watch me fall Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Still lost. You just want someone to argue with you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 You just want someone to argue with you.This is true, but I really don't get it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Try this: Farv sux, Armstrong can still compete. He recovered from a broken collarbone in less than 30 days. 40 y.o.? Shit, most 20-30 y.o. pros can't do that. We shall see. Tour starts on Sat. The itt will be a decent barometer for the rest of the race, but a lot can happen once the mt. stages begin. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 For the record, Armstrong's still 37, and Favre is still 39. I originally associated Favre and Armstrong because they're two guys who really should have stayed retired, in my opinion. Both still have enough skills to compete, but both have managed to tarnish their own legacies in their respective sports, and haven't exactly been welcomed back with open arms (despite what the media want you to believe). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I am a zombie...ddduuuu.....mmmmmmm....Lance Armstrong is a good. he is good....ddduuuuu...mmmmmmm...so is Brett Favre....duhhh...mmmmm ah, the media, blame it on the media. I cannot take ownership of my thought, the media did it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mpolak21 Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I thought he prepared by doing lots of HGH, steroids, and epogen Yes! This was my first thought when I saw this thread, and I am happy someone else went the smartass route. --Mike Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Why do you hate Wilco? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
watch me fall Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Today he apparently twittered about Jenny Lewis (via my sister in law, I didnt see it myself). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Completely absurd. Your wild claims about the 2008 Tour riders are completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, except the desperate fingerpointing accusations of the utterly unreliable Bernard Kohl, trying to minimize his admitted drugging by claiming that "everybody does it." You're the delusional one, living in a fantasyland where by watching tv carefully you're able to successfully obtain positive drug tests for 200-some cyclists. Your opinions of Armstrong's success are more of the same -- speculation by the ignorant. The fact that you'd bring up his personal life as evidence that he cheated his way to 7 Tour de France victories just shows your claims are rooted in your vindictive dislike of the man rather than any science. BTW, I've followed Armstrong's career before he was even a full time cyclist, and was just a tri geek. I don't watch much on TV, I'm to busy actually doing it. Having participated in high end athletics for 30 years, and raced bicycles for more than 20, one doesn't need to be a genius to survey the landscape of sportand see PED usage is the norm in upper level professional athletics. There's a reason recent most grand tour winners have been enshrouded in controversy. Not evento forget that this usage is repeatedly proven to be systematic through scandals like Puerto, Kohl's revelations, the recent Quickstep shoe that fell, every Armstrong domestique being disgraced by drug scandals (Heras, Landis, Hamilton, Andreau), sworn testimony as to things that were done or said, and didn'tBetsy Andreau just win some court settlement on the very topic..? Plus even in this country there has been systematic doping of national team riders. It has nothing to do with vindictive dislike. Those are the silly words of someone with nothing to say. The debunking of mythologies does nothing to tarnishathletic achievement. Sport is hard enough without needing it to be hyperbolic or rooted in some unobtainable genetic achievement, that simply sets standards unobtainable without PED usage. It simply sets a standard that kids, and young adults to follow need to take health risks to even think aboutchasing their dreams. Now if you'll excuse me I'm off to win a national title but I need pancakes first. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Completely absurd. Your wild claims about the 2008 Tour riders are completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, except the desperate fingerpointing accusations of the utterly unreliable Bernard Kohl, trying to minimize his admitted drugging by claiming that "everybody does it." You're the delusional one, living in a fantasyland where by watching tv carefully you're able to successfully obtain positive drug tests for 200-some cyclists. Your opinions of Armstrong's success are more of the same -- speculation by the ignorant. The fact that you'd bring up his personal life as evidence that he cheated his way to 7 Tour de France victories just shows your claims are rooted in your vindictive dislike of the man rather than any science.What flavor is that Kool-Aid? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
magcat Posted July 3, 2009 Author Share Posted July 3, 2009 Now if you'll excuse me I'm off to win a national title but I need pancakes first. I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shakespeare In The Alley Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Completely absurd. Your wild claims about the 2008 Tour riders are completely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, except the desperate fingerpointing accusations of the utterly unreliable Bernard Kohl, trying to minimize his admitted drugging by claiming that "everybody does it." You're the delusional one, living in a fantasyland where by watching tv carefully you're able to successfully obtain positive drug tests for 200-some cyclists. Your opinions of Armstrong's success are more of the same -- speculation by the ignorant. The fact that you'd bring up his personal life as evidence that he cheated his way to 7 Tour de France victories just shows your claims are rooted in your vindictive dislike of the man rather than any science.Good lord, dude. I'm surprised you were able to step off of Lance's dick long enough to post these comments. The guy is a success story when you consider the cancer and such. But I think it's pretty obvious that he used some steroids. Be realistic, man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's. while it's true old guys do test positive each year, for the most part training time and intensity trump the need for drugs on thus level. There's simply not enough on the line to make it a worthwhile endeavor. It's not like some 45 year old is gettingsigned to a uci team. A friend if mine did get bumped up at the worlds last year, fro 4th to 3rd, because one of the podium finishers tested positive. I was the number one ranked rider I'm my category last year, and there are enough people here who know me (for real) that I don't really need to blow smoke up my own ass. Still being the fastest old guy on a given day is different than being a 20 year old cat 1 trying to make it to the next level. I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's. while it's true old guys do test positive each year, for the most part training time and intensity trump the need for drugs on thus level. There's simply not enough on the line to make it a worthwhile endeavor. It's not like some 45 year old is gettingsigned to a uci team. A friend if mine did get bumped up at the worlds last year, fro 4th to 3rd, because one of the podium finishers tested positive. I was the number one ranked rider I'm my category last year, and there are enough people here who know me (for real) that I don't really need to blow smoke up my own ass. Still being the fastest old guy on a given day is different than being a 20 year old cat 1 trying to make it to the next level. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Typos by iPhone with love from Steve Jobs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
magcat Posted July 3, 2009 Author Share Posted July 3, 2009 I was the number one ranked rider I'm my category last year, and there are enough people here who know me (for real) that I don't really need to blow smoke up my own ass. Still being the fastest old guy on a given day is different than being a 20 year old cat 1 trying to make it to the next level. So to paraphrase: everybody who's faster than you is doped up on EPO, and you're completely above suspicion. Got it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Is that what I said? Spawn on the infield of Churchill Downs Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 So to paraphrase: everybody who's faster than you is doped up on EPO, and you're completely above suspicion. Got it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 That's still the best of the carlos pics to my mind. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I imagine the only thing you're going to win a national title for is blowing smoke up your own ass. But if you *did* win a national title, by your own logic that is proof that you must be doping, since by your own statements anyone who succeeds at athletics at any significant level is obviously using PED's. what's your problem? maybe find some facts to back up why you don't think there's doping in the sport and post about that instead of being whatever you want to call this? and ummmm, yeah spawn's dad is a cyclist and will be racing for a national title tomorrow. and i'm pretty sure what he said was that for a lot of athletes it isn't worth it, but one shouldn't be so naive about the fact that it happens. calm down. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 who are you again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 who are you again? just some hot chic... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 You should calm down and quit blowing smoke up your own ass. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 You should calm down and quit blowing smoke up your own ass. Why do you hate wilco (fans)? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Al.Ducts Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I should really reconsider that decision to buy a bicycle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.