Tetedelacourse
New Member
- Location
- Rosyth
Noodley said:I was rather worried there as I read your reply to include your signature...."is Chuffy clean? Mmm tastes like babyfood"
What do you reckon the chances are?
- Thread starter Chuffy
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
I have never tested positive.Tetedelacourse said:
wafflycat
New Member
- Location
- middle of Norfolk
You positive about that Chuffers?
OP
OP
Chuffy
Veteran
- Location
- On the banks of the Exe
You can trust me.
Tetedelacourse
New Member
- Location
- Rosyth
wafflycat said:You positive about that Chuffers?
Now, or against any non-validated test that may be devised in the future, against the decaying of the contents of Chuffy's rubber bloomers.
Chuffy, a well known wearer of rubber pants and also a cat lover of repute, has today had his reputation called into question. Pictures of Chuffy in rubber pants and holding a cat in a compromising position were published. The Cat protection league was called in and questioned Chuffy at length. Chuffy did not deny anything but merely confirmed he was holding the cat as he normally does.
In the meantime private cat investigators have dug up a number of deceased cats from Chuffy's garden. Their investigations were inconclusive but questions are being raised about the nature of their burial. They also spoke to neighbours one of whom said "Many's a time I've hear him say - c'mere you mangy moggy, I wanna give you a cuddle - Personally I wouldn't like a cuddle from Chuffy"
A police investigation was started but the officer in charge refused to comment. Meanwhile neighbours are now keeping their cats indoors and there is talk of a petition to get Chuffy to move. THe RSPCA have been informed and intend to talk to Chuffy who still does not deny any wrongdoing and states merely that he likes keeping cats.
In the meantime private cat investigators have dug up a number of deceased cats from Chuffy's garden. Their investigations were inconclusive but questions are being raised about the nature of their burial. They also spoke to neighbours one of whom said "Many's a time I've hear him say - c'mere you mangy moggy, I wanna give you a cuddle - Personally I wouldn't like a cuddle from Chuffy"
A police investigation was started but the officer in charge refused to comment. Meanwhile neighbours are now keeping their cats indoors and there is talk of a petition to get Chuffy to move. THe RSPCA have been informed and intend to talk to Chuffy who still does not deny any wrongdoing and states merely that he likes keeping cats.
Noodley
Guest
Big cheat Jan Ullrich supports Lance's stance. He too is a man of principle.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/oct08/oct04news
"Ullrich also said that he supported Armstrong's decision not to let his doping samples from 1999 be re-tested. "Why should he do something he doesn't have to do? I wouldn't do it either, it is a matter of principle."
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2008/oct08/oct04news
"Ullrich also said that he supported Armstrong's decision not to let his doping samples from 1999 be re-tested. "Why should he do something he doesn't have to do? I wouldn't do it either, it is a matter of principle."
OK, what's the main evidence against Armstrong apart from Anecdotal and guilt by association accusations. It's the 2005 tests right?
Read this interesting discussion on another forum. For me the provenance of the testing is key and lots of stuff I've read casts doubt on the testing, in particualr the testing from that lab.
Read this interesting discussion on another forum. For me the provenance of the testing is key and lots of stuff I've read casts doubt on the testing, in particualr the testing from that lab.
Noodley
Guest
Crackle, you are falling into the trap: 
Here's how it goes:
"I have never tested positive."
"I can't understand how I failed the test, I have never taken any drugs."
"The test I failed was flawed."
"I got a TUE for that failed test, albeit retrospectively."
"Well, these scientists know nothing."
"Everyone hates me, nobody likes me."
"I am a victim."
"My body is different to everyone else in the world."
Here's how it goes:
"I have never tested positive."
"I can't understand how I failed the test, I have never taken any drugs."
"The test I failed was flawed."
"I got a TUE for that failed test, albeit retrospectively."
"Well, these scientists know nothing."
"Everyone hates me, nobody likes me."
"I am a victim."
"My body is different to everyone else in the world."
Noodley said:Crackle, you are falling into the trap:
Here's how it goes:
"I have never tested positive."
"I can't understand how I failed the test, I have never taken any drugs."
"The test I failed was flawed."
"I got a TUE for that failed test, albeit retrospectively."
"Well, these scientists know nothing."
"Everyone hates me, nobody likes me."
"I am a victim."
"My body is different to everyone else in the world."
Nay lad. I'm not as daft as I'm cotton looking. I'm just playing the game from the other direction.Noodley said:But it doesn't work from the other direction
See your making me get serious again now
. There has been a number of athletes cleared because of testing mistakes. If you want chapter and verse I'll have to go off and search because they weren't all cyclists, one was a triathlete and it was his clearance that sent them back down testing the test route. False positives and wot-not.Does that last link I provided, which seems genuine, not alarm you. Two different labs got two different results.
Besides which we are not talking about all cyclists here just Armstrong who's rather unique in sporting terms. As a for instance, has there ever been any studies done into the physiological changes in the body of an athlete who's been through some fairly aggresive chemo? I can't find any but I'd be quite surprised to find it had no effect.
You know I still struggle to believe that someone who came pretty close to death would take a substance which would encourage and accelarate possible tumour growth, whilst at the same time promoting the fight against cancer. The duplicity of that would not just be staggering but monumental. That's not to say it couldn't happen but I require the evidence for that to be beyond doubt and it isn't.
