I believe Hamilton!
You also believed an old spoon and some glue would make a disk brake mount. 
Bike Forum
[closed]
Tyler Hamilton dobs Amrstrong in it!
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Hincapie has come clean for the investigation. No book, nothing to gain, one of lances closest allies. It's pretty much all over for Lance, he Can't try to rubbish hincapies statement
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hincapie's comments seal it for me
Doper
Posted 1 year ago # -
FlyingOx - so if it was found out that person A training harder than person B had a positive effect on performance then by your reasoning they should be banned.
People drinking water will have better performance than non-water drinker. Should we ban water? And hang all cyclists who drank water in 1973?
Mr. breatheasy, what you've just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul!
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hincapie's comments are only attributed to him by a third party. He has come out and said (via twitter) that he hasn't spoken to 60 minutes and has no idea where they got their information from.
Not saying that it isn't a leak from the grand jury investigation but just that it is unconfirmed and shouldn't be taken as any kind of evidence. Yet.
It's all a bit of a sideshow though. While ultimately I think all the cheats should be caught and punished I'm more interested in catching the cheats that are still a part of the peleton even if it means bringing down current grand tour leaders. The only useful thing I can see that comes from getting Armstrong is that it demonstrates that no one is untouchable and that may just add a little doubt into the minds of anyone considering doping as a career enhancer.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hincapie on twitter:
As for the substance of anything in the "60 Minutes" story, I cannot comment on anything relating to the ongoing investigation.
surely if he hadn't said it he could of said so?
I'm more interested in catching the cheats that are still a part of the peleton even if it means bringing down current grand tour leaders
Totally agree, but Armstrongs arrogance has me really wanting him to be bought down.
as for Contador, do you think his dominance in the giro is a bit of a two finger salute to the UCI and WADA?
Posted 1 year ago # -
surely if he hadn't said it he could of said so?
Quite right. But at the moment we can't really go around attributing the words to Hincapie, at best we can say that someone said that Hincapie said, and without knowing the details of that someone it's not much better than gossip. May all turn out to be true but right now I'd be a little cautious about putting words in the mans mouth.
Contador's approach to the Giro is unusual to say the least. Says he doesn't want to defend the Jersey and then just rides away from world class climbers in there own backyard with apparent ease. I'm sure he is fired up for the giro and feels that he has something to prove but his performance is incredible. Bringing it back to Lance when he rode away from people at least he had the good grace to look like he was making an effort, Contador looks like he's out on a club run most of the time and that ain't right.
As much as I initially disliked the idea of Vaughters turning into cycling's Bernie Ecclestone and forming a breakaway racing body perhaps a clean break is the way forward. Form a new body with its selling point being clean racing and let the fans decide which way they want to go.
Posted 1 year ago # -
As for the substance of anything in the "60 Minutes" story, I cannot comment on anything relating to the ongoing investigation.
surely if he hadn't said it he could of said so?
That was referring to the substance of the program [the grand jury investigation] not whether or not he said anything
I'm not sure you are even allowed to even intimate what you've said or heard in a Grand Jury room anywayPosted 1 year ago # -
Interesting both Hamilton and Landis tell same story about the failed 2001 test and subsequent 'donation' to UCI. wander what the fallout of this could be if an official comes forward and comes clean...
Posted 1 year ago # -
It does look like the trap is closing on Armstrong bit by bit
I guess if he was doping whilst on the Post team, that'll have been federally financed making the indictment a bit more serious?
not sure that is the case though - just thinking out loud
Posted 1 year ago # -
uplink, thats the whole case against him. They don't strictly care if he took drugs, but they do very much care if he used government money to do it
Posted 1 year ago # -
Jail time here we come
Posted 1 year ago # -
The US investigations have brought down some very high profile athletes. They amass a lot of evidence and they pursue any witnesses that perjure themselves. It looks like the cracks are starting to appear.
Hincapie is only denying speaking to 60 Minutes, anything related to Lance Armstrong is a straight "no comment".
Posted 1 year ago # -
if any case is bought against him and if he's found guilty he'll get jail time. but he's a very very rich man, don't underestimate the power he's got.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Sanny - Member
I'd echo Crazy Legs comments.
Met him, ridden with him, shot the breeze, nothing but respect for what he had achieved both in cycling but more importantly for the fight against cancer. I could not care less about what Landis or Hamilton have to say. What have they to achieve other than publicity for themselves and a poor attempt to divert from their own misdeeds? When you watch Hamilton, look at his body language when talking about Armstrong and doping. Lots of shaking of the head and lack of eye contact. Hmmmm.
Ultimately, Armstrong's legacy reaches far beyond the confines of bike racing. If he did dope, I just don't care. Whether he did or not, I judge him by what he has done with the Livestrong Foundation and that to me is what counts.
Posted 2 days ago #Report-Post
so because you're his best mate, think he is cleaner than a nun swimming in Fairy Liquid? I think your bias being as you’re mates with him.
I think he's been a clever, calculating professional. Of course he used EPO, how would he have achieved what he has without performance enhancing, illegal practises? The whole peloton in the early and mid 90s were clearly on something, given the sheer number of positive tests. Your mate wouldn’t have stood much of chance without alittle something extra in his training routine.
Even though you two are buddies, i bet you didn’t ask him if he'd ever taken EPO, or what he thought about the "crazy" accusations that his positive test had been covered up? I mean, cover ups and back handers in professional sport??? come on as if............
Posted 1 year ago # -
Even more damning is that la-la wasn't inducted into the Texas Sports Hall of Fame recently. When red-necks won't hold you up any more then it's pretty much over isn't it?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Personally I don't believe there has been a clean winner of the TDF ever and hardly a clean top ten finisher.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Personally I don't believe there has been a clean winner of the TDF ever and hardly a clean top ten finisher.
Greg Lemond
Posted 1 year ago # -
Don't believe it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Don't believe it.
I know. You already said.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Personally I don't believe there has been a clean winner of the TDF ever and hardly a clean top ten finisher.
Bjarne Riis
I'll get me coat
Posted 1 year ago # -
You're going in circular arguments here. Saying that it's impossible to win the Tour clean then saying that Lemond was clean in an era where doping was far more prevalent than today (or even than in Armstrong's era).
What gets me is the inconsistencies in it all. Contador should not be racing at the moment (final ruling on a doping infringement still going through the courts) yet he's currently leading the Giro. Riis should have been stripped of his Tour win in the same way that Landis was yet he hasn't. Everyone is so desperate to find Armstrong guilty of something that when another doper (Hamilton) comes out the closet, everyone says "yeah, so what, now tell us about Armstrong" and all this focus on one man is actually making it harder to catch cheats.
The stuff about Hincapie is just a diversion at the moment. An anonymous third party has alleged that Hincapie has spoken to 60 Minutes (which Hincapie denies). The "no comment" thing is becasue Hincapie has already been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury so he's just making sure that nothing he says can come back to bite him otherwise he'll be doing jail time for perjury. There's no new evidence against LA, just more wild rumours, claims, counter claims and internet gossiping.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Actually as I understand it, Hincapie has given evidence to the Grand Jury (last summer) and someone has leaked his testimony to 60minutes. His statement about not talking to 60minutes is correct as he hasn't, and because the federal investigation is still under way he is making no further comment.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Lets hope when he finally gets busted he hits the ground really hard, i hate the smug git, lets face it he must have been dopeing to go that fast. The fat lady is about to sing me thinks.
Posted 1 year ago # -
re Hincapie, aP has it right. I watched the 60 minutes doc this morning. doesn't look good for Armstrong. The papers supposedly confirming a covered up failed drugs test could be the final nail....
Posted 1 year ago # -
You're going in circular arguments here. Saying that it's impossible to win the Tour clean then saying that Lemond was clean in an era where doping was far more prevalent than today (or even than in Armstrong's era).
Although doping was possibly more prevalent in the Lemond era it was nowhere near as effective as during the EPO years. Therefore it was more rather than less possible that a clean rider could win. A lot of the stuff pre EPO was more placebo than actual benefit. Many may have taken products but they were of little benefit.
What gets me is the inconsistencies in it all. Contador should not be racing at the moment (final ruling on a doping infringement still going through the courts) yet he's currently leading the Giro. Riis should have been stripped of his Tour win in the same way that Landis was yet he hasn't. Everyone is so desperate to find Armstrong guilty of something that when another doper (Hamilton) comes out the closet, everyone says "yeah, so what, now tell us about Armstrong" and all this focus on one man is actually making it harder to catch cheats.
True.
Posted 1 year ago # -
"Riis should have been stripped of his Tour win"
....and perhaps not allowed to manage a pro cycling team.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Personally sad though it may seem I think the Grand Tours were more exiting to watch when they were all doped up.
they seem to be a bit boring now.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I still don't get the obsession with proving a retired racer was doping. Should we not be focussing on Contador? Or anyone else in the pelaton who is winning and/or has some dodgy test results?
Lance has gone from the sport, he has retired and any findings that come out are only going to make the sport of cycling look ever worse than it does now. Move on people, lets catch todays cheats before they win anything else.
Posted 1 year ago # -
lunge - Member
I still don't get the obsession with proving a retired racer was doping. Should we not be focussing on Contador? Or anyone else in the pelaton who is winning and/or has some dodgy test results?Lance has gone from the sport, he has retired and any findings that come out are only going to make the sport of cycling look ever worse than it does now. Move on people, lets catch todays cheats before they win anything else.
I'm sure that ongoing investigations into other riders don't stop every time Armstrong's name is mentioned?
Posted 1 year ago # -
IdleJon, I realise that, I'm focussing on the public's obsession more than WADA or the UCI.
As a cycling fan, spectator, rider, etc. I am more concerned/interested that a guy who tested positive in last year Tour has just won the Giro.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I am more concerned/interested that a guy who tested positive in last year Tour has just won the Giro.
I don't think time travelling drugs are on the banned list though.Posted 1 year ago # -
Wow, Ganic, where did I write I was mates with him? I met Lance and rode with him when he did the Paisley Twitter ride. Had a good wee chat with him on the ride but oddly he hasn't returned any of my thousand or so stalker calls since! Ha! Ha!
Like I wrote, I just don't care if he doped or not. If that was the price (and I'm not saying it is, I prefer to let folk have their day in court before breaking out the pitch forks) for the amount of good that has been done with the Livestrong Foundation then on balance I think that would be a fair price to pay. Professional sport and drugs go hand in hand, always have, always will. There will always be someone looking for the edge.
What's more intersting to me at the moment is the fall out if the Pro Teams split away from the UCI, the publication of the suspicion list and what will happen should the Swiss meeting as alleged actually took place and the content of it.
As before, Crazy Legs sums the current situation up perfectly.
Posted 1 year ago # -
aracer, sorry, is about to win this years Giro. Either way, the point is still there.
Posted 1 year ago # -
TJ - Andy Schlek and Bradley Wiggans, clean or dopers? Anyone in the current peloton that you think is clean?
I'm (or have been) a die-hard LA fan, but have to face it that its looking increasingly likely that he's a doper. Sports biggest fall from grace if it happens...Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
