(About Armstrong)
"He will be particularly, particularly, particularly monitored," she said.
The head of France's anti-doping agency says the American would be treated like anyone else when it came to dope tests.
So will you be singling him out or treating him the same as others?
If he wins he's a cheat, if he loses he is a failure 
He'll just be treated a bit more equally than others... 
All cyclists are equal, it's just that some cyclists are more equal than others....
So they'll be watching him more.
But his tests will be at the same amounts and guidelines as other riders.
(I think they should be watching everyone equally too)
I'd be very careful about who you decide to call studid 
They'll suck so much blood out of him that he'll need EPO just to stand up
I hate witch hunts - if he drowns he was innocent, if he survives it's proof of guilt.
I hate the dopers - they are weasels stealing other people's achievements.
They should be banned for life and their names should be boycotted. That Scottish rider D***d M*ll*r shouldn't get a mention in the cycling press except as a loser.
If he wins he's a cheat, if he loses he is a failure
no, if he wins he's a cheat, if he loses he's a cheat. Same as most of the others.
The French won't rest until they've caught him by wahtever means possible. Leaks of data from the drug testing labs, journos going through the team rubbish, whatever and however, it'll be their sole intention. If a few other riders happen to get caught as well then that'll be icing on the cake.
It's got to the point of being conspiracy theory. If he doesn't test positive it's because he had better drugs/better doctors etc. Sad state of affairs that it's got to this. 
It doesn't help that there are several different agencies and labs, the media always looking for an angle, rumours going round, dodgy info on various stories, it's difficult to know what's going on sometimes. All that the general public see is "Tour de Drugs", the impression that all cyclists are cheats and it doesn't do anyone any favours.
Pro cycling is like sausages; I like sausages, but I don't want to know how they're made...
That Scottish rider D***d M*ll*r shouldn't get a mention in the cycling press except as a loser.
but the thing is, Millar has 'fessed up. Armstrong just keeps on pulling the wool over numpties' eyes.
Ummmmmmmm, once again, for the millionth time, Dave Millar 'fessed up' when they found the empty vials in HIS FLAT.
He didn't volunteer the info, he 'fessed up' when they caught him with his hand in the bloody till....
And he was sitting with Dave Brailsforth about 10 minutes prior to his amazing conversion.
Armstrong just keeps on pulling the wool over numpties' eyes.
That's what I mean!
You're convinced that he's a doper, that he's guilty. Yet in any court of law Armstrong is INNOCENT. Yes, there have been claims & counter claims, former teammates have been found to have doped etc but that does NOT make him guilty!
All the stories out there weave some kind of tangled intricate web and say that because so-and-so doped Armstrong must have done as well or because a former employee saw a vial in his bathroom cabinet, it must have been EPO. Trying to make circumstantial evidence into something concrete.
Different cyclists get treated differently as well. Look at Richard Virenque who is still feted as a hero in France in spite of being a known persistent doper. Tommy Simpson is still regarded as being one of the greatest British cyclists in spite of dying of drugs/dehydration during the Tour (admittedly in a time when EVERYONE doped!). Pantani was regarded as a worthy winner of the Tour, his record breaking ascent of Alpe d'Huez still an official time. Bjarne Riis, Mr 60%, is directeur sportif of a TdF team in spite of being a known doper for years. Yet other cyclists get almost publically humiliated, reviled, talked down for years afterwards. Any interview with Millar now, it's drugs this cheating that, his past constantly dredged up.
Until there is ONE laboratory following ONE set of protocols that is scrupulously clean and rigourously vetted, ONE anti drugs agency, a unified international standard of how to deal with it then the problem will persist. Having one set of rules in one country, a dodgy individual in one lab, an anti-doping chief with his own agenda (get Armstrong no matter what) then it's not going to work.
That's TDL not TDF...............
Tour de Lance!
ffs how many times has he be tested? how many times has he tested positive? let it go
TdF - stupid comment from head of doping
When I read that title, I thought it was going to be a thread about one the team doctors 
Smart cookie; retire for a while (no testing!), get 'fit' and come back. Way to go - cycling salutes you, Lance Armstrong.
wors have you read the recent Bernard Kohl interviews? how many times was he tested? or is it just a case of 'OO its super-Lance the only clean rider in the peloton'
Im sorry but I dont buy into the Lance as super human theories, but I like to watch him race, see his blog/twitter stuff
A UK journo who occassionally visits our store (but shall remain nameless ) recently mentioned he and his fellow journo's are afraid to write anything 'against' Lance, as his lawyers are on the phone stop it with immediate legal action every time.
Something to hide, or are they just protecting Lance's market image from poor journalism? Mmm...
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden
some interesting reading on lance's doping.
Stuff the rest of it - there's nothing like kicking off a thread with an appalling bit of misquoting...
"He will be particularly, particularly, particularly monitored"... said by Roselyne Bachelot
"The head of France's anti-doping agency says the American would be treated like anyone else when it came to dope tests."
You may or may not have noticed that that's not the same person, nor speaking for the same body.
Frech politicians are playing games with the tour and ASO and AFLD appear to be playing along as much as benefits them. eg ASO clearly wanted Boonen to ride (and knew that they couldn't stop him riding) but politics dictated that they try to stop him riding
Who really cares, you could pump me full of drugs and I couldn't finish one stage of the tour - Anyone who rides a bike should appreciate the amount of effort/training that's needed to finish it
Well I for one hope Lance stuffs them all once again and give's the metaphorical finger to all the Frenchies and all the sad b@stard's on here who can't stand a winner.
Not exactly the point, and poor form to bring an element of racism into it.
It's very hard to see why this years TdF should be different to previous ones; i.e. the riders aren't on tea and biscuits, and the only crime seems to be being caught.
Yes, there are clearly some ways Lance Armstrong is better than most.
There is plenty of evidence of Armstrong doping but no proof. from sworn witness statements to circumstantial evidence
You can look at he evidence and make up your own mind. I believe he is a continual doper and has been all his career - just one step a head of the testers like many others
How many american atheltes never tested positive but ae now known to be doping? Marion Jones for one - tested far more than armstrong and never positive but admitted in front of a grand jury to doping
WTF racism! The French at least as exemplified by their media and judicial system appear to be out to get Armstrong hence my comment.
Marion Jones for one - tested far more than armstrong
I find that hard to believe. Evidence please.
Blood samples are now routinely archived and the riders know that they can be tested retrospectively now. Even if Armstrong had access to using state of the art pharmaceuticals undetectable for the last 10 years he's too conscious of his legacy to go that route.
TJ there's plenty of circumstantial evidence that you're a slacker who spends all his time on this forum. However I prefer to believe you are a fine hard working upstanding member of society.
Uponthedowns - its purely a matter of opinion. without proof thats all it can be.
As for Jones - I can't lay my hands on eveidece right now - but track and field atheletes are routinly tested far more stringently than cyclists and have been done for many years.
Ummmmmmmm, once again, for the millionth time, Dave Millar 'fessed up' when they found the empty vials in HIS FLAT.
He didn't volunteer the info, he 'fessed up' when they caught him with his hand in the bloody till...
He tested positive at the 2001 Tour?
oh no, that's right. he didn't.
They found the vials at the 2003 Worlds?
oh no, that's right, they didn't.
and so on.
hazeii - Member
Smart cookie; retire for a while (no testing!), get 'fit' and come back. Way to go - cycling salutes you, Lance Armstrong.
Posted 10 hours
Hazeii, you're a numpty. I don't know whether LA is clean or not, but if you really think that he looked particulary fit in Georgia or the Tour Down Under then you're an idiot.
Can't believe I took the bait on that...
Pro cycling is like sausages; I like sausages, but I don't want to know how they're made...
A few definitions:
Proof: 1 a: the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact
Evidence: 1 a: an outward sign : indication b: something that furnishes proof : testimony ; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
Source: Merrriam Webster
There are more variations on the meanings but the theme is the same: proof & evidence are so closely linked that to differentiate between the 2 is futile.
LA is currently innocent till proved otherwise. Get over it. I may just be quibbling over semantics but hey, if you are going to sling mud about someone you have never met at least get your grammar in order.
God I hate forums..Nothing but a bunch of opinionated tossers 
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
