Lewis is such a cock!
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Lance Armstrong
Collapse
X
-
I remember back in about 92, my PE teacher telling his Sports Science A-Level class that he'd sat on the Oly board & been involved with Oly althletes & the vast majority of them had doped at one point or another- even Linford Christie. Everyone was dead sceptical of what he said cos Christie was the golden boy of althetics at the time, but we all know how that ended up. Sad really.
RE Dom's point- body building has drug-free ("natural") & "open" competitions, although I spose the differences are more clear-cut there.3rd place. Worst champions ever.
Comment
-
I doubt they'll award the wins to anyone. It's all too long ago and too many were cheating. Ullrich, Pantani, Mayo...Originally posted by G View PostAll the riders who finished second to him on his tour wins have doping history's.
They need to be very careful who gets awarded those wins.
Thanks, I didn't know any of that.Originally posted by Ben_Itez View PostLewis has long been suspected of cheating.
He also started wearing braces in his mid 20's which is another indicator of steroid abuse as it can affect your jaw and teeth position apparently. Try watching the recent documentary on the Seoul 1988 100m, fascinating stuff. Probably only a couple of clean athletes in the field.
The thing about braces could be indicative. But it's circumstantial of course. There is an innocent explanation..
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.
Comment
-
there is something in this comment to be honest. I see little point in stripping titles to award to others after all this time. Whoever gets the title isn't going to be afforded a special cermoney in paris to recieve the adulation. it'll be for nothing. a marred victory. just leave the titles but put a mark against them in the record books, a T for tainted would suffice.Originally posted by G View PostThe more I read the more I see general opinion of those close to the sport are that everyone was at it back then.
That being the case it's still an achievement for him to win 7 tours against all his drug adled competitors
Always borrow money from a pessimist. He won’t expect it back. Oscar Wilde
Comment
-
Imagine if your kid had the chance to be an elite athlete. All the money, the fame, the success, the celebrity, the shrunken reproductive organs, the permanent damage to heart and kidneys and liver, the early death... Would you encourage them or not?Originally posted by kingfunk View PostIv long had the view that sports men and women should be aloud take all the drugs the want, much more entertaining, by the next Olympics we could see a new 100m sprint in 3.12 seconds.....Awesome!.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.
Comment
-
You should definitely try and watch that film. It was pretty eye opening. Both in what was was said, and what was not said.Originally posted by Neil Young View PostI doubt they'll award the wins to anyone. It's all too long ago and too many were cheating. Ullrich, Pantani, Mayo...
Thanks, I didn't know any of that.
The thing about braces could be indicative. But it's circumstantial of course. There is an innocent explanation.Oh I don't know.
Comment
-
By Jacquelin Magnay, Olympics EditorLast Updated: 9:43AM BST 24/08/2012
The 300 members of ParalympicsGB have been warned about the dangers of ''boosting'', an illegal practice of hurting themselves to create an adrenalin rush to enhance performance at the Paralympic Games.
''It is like doping and some people are prepared to (do it to) cheat,'' said the ParalympicsGB chef de mission Craig Hunter of the practice which involves extreme measures such as strangling their own testicles, breaking bones, stimulating muscles with electric shocks or blocking catheters.
''We run an education programme for athletes and our athletes are fully aware we do not encourage boosting in any way shape or form.''
The resulting pain from self-inflicted injuries boosts blood pressure, heart rate and adrenalin levels in athletes with spinal cord damage much the same way as doping practices, says Hunter.
The International Paralympic Committee has been aware of the practice – technically called induced autonomic dysreflexia – for nearly 20 years and have introduced blood pressure tests in the warm up areas before competition to try and stamp out the practice.
Officials say they will withdraw anyone right up to the moment of competition at the London Paralympics if they believe their blood pressure is at dangerous levels. Extreme blood pressure could induce a heart attack or stroke.
An anonymous survey at the Beijing Paralympics four years ago found that one in six athletes admitted to the practice – mainly from wheelchair rugby, the marathon and long distance racing. This is because the heart rate and blood pressure in spinal victims doesn't increase in the same way as other athletes.
"There have been times where I would specifically give my leg or my toe a couple of really good electric shocks" Brad Zdanivsky, a Canadian quadriplegic climber told the BBC.
"That would make my blood pressure jump up and I could do more weights and cycle harder – it is effective.
"I tried several different ways of doing it. You can allow your bladder to fill, basically don't go to the bathroom for a few hours and let that pain from your bladder do it.
"I took it a notch further by using an electrical stimulus on my leg, my toe and even my testicles."
Zdanivsky knows of the extreme risks but says Paralympic athletes are attracted to the practice because of the instant results.
He said: "It can actually stop your heart. It's very unpleasant, but the results are hard to deny. The saying is that winners always want the ball, so it doesn't matter if it's unpleasant, it gets results."
IPC spokesman Craig Spence said boosting was an unacceptable practice.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ben_Itez View PostOf course
Lewis' incredible vanity being one of them.
There are lots of orthodontists around here trying to sell the perfect smile to adults. The children's market is saturated so they're trying to get adults to do it, it's the only way to grow.
If it's like that here now, after twenty or thirty years of galloping private dental healthcare provision, then it could have been the same in the USA back in the Eighties.
Apologies for (a) using business language to describe dental care and (b) going off on a tangent. At least this tangent didn't involve dog pictures (yet).
.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.
Comment
-
Lance Armstong's Statement of August 23, 2012
AUSTIN, Texas - August 23rd, 2012 - There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart's unconstitutional witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense.
I had hoped that a federal court would stop USADA’s charade. Although the court was sympathetic to my concerns and recognized the many improprieties and deficiencies in USADA’s motives, its conduct, and its process, the court ultimately decided that it could not intervene.
If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and – once and for all – put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?
From the beginning, however, this investigation has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs. I am a retired cyclist, yet USADA has lodged charges over 17 years old despite its own 8-year limitation. As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges. The international bodies governing cycling have ordered USADA to stop, have given notice that no one should participate in USADA’s improper proceedings, and have made it clear the pronouncements by USADA that it has banned people for life or stripped them of their accomplishments are made without authority. And as many others, including USADA’s own arbitrators, have found, there is nothing even remotely fair about its process. USADA has broken the law, turned its back on its own rules, and stiff-armed those who have tried to persuade USADA to honor its obligations. At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers’ expense. For the last two months, USADA has endlessly repeated the mantra that there should be a single set of rules, applicable to all, but they have arrogantly refused to practice what they preach. On top of all that, USADA has allegedly made deals with other riders that circumvent their own rules as long as they said I cheated. Many of those riders continue to race today.
The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced. The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, perverts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex-teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It’s an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It’s just not right.
USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles. I know who won those seven Tours, my teammates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours. We all raced together. For three weeks over the same roads, the same mountains, and against all the weather and elements that we had to confront. There were no shortcuts, there was no special treatment. The same courses, the same rules. The toughest event in the world where the strongest man wins. Nobody can ever change that. Especially not Travis Tygart.
Today I turn the page. I will no longer address this issue, regardless of the circumstances. I will commit myself to the work I began before ever winning a single Tour de France title: serving people and families affected by cancer, especially those in underserved communities. This October, my Foundation will celebrate 15 years of service to cancer survivors and the milestone of raising nearly $500 million. We have a lot of work to do and I'm looking forward to an end to this pointless distraction. I have a responsibility to all those who have stepped forward to devote their time and energy to the cancer cause. I will not stop fighting for that mission. Going forward, I am going to devote myself to raising my five beautiful (and energetic) kids, fighting cancer, and attempting to be the fittest 40-year old on the planet.
Comment
-
They were. Hincapie said recently though that he hadn't spoken to Armstrong for a while.Originally posted by rcasemore View PostI'd interested to see what George Hincapie has to say on all of this, he was apparently the "star" witness to all these allegations against Armstrong & I'd always got the impression that they were very close..
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.
Comment
-
There are broader issues here:
What does this tell us about anti-doping procedures and regulations? As has been said above, he passed every test but he was doping. So how did he do it? And, more to the point, how many others have done it and may still be doing it but remaining undetected.
How far are others complicit? I don't mean other riders (although clearly some of them were). I mean the authorities, his teams, their management and medical staffs, and so on. The UCI accepted a very large sum (I forgot how much but somewhere between $10k and $100k I think) from Armstrong, supposedly to pay for some piece of equipment or something. An extraordinary payment in all senses. The UCI may have got its act together but the low profile of the blood passport programme suggests all may not be well.
Basically Armstrong had such power and importance that he could bully people into keeping quiet, either through legal action or because of the financial impact it could have. The reason so many cyclists kept quiet is, it seems to me, they all knew lots were doing it, even if they weren't. And bans were accepted as part of the deal - bad luck to be dealt with should the worst happen.
.
Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.
May the Lord bless this post.
Comment

Comment