in praise of USADA
- Thread starter dellzeqq
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Because, as you would be aware if you had any real knowledge of the case, the tests of the 1999 samples were done for research purposes and not as a doping test.
Am I being trolled here? Please help!
A wise move that I may follow at any moment.
p.s. Is Orbytal actually Red Light Lite? There's definitely something of the (red) Light about him.
DogTired
Über Member
- Location
- Floating on a sea of vimto.
Here's why your posts can be considered rants:
- You try and make a point. When challenged you attack the challenger.
- You fail to provide references to back-up your points.
- You answer questions with questions.
- You seem to have an unhealthy dislike for Dick Pound.
- You suggest that people should research to answer your questions 'Try look closer', 'if you look up', etc. The way it works is if you make an accusation or have a point, then you back it up.
- In the 'Reforming the UCI' thread its clear you have little knowledge of the background of the backdated 1999 EPO tests and subsequent court cases.
- You use an aggressive tone and refer to comments with profanity.
- Your posts are neither reasoned, measured, easy to follow or coherent. But they are long.
"The sport is cleaner WRT EPO but still being used as micro doping but the new challenge is genetic modified stimulation for enhancement and WADA are playing catch up."
I think you need to come up some details on this. (Oh yeah and explain the genetic modified bit, where the genome lives in all of this. And are you sure you know what a stimulant is or did you mean a PED?)
"So how do you account for 6 positive samples from 15 from LA confirmed by WADA Lab BUT there was NO Sanctions. WADA did nothing about 6 positive samples between 2005 and 2012 allowing a confirmed positive testing athlete to compete and allow him to sign up AGAIN to their Code as an Elite athlete."
This was the basis of an argument between WADA and the UCI and the creation of the Vrijman report. We all know why there were no sanctions. Its well understood and in the open. Clear as day.
DogTired
Über Member
- Location
- Floating on a sea of vimto.
At times like this I look back on RedLight with fondness. At least he could do his job in one paragraph.
U
User169
Guest
Just one point, but it's worth making. Whilst he is more or less retired now, he wasn't prior to the recent sanctions. If it weren't for USADA's actions, he'd be competing at the highest level in triathlon.
@dogtired you want substantiation but fewer words. Brilliant contradiction.
WRT to your other comments you appear to have an unhealthy disregard to facts and offering substance to any comments you object to. I have made mine and stated why I have stated them but from you and others I asked PLEASE show why you disagree and not keep repeating the same lame rubbish don’t agree.
You appear to offer a greater level of intelligence and reasoning that me so don’t hide let’s see it instead of you are wrong. I am interested to know why I am wrong WRT your opinion. Have I not stated why I have these comments in my posts but I see no cogent reply from you or the 'it's nonsense' posters.
To answer your comments.
1. I attack a challenger. Have you read what the responses are to me? Lots of words but very little substance including you!
2. I fail to make reference in my back up like all the different historical events, documents etc. What have I seen to read to help me gauge your comments...Nothing? Contradiction or?
3. I have no Q's to answer as I have cogent responses. The ones who have asked Q's I have answered. You obviously have an opinion based on what I don’t know but you have one.
4. I have an unhealthy dislike for DP. I do and I have explained that for IOC and WADA work he has done. You obviously have no idea of his history! If he is that good tell me why and I will respond if I disagree and explain why.
5. Back up what I say! If I make points and explain why and I get nothing cogent back how can I answer no valid comments, seriously have you read anything posted or just reacting to back your pals up here?
6. You mention my comments on UCI reform knowing very little about post 1999 EPO cases! Wow big assumptions considering I have laid out many areas of why issues exist and cross relate them and get back that rubbish and no explanation. I will be happy to take any challenge you have to make on the historical events and data on that or any other EPO matter. You talk a big game and bring nothing to the table. I shall even allow you to set the question and criteria for a debate and we shall exactly what you know and how you can deal with some reasoned argument because so far you have offered nothing. Your call big guy roll it out.
RE Genetic issues you mention genome, are you referring to prokaryotes or eukaryotes, and are you referring to repetitive or no repetitive actions? I am unsure if you know what you are talking about now so I feel I should ask! Do you know what I actually meant in my post or not and how it can be used to activate the response stimulation intended? Genome is a great word but it’s like doping what is it and the fact you question if I mean a PED makes me wonder that you have no idea what I am talking about!
You ask if I actually know what a stimulant is really shows how condescending you like to be. I think it is fair to say that I do and that I am finding your resistance along with many others on here to ridicule comments without substance in reply is testimony to the frustration in achieving stimulation from you and others to gain a credible, coherent and cogent reply.
6 samples ramblings you have offered are clear as day we all know it. That has to be Contradiction Gold right there.
You question my knowledge on 1999 EPO samples case, dislike to D Pound and WADA that I make no cogent points and you come away with that! WOW absolutely amazing. You have both validated my comments and undermined your own in 1 sweep, thanks.
Now it’s clear as day and you disagree with me. Tell us all why it’s clear as day because I cannot see if I am wrong it’s clear?
You make a lot of noise like an empty barrel because it has nothing in it. I have made 2 requests of you I hope you will take up the challenge and offer a stimulated debate but I don’t expect you have the impetus for any serious inquest to what you actually know.
WRT to your other comments you appear to have an unhealthy disregard to facts and offering substance to any comments you object to. I have made mine and stated why I have stated them but from you and others I asked PLEASE show why you disagree and not keep repeating the same lame rubbish don’t agree.
You appear to offer a greater level of intelligence and reasoning that me so don’t hide let’s see it instead of you are wrong. I am interested to know why I am wrong WRT your opinion. Have I not stated why I have these comments in my posts but I see no cogent reply from you or the 'it's nonsense' posters.
To answer your comments.
1. I attack a challenger. Have you read what the responses are to me? Lots of words but very little substance including you!
2. I fail to make reference in my back up like all the different historical events, documents etc. What have I seen to read to help me gauge your comments...Nothing? Contradiction or?
3. I have no Q's to answer as I have cogent responses. The ones who have asked Q's I have answered. You obviously have an opinion based on what I don’t know but you have one.
4. I have an unhealthy dislike for DP. I do and I have explained that for IOC and WADA work he has done. You obviously have no idea of his history! If he is that good tell me why and I will respond if I disagree and explain why.
5. Back up what I say! If I make points and explain why and I get nothing cogent back how can I answer no valid comments, seriously have you read anything posted or just reacting to back your pals up here?
6. You mention my comments on UCI reform knowing very little about post 1999 EPO cases! Wow big assumptions considering I have laid out many areas of why issues exist and cross relate them and get back that rubbish and no explanation. I will be happy to take any challenge you have to make on the historical events and data on that or any other EPO matter. You talk a big game and bring nothing to the table. I shall even allow you to set the question and criteria for a debate and we shall exactly what you know and how you can deal with some reasoned argument because so far you have offered nothing. Your call big guy roll it out.
RE Genetic issues you mention genome, are you referring to prokaryotes or eukaryotes, and are you referring to repetitive or no repetitive actions? I am unsure if you know what you are talking about now so I feel I should ask! Do you know what I actually meant in my post or not and how it can be used to activate the response stimulation intended? Genome is a great word but it’s like doping what is it and the fact you question if I mean a PED makes me wonder that you have no idea what I am talking about!
You ask if I actually know what a stimulant is really shows how condescending you like to be. I think it is fair to say that I do and that I am finding your resistance along with many others on here to ridicule comments without substance in reply is testimony to the frustration in achieving stimulation from you and others to gain a credible, coherent and cogent reply.
6 samples ramblings you have offered are clear as day we all know it. That has to be Contradiction Gold right there.
You question my knowledge on 1999 EPO samples case, dislike to D Pound and WADA that I make no cogent points and you come away with that! WOW absolutely amazing. You have both validated my comments and undermined your own in 1 sweep, thanks.
Now it’s clear as day and you disagree with me. Tell us all why it’s clear as day because I cannot see if I am wrong it’s clear?
You make a lot of noise like an empty barrel because it has nothing in it. I have made 2 requests of you I hope you will take up the challenge and offer a stimulated debate but I don’t expect you have the impetus for any serious inquest to what you actually know.
asterix
Comrade Member
- Location
- Limoges or York
There's a lot to be said for simple, vulgar personal abuse. For starters it doesn't make my head spin so much.
It's definitely someone familiar with the forum.
@Delftse Post I accept your comment about his participation in sanctioned events and that these are no longer being available to him. I would not see him being competative Elite level however. I do believe he would nonetheless receive invitations to compete due to his status and standing had it been available to them.
I shall watch with interest how the Livestrong Tri events shall evolve and see if this shall impact the sanctioned events in the need to attract the Elite athletes, points for rankings or $ for performance!
I shall watch with interest how the Livestrong Tri events shall evolve and see if this shall impact the sanctioned events in the need to attract the Elite athletes, points for rankings or $ for performance!
philipbh
Spectral Cyclist
- Location
- Out the back
So are you saying that there are cyclists, unicyclists and unicellular cyclists?
I'm no Dr Seuss, but what utlity is prokaryotic genome manipulation to enhancing athletic performance of a eukaryote?
U
User169
Guest
Well why don't you just explain a bit more about what you meant by genetic modification. In any event, given that you were presumably talking about genetic modification of human athletes, I'm not entirely sure why prokaryotes would be relevant.
Edit: I see Dr Seuss has made the same point.
