The Chainlink

Views: 2780

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I wonder how long it will be before Anonymous "finds" a crapload of Child Porntm on Travis Tygart's laptop and alerts to the whole world what a scumbag pedobear he is.

A little turnaround would be fair play on this tinpot dictator. 

Thanks for the link Zoe. It was both interesting and informative.

Zoetrope said:

You're quite welcome, sir.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHJErrp4eOw
So much more strength and endurance he displayed on this climb than the few people who were close to him.

If what LA used was not in the black list at the time he raced, he won it fairly. If a swimmer drinks ginger (or fish sauce, or snake wine) to keep him/her warm in the water, can that also be considered as unfair advantage too?
Performance enhancing hormones don't make a racing cyclist a winner. Tour de France is the most challenging sports competition of all, it takes sheer determination to win, and this trait can't be synthetized.
My friend's blog has many good points about LA: http://journal.michaelahlers.org/2012/08/i-still-admire-lance-armst...

That reddit post is a bit misinformed and pretty biased.  The USADA has jursidiction over the European citizens because they were working for an US based team.  Also the UCI isn't necessarily impartial and honest.  This is an organization that received over 100+k from Armstrong to purchase blood doping testing equipment and which was directly benefiting from Armstrong's success.  After all, the UCI or it's predecessors looked the other way when things like the Festina affair were going down or just provided slaps on the wrist when riders were popped for doping.  That's the entirely reason for WADA and the various national ADAs.  The sports federations were allowing doping to occur in violation of the rules with very little punishment to dopers because it benefitted the federations directly.  The UCI is free to tell WADA and the various national authorities to fuck off but that'd mean that the cycling events would not be in the Olympics and the UCI wants the money that comes from that.

Zoetrope said:

I say screw the WADA and the dog & pony show they call "The Olympics."

But my opinion doesn't matter. 

The stuff LA is supposed to be using was very much against the rules.  Between EPO, anabolic steroids, and blood reinfusion most if not all of that was banned. HGH may not have been explicitly banned though.

Doping definitely helps atheletes.  There have been studies that have shown improvements in the range of 5-10%.  That's enough of an edge to turn someone that's average but competitive into someone that is in the top 5 or better.  



Loan L. said:

If what LA used was not in the black list at the time he raced, he won it fairly. If a swimmer drinks ginger (or fish sauce, or snake wine) to keep him/her warm in the water, can that also be considered as unfair advantage too?
Performance enhancing hormones don't make a racing cyclist a winner. Tour de France is the most challenging sports competition of all, it takes sheer determination to win, and this trait can't be synthetized.
My friend's blog has many good points about LA: http://journal.michaelahlers.org/2012/08/i-still-admire-lance-armst...

Curiouser and curiouser. It now appears that some of the punishment meted out by the USADA was related to LA's refusal to cooperate with the investigation, and it has reached back beyond its own statute of limitations. Makes you wonder if they actually had evidence of LA's use of banned substances in each of the years for which they're stripping titles.

Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service