Reply With Quote
The guy that guy screwed out of this is Alexander Vinokourov...he's not even implicated but his team is suspended.
This guy scared the living out of Armstrong last year...he'd have been my pick to win it this year.
I'm stunned with your reasoning. He ahs cheated in 99.
BTW, 33 isn't that old for cycling : it's a sport based on resistance.
It's since 98 that drug testing is a priority (after the festina story)
There aren't samples for them but now there is now a law that allow to test samples years after when test are better and can detect the method used for doping when the guy won the tour.
It's known that Hinault, has taken drugs but the diffirence with Armstrong is that there is a proof concerning Armstrong.
The guy that guy screwed out of this is Alexander Vinokourov...he's not even implicated but his team is suspended.
This guy scared the living out of Armstrong last year...he'd have been my pick to win it this year.
what proof? link to this proof please?
When it's properly used, the risk is very low.
His heart wasn't weak, he was a professional cycling.
What's going to be funny is if Landis or Hincapie end up winning because of the French greed to reclaim their tour.
Cycling is a team sport and his team hasn't been suspended : you can't start with less than 7 (or 6 ?) guys in a team. It's a rule. 3 or 4 guys in his team were suspended, so his team must given up.
Dude, he was diagnosed with terminal cancer in over 50% of his body and he had to undergo extensive chemotherapy....the question is not did the chemo damage his heart, athlete or otherwise, the question is, to what degree...
And healthy guys that haven't even had chemo die from EPO..
And 33 is ancient, for winning the tour.
And Hinault was an ahole who tried to welch on a deal with Greg Lemonde...chances are, if he was willing to dishonor himself to win a 5th..he damn sure would have sucked down any drug available to do so.
I can kind of give him a pass though...because LeMonde is an asshole as well.
I mean his team was suspended in the relative sense.
He did get screwed by this ruling...and forget this Basso and Ulrich crap...this guy was a monster last year...
Test publised in L'equipe. I won't do a google search for you.
You obviously don't know cycling.
None french ( barring a miracle) can win the tour this year : they suck.
As I said before, the last french who was able to win has been waived in 98 while he hasn't failed a drug test.
I did google it...I got nothing.
Must be an article in your French state run media...could you direct me to it please? In the name of truth and backed up accusations?
At a low enough degree to win compe ion in a sport where the heart is very important.
Vinokourov is too inconsistent to win the tour. Basso was way better than him.
I see nothing about his hair testing positive in that article...only the same experimental tests on illegally retained ancient samples that was panned by every expert in the world, including cyclings own body...as well as the questioning of the ethics involved in illegally keeping Armstrong's samples after negative tests without his knowledge or permission.
What that lab did was unethical and illegal and I don't know how they could be considered a valid source when the only evidence of cheating and even criminal activity, is on the part of they themselves.
Shame on you France, shame shame on you.
Funny, you guys are finally rid of Lance and boom....is it a great cycling moment that replaces him? No...it's a huge scandal. This after Lance had given the tour more worldwide notoriety, media coverage and prestige than it had ever had before...to be repaid by ridicule and underhanded attempts to sully his character.
I tell you...no one says thanks like the French. I don't know what they do better...stab their friends in the back...or cut off their own nose despite their face.
Last edited by whottt; 07-01-2006 at 06:33 PM.
It wasn't hear but urine.
You can question methods (but you're wrong on most of the points) but you can't deny results : Armstrong has cheated in 99.
They are a valid source. They have done nothing illegale and unethical.
Proof that the fight was against the doping and not against Armstrong.
Only in USA.
No need to continue with a guy that say things like that. No need to answer to this post, I won't answer.
I've owned you and your only answer is to insult French... weak...
I won't judge you because I don't know you but guys that say things like that are usually dumbass.
Take care of you and goodbye.
Let me see...you said it was hair, not urine, I disproved this(in French no less) and I am wrong?
They are a valid source. They have done nothing illegale and unethical.
Then why is the UCI investigating them and questioning their methods?
Let me repost this:
UN EXPERT ALLEMAND SCEPTIQUE
Un expert de lutte antiodopage en Allemagne, le professeur Klaus Müller, a évoqué mardi ses doutes sur la méthode d'analyse et les échantillons qui ont permis de déceler de l'EPO dans les urines du cycliste Lance Armstrong. «Je ne doute pas que les résultats des analyses réalisées par mes collègues français sont solides», a déclaré le professeur Müller, directeur de l'Ins ut pour l'analyse du dopage de Kreischa à un quotidien allemand dans son édition de mercredi à paraître. Mais l'expert évoque son étonnement sur la conservation de ces échantillons d'urine : «Quand un échantillon contrôlé s'avére négatif, il est détruit, ainsi que l'échantillon B, dans les mois qui suivent». Selon lui, un échantillon peut être conservé pour procéder à des recherches et expériences à condition toutefois que la personne sur laquelle il a été prélevé donne son accord et que le «donneur» reste anonyme. Or, note le patron de l'Ins ut pour l'analyse du dopage, «cela ne semble pas s'être passé ainsi», ce qui suggère que le champion cycliste américain pourra saisir la justice.
There's always been doping...Proof that the fight was against the doping and not against Armstrong.
Well now it's been dealt a blow in Italy and Germany...Only in USA.
I've owned you and your only answer is to insult French... weak...
Owned me how? By saying it was a failed test for hair and then linking me to an article about a failed piss test?
If you notice...I already posted an article that he was completely exonerated by the Cycling body and the only investigation to come out of all this was one into the ethcis and legality of the testing lab...
Oh well...at least I don't post articles to piss tests to prove a hair test. Maybe you need to work on your French?I won't judge you because I don't know you but guys that say things like that are usually dumbass.
Surrender all you want...but you still are wrong about Armstrong failing a legitimate public test.No need to continue with a guy that say things like that. No need to answer to this post, I won't answer.
And there is every need in the world to answer your post...it's called getting the last word in!
Awwww don't go away wrong.Take care of you and goodbye.
Way to disprove all those French sterotypes BTW.
And BTW, I think you missed an excellent opportunity to shut up..............after I posed the exoneration article.
in french the guy don't say Amstrong don't use doping but the urine must be destroy
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions