Forum menu
See bullandbladder, I'm not actually [i]convinced[/i] he is doping, I'm just [i]suspicious[/i]. Well actually highly suspicious, you know it being professional cycling and all.
I'm not sure after the reasoned decision and Tyler & Landis' revelations that you could convince me it was clean.
But as I said before, a properly funded, independent, credible anti-doping body would be the place to start.
And not allowing the whole doping debacle to be swept under the carpet.
Oh and just for Junkyard I know you're not that hot on reading nuance...
Sarcasm is such a powerful debating tool when you argument is ripped asunder and shown to be weak to the point of hilarity 😕
Part of your evidence is he is slower than dopers and his W/KG is normal- I am sure your sarcasm helps you get out of the hole you have dug and leapt in to but it does not cover the fact you have no senisble argument. FWIW you are funnier when you try a cogent argument than when you try a joke
I'm not sure after the reasoned decision and Tyler & Landis' revelations that you could convince me it was clean.
Then why are you debating?
Just say i think they cheat and nothing will persuade me otherwise?
FWIW you could convince me Froome AN Other cheats if you had some evidence
Let me get this right, your counter debate to my Froome is just under the theoretical maximum w/kg and is just short of the super doped up climbing times and looooooong peaks is: the fastest guy always wins? And I'm being hilarious. Go Junkyard!
Why am I here, well one, I love cycling. Ive followed it from the days of (Robert) Millar, Lemond and Fignon. And two, I'm genuinely curious as to why you guys apparently have absolutely no doubts (whatsoever?) and just what would constitute a 'red flag' for you.
I could go drag up some articles from people with a lot more credibility than me and dissect your posts and counter each point but a) I don't have the energy, the weather is too nice and I'm not that fussed that you actually hold a different opinion from me and b) as above that's not really what I'm interested in.
So if you don't want to answer these questions re. doubts and flags, fair enough.
The sun is shining and my bike needs picking up from the shop so I will now leave you all in peace.
aracer: so I had you convinced up until that point had I?
I think I covered myself there:
any credibility he might have had
Let me get this right, your counter debate to my Froome is just under the theoretical maximum w/kg and is just short of the super doped up climbing times and looooooong peaks is: the fastest guy always wins?
I think the counter to "Froome is just under the theoretical maximum w/kg" as evidence that he's doping is a lot simpler than that: no it isn't.
I could go drag up some articles from people with a lot more credibility than me
Like David Walsh? Now there's a man I'd trust to find out the truth behind the cover ups - a man who's done a lot more to expose doping than you have. Remind me what he's saying?
Let me get this right, your counter debate to my Froome is just under the theoretical maximum w/kg and is just short of the super doped up climbing times and looooooong peaks is: the fastest guy always wins? And I'm being hilarious. Go Junkyard!
It seems slightly[ well light years actually] more credible than the alternative which is dopers have natural w/kg, are slower than other known dopers and the fastest guy does not always win a race based on time.
Again I say he peaked for the TdF he was just always faster than al the other guys who were also trying to peak for the TdF. It is really not uncommon for the fastest person to to be the fastest person*
I'm genuinely curious as to why you guys apparently have absolutely no doubts (whatsoever?) and just what would constitute a 'red flag' for you.
How about times faster than dopers and w/kg above the natural
TBH I would be pretty unimpressed by the PEDS i was taking if they did not take me above the natural limit and left me slower than previous dopers
So if you don't want to answer these questions re. doubts and flags, fair enough.
LOL you cannot be bothered answering our questions though you could rip them apart if you were so inclined and then you ask us questions we have already answered
I am loving your work.
I think I have said what would convince me [evidence] and you could prove it if you could be bothered obviously 🙄
* edwin moses for example
Between 1977 and 1987, Moses won 107 consecutive finals (122 consecutive races) and set the world record in his event four times. In addition to his running, Moses was also an innovative reformer in the areas of Olympic eligibility and drug testing. In 2000, he was elected the first Chairman of the Laureus World Sports Academy, an international service organization of world-class athletes.
even more remarkable he came from nowhere to win gold an break the World record
Moses competed mostly in the 120-yard hurdles and 440-yard dash. Before March 1976, he ran only one 400 m hurdles race, but once he began focusing on the event he made remarkable progress. His trademark technique was to take a consistent 13 steps between each of the hurdles, pulling away in the second half of the race as his rivals changed their stride pattern. That summer, he qualified for the US team for the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal. In his first international meet, Moses won the gold medal and set a world record of 47.63 seconds.
Why won't this thread die?