The plot thickens
- Thread starter rich p
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Hont
Guru
- Location
- Bromsgrove
A good state of mind to have IMHO. If everyone was more questioning then it may force the corrupt forces in sport away. Unquestioning support will only end in sports that are rotten from top to bottom.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Oops! Everyone forgets about poor old Carlos.Sastre was the last clean winner of the TDF.
Hont
Guru
- Location
- Bromsgrove
No but it's not good etiquette. 
A massive rider who climbed mountains with the smallest of mountain specialists during the period when EPO was available but undetectable. I think you can work it out for yourself.Greg Collins. said:
I think what you meant to say there was; it does smack of the Michael Jackson child molester investigation which ended in Jackson paying off his accusers.bromptonfb. said:
For what it's worth I believe in Sastre as well.lukesdad. said:
Tim Bennet.
Entirely Average Member
- Location
- S of Kendal
I bow to the nit picking exactitude of my learned friend.
But still seems dodgy.
Sastre was the last clean winner of the TDF.
Was he? I must admit to not knowing a lot about him, I just assumed he was in the Pantani vein. For some reason, the year he won was not a year I followed racing at all.
lukesdad
Guest
Tim Bennet.
Entirely Average Member
- Location
- S of Kendal
Apparently it's only bad form if you leave indents on the green.
And then only if said indents lay between you opponent's ball and the hole.
lukesdad
Guest
Get a copy of overcomming, Crackle. Its quite moving, And you ll see why Carlos could never dope.
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
Eh? When did Cuddles win the Tour then? Did I miss a year?!
I think you coul bracket poor old cuddles there too.
Hont
Guru
- Location
- Bromsgrove
Nit picking exactitude that falls short unfortunately. There were B samples. It was the B samples that they retrospectively tested. The A samples had been tested at the time (1999) so were obviously not available. The reason that the tests were not allowed as evidence were technical or procedural errors at the lab (IIRC - not a scientist I'm afraid).
lukesdad
Guest
Sorry you misunderstood,........In the "poor old vein" for the era, is what I meant, but for the cheats he may well have done.
Hont
Guru
- Location
- Bromsgrove
Can one purchase a Mad Shagging repair fork?
Vidor06
Long term loafer
- Location
- Deepest, darkest Belfast
I have just finished reading Bill Strickland's Tour de Lance and while the book started off as LA hero worship the further I went the more the author and I were questioning Armstrong and his achievements. When basically everyone on the podium with him in his 7 wins is either a cheat or tainted then you have to question how he was so much better than the cheats.
Until I read the book I was very much in the innocent until proven guilty camp but I must say the evidence both from results and witnesses is becoming increasingly damning.
With regards to the 1999 'failed' samples it is my understanding that those samples were supposed to be anonymous and therefore he got the case thrown out of court when they were linked to him as if they knew the samples were his then they must be tainted in some way.
Until I read the book I was very much in the innocent until proven guilty camp but I must say the evidence both from results and witnesses is becoming increasingly damning.
With regards to the 1999 'failed' samples it is my understanding that those samples were supposed to be anonymous and therefore he got the case thrown out of court when they were linked to him as if they knew the samples were his then they must be tainted in some way.
I strongly suspect that, even if LA is shown beyond all doubt to have been a doper, and it's surely just a matter of time, the large majority of his fans and general public will still admire him. His comeback from cancer, his subsequent discovery awareness campaign and the fact that they'll say he was merely levelling the playing field amongst the other dopers.
One striking thing about Armstrong is that despite many of his rivals being found guilty of doping, such as Pantani and Ullrich, he never came out and pilloried those cheating toe-rags for trying to beat him by unfair means which would certainly have been my reaction.
He also never went on record saying how terrible it was that Heras, Landis, Hamilton were to resort to dopage and even went the opposite way of offering them public support. Curious.
One striking thing about Armstrong is that despite many of his rivals being found guilty of doping, such as Pantani and Ullrich, he never came out and pilloried those cheating toe-rags for trying to beat him by unfair means which would certainly have been my reaction.
He also never went on record saying how terrible it was that Heras, Landis, Hamilton were to resort to dopage and even went the opposite way of offering them public support. Curious.
