki, Moreau 2001 Ullrich, Beloki, Kivilev 2002 Beloki, Rumsas, Botero 2003 Ullrich, Vinokourov, Hamilton 2004 Kloden, Basso, Ullrich 2005 Basso, Mancebo, Vinokourov Strip Lance and give podium spots to Tyler Hamilton and Vinokourov, both of whom have multi-year doping bans on their resume. . .I LOVE it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 Ummmm, it's bicycling. Anyone that doesn't stop that at 14 years old is on something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 doping or not, the guy walked on the moon. you have to give him that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 Should Armstrong be stripped of all his titles here would be the Tour winners. LOL 1999 Zulle, Escartin, Dufaux 2000 Ullrich, Beloki, Moreau 2001 Ullrich, Beloki, Kivilev 2002 Beloki, Rumsas, Botero 2003 Ullrich, Vinokourov, Hamilton 2004 Kloden, Basso, Ullrich 2005 Basso, Mancebo, Vinokourov This would mean that Ullrich, counting his win in '97 would have 4 titles, becoming the 5th most succesful rider of the tour, right behind Anquetil, Mercx, Hinault, and Indurain, ahead of Lemond and Bobet. This is in fact the biggest problem of this whole story in my mind. While I have no doubt that Armstrong is guilty, so were the others, and there certainly is very tangible proof against all these runner ups. I can't abide by a cheater winning, but I just don't see how to untangle this web. I think the only solution is to break out a bunch of asterisks to put next to everyone's name in the books....which of course gets complicated by the fact that as Az notes earlier, all of our champions of yore also were doped to the gills. Must admit that even a solomonic ruling on this, regardless of the legal one, is really hard to come up with I saw the breakdown on that, and the ONLY person on that list without an asterisk was either Kivilev, or Rumsas (but not both). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted August 26, 2012 Share Posted August 26, 2012 I originally posted the runner up list to show how laughable it was to try to find a runner up in the Tour in the the years of Lance's reign, but upon further reflection, other than the couple that actually did test positive, many paid an actual price for circumstantial evidence. Basso for example was banned for two years, though he never tested positive. Ullrich had all his titles post 2005 erased, though he never tested positive in a race (he did test positive for amphetimines in the off season, and was suspended for 6 months. claiming that it was due to a disco extravagance). I of course don't mean to say that Ullrich and Basso aren't guilty as hell, the point is that 1) not failing a drug test is not irrefutable proof that you are clean 2) circumstantial evidence HAS nailed previous riders that paid the price 3) That Lance was not totally singled out (though the USADA clearly does have a hard on for him, as they are trying him for organized doping rather than individual doping to avoid the statute of limitation) Lastly, I hate the term 'circumstantial evidence'. It's like "he got off on a technicality". It always sounds like a totally unfair judgement. But, just as 'getting off on a technicality' can be the fact that the suspect was beaten into signing a confession, circumstantial evidence can be more damning than a smoking gun. To Az's point of nailing the brash Yankee, I will remind him that it is the USada going after him. I do take his point of the previous legends also being doped to the gills to heart. well said. Solomonic judgement: Lance keeps all titles, keeps all monies, signs a complete confession. Never gonna' happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 doping or not, the guy walked on the moon. you have to give him that. Everyone knows that the moon landings are nothing but a hoax that was perpetrated on a hidden movie set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsfan Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 It would be so much easier if that were true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Bad week to be an Armstrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.