I see he is due to be stripped of all his titles.
Does this mean that Buzz Aldrin will be the 'official' first man on the moon?
|
Eh? You're not seriously mixing up Lance and Neil Armstrong.
There's a bit of me not surprised if he did cheat - they all were at one time weren't they. But what he might have done was not tested for at the time - well that's my guess. Some athletes would even have their own blood drawn and stored and then later given back to boost red blood cells. So it's their own blood. They can test for that now for example.
|
>> Some athletes would even have their own
>> blood drawn and stored and then later given back to boost red blood cells. So
>> it's their own blood. They can test for that now for example.
>>
yep. Very popular back in the late 80s amongst cyclists and distance athletes.
Unfortunately for them they didn't realise the bad side effect - a fair chance of contracting Leukemia.
|
>Eh? You're not seriously mixing up Lance and Neil Armstrong.
While you're laughing about that Ian, work out what it indicates about his perception of your education.
|
>> Eh? You're not seriously mixing up Lance and Neil Armstrong.
Or even Alexander Armstrong?
|
>> Or even Alexander Armstrong?
That was a pointless post...
|
>> >> Or even Alexander Armstrong?
>>
>> That was a pointless post .......
.............. and leaves my total at nothing!
|
There seem to be two different arguments taking place;
The first and the one the media focusses on is whether or not Armstrong took drugs?
It has been reported that the USADA are maintaining that he did.
It has been reported that 10 of his team mates will testify to that effect.
In his official statement Armstrong said many things about rules and winning and fairness, but he didn't specifically say he had not taken drugs.
Personally, if I was making what I intended to be a convincing statement, the first words would be "I DID NOT....."
Rightly or wrongly I would take something from that.
The second argument, which is the one that seems has got Armstrong all fired up, is that the important question is not whether or not he took drugs, but whether or not the USADA has acted improperly or outside its scope in pursuing these allegations.
I *know* its important about organisations working within the rules, first step on the slippery slope and all that. But I struggle to care about this any more than I care about someone using a procedural failing to get out of a speeding camera allegation.
I'd probably do it myself. That doesn't make me innocent, just the rules incomplete.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 24 Aug 12 at 16:13
|
>>>But I struggle to care about this any more than I
>> care about someone using a procedural failing to get out of a speeding camera allegation.
>>
>> I'd probably do it myself. That doesn't make me innocent, just the rules incomplete.
>>
So Neil Armstrong was charged with speeding on a bicycle?
|
>> There seem to be two different arguments taking place;
>>
>> The first and the one the media focusses on is whether or not Armstrong took
>> drugs?
>> It has been reported that the USADA are maintaining that he did.
>> It has been reported that 10 of his team mates will testify to that effect.
>> In his official statement Armstrong said many things about rules and winning and fairness, but
>> he didn't specifically say he had not taken drugs.
>>
>> Personally, if I was making what I intended to be a convincing statement, the first
>> words would be "I DID NOT....."
>>
>>
You mean like President Clinton did when he said "I did not have sex with that woman"
:-)
|
>>
>> You mean like President Clinton did when he said "I did not have sex with
>> that woman"
>>
Be fair, he didn't say which woman. He probably meant Hilary.
|
I think he said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman [Lewinsky]"
Which, in hillbilly country, does not include doing things with cigars and spluffing on dresses apparently.
|
>>Does this mean that Buzz Aldrin will be the 'official' first man on the moon?
I don't know, maybe it means that "What A Wonderful World" will no longer be known as one of his greatest works.
|
>> "What A Wonderful World" will no longer be
>> known as one of his greatest works.
>>
I don't know much about history.
:>)
Or is that a case of too many cookes?
|
We could go further and trawl back through history, banning people who did things we don't like.
After tobacco and alcohol have been outlawed there will be a whole load of old "firsts" up for grabs.
|
>> After tobacco and alcohol have been outlawed there will be a whole load of old
>> "firsts" up for grabs.
>>
You depress me, Cliff. I'm off to the pub for a pint and a few fags.
|
Armstrong's crime was not doping, most (but by no means all) top cyclists did at one time. It is the fact that he behaved like a Mafia Don that eventually turned people against him. Armstrong was the "Patron" of the sport, the title given to any dominant rider of an era, unofficial boss in the peloton. All those who previously held that honour - Merckx, Hinault etc - knew what was going on but took a neutral live and let live attitude, they may or may not have been on it themselves. But Lance went further, he deliberately ruined the careers of two riders who spoke out against doping, tried to get inquisitive journalists ostracised by the sport and did everything he could to make sure the doping culture continued. He is the worst thing that ever happened to professional cycling and it is a relief to all who follow it that he has now been exposed.
There is a lot more to come on this too - in 2006 he committed perjury in a court case against an organisation called SCI who were trying to withhold a 5 million dollar bonus they promised him for winning seven tours, on the grounds that he had doped to win them. It is almost certain that they will now want that back and land Tex with a serious criminal case to defend.
It couldn't happen to a nicer bloke.
|
A rewrite of drug free history would leave a few holes -
www.soveriegn.freeservers.com/drugs.htm
and also relegate a few modern politicians to the realm of non-persona!
|
Drugs do seem to go with the territory in that era...
Shamelessly nicked from another forum...poster had probably nicked it from elsewhere anyway :-)
If they stripped him of his titles, who would get them?
1999
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Alex Zülle (‘98 busted for EPO)
3. Fernando Escartín (Systematic team doping exposed in ‘04)
4. Laurent Dufaux (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Ángel Casero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2000
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Christophe Moraue (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Roberto Heras (‘05 busted for EPO)
2001
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Andrei Kivilev
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2002
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Raimondas Rumšas (Suspended in ‘03 for doping)
4. Santiago Botero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2003
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
4. Tyler Hamilton (Suspended ‘04 for blood doping)
5. Haimar Zubeldia
2004
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Andreas Kloden (Named in doping case in ‘08)
3. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
4. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Jose Azevedo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
2005
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
3. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Fransico Mancebo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
Operacion Puerto en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operaci%C3%B3n_Puerto_doping_case - Operación Puerto (Operation Mountain Pass)[1] is the code name of a Spanish Police operation against the doping network of Doctor Eufemiano Fuentes, started in May 2006, which resulted in a scandal that involved several of the world's most famous cyclists at the time.
Media attention has focused on the small number of professional road cyclists named. By May 2007, 15 had been acquitted. Three admitted doping or had evidence of blood doping
|
With Armstrong now apparently implicated, from the above results list only two names are not tagged regarding drugs.
4. Andrei Kivilev and 5. Haimar Zubeldia
The rest of the list makes horrible reading.
From what I have read Armstrong sticks with his statement
"..The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors.” and I can assume that to be true but obviously no statement " I have not taken anything!"
A good article on things.
"Here's a rundown of the banned substances that Armstrong allegedly used to fuel his historic seven Tour de France wins"
"Why the Wheels Came Off the Lance Armstrong Case"
healthland.time.com/2012/08/24/which-drugs-is-lance-armstrong-accused-of-taking/
|
|
Interesting item on radio 4 this morning that said something along the lines of performances are 10% down on previous tours de France.
|
Found this page - www.sportsscientists.com/2010/07/power-outputs-from-tour-de-france.html - I am amazed at the data which is available. It doesn't mean much at all to me, but shows how scientific sport has become.
EDIT: I realise it's 2010...
Last edited by: smokie on Sun 26 Aug 12 at 11:08
|
>>
>> "..The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying
>> colors.” and I can assume that to be true but obviously no statement " I
>> have not taken anything!"
>>
Not true.
A retrospective test on Armstrong'a samples from his first Tour win using detection methods not available at the time showed evidence of EPO in his blood. This could not have been used against him as the 'B' sample had quite legitimately been destroyed after the original test showed a negative result.
|
|
RR. Thanks for that added info.
|
Me and my big mouth.
Neil Armstrong dies at age 82.
|
|
One last leap for a man....
|
Neil Armstrong - now there is someone who did test positive . . . . . . for greatness!
RIP Neil.
I remember waking up just in time to see the famous lunar walk on grainy Black and White TV.
I've never seen anything on the box remotely as brilliant since.
|
|
As a tribute they should scatter his ashes on the moon.
|
|
Scattering ashes isn't burial.
|
>>Scattering ashes isn't burial.
>>
Its a headline not an obit. Do not believe all you read in a tabloid :-)
|
au contraire
Burial-at-sea services are available at many different locations and with many different customs, either by ship or by aircraft. Usually, either the captain (or commanding officer) of the ship or aircraft or a representative of the religion performs the ceremony.
The ceremony may include burial in a casket, burial sewn in sailcloth, burial in an urn, or scattering of the cremated remains by ship. Burial at sea by aircraft is usually done only with cremated remains. Other types of burial at sea include the mixing of the ashes with concrete and dropping the concrete block to form an artificial reef such as the Atlantis Reef.
Wikipedia
|
|
He's off exploring inner space.
|
|
one small leap for man...a giant concrete step for mankind
|
I only just found this thread about Armstrongs and drugs and thought you were talking about Louis ......
|
|
Good job they didn't scatter cycling Armstongs ashes, it would have caused a chemical pollution incident.
|
Armstrong - rtj70
