Board index ‹ Other Sports ‹ Cycling ‹ Cycling

Apparently its his spine.

Who knew he had a backbone?

[John_D]

Haggis Fax wrote:

Apparently its his spine.

Who knew he had a backbone?

Arf.
Slightly disappointed that it's not an issue related to having to go downhill when there's a slight chance of rain.

So.......the Armstrong thing blows up again and USADA are lining up their accusations against him, Bruyneel, Ferrari etc.

What are your thoughts? Here are mine:

1. Surely he must have doped? He was cycling in an era where he was up against people who have proven to have doped. If it is possible that he did it clean then he is a hero.

2. He never tested positive. His statements are very clear on this. Over 500 tests and no positive test. Note that he has never said 'I never doped' just that 'I never tested positive'.

3. What does this achieve? See my post a little while ago and I just wonder what we do if it is proven that he doped. Who do we give the jumper to? Ullrich? Pantani? Bassos? Kloden? These are all proven dopers.

4. What does this achieve? Well is it significant because people should fear losing their legacy if they didn't ride clean whoever they are?

The whole thing is a minefield. Whenever it rears its head again it is so easy for people who don't love cycling to just dismiss cycling as being riddled with dopers.

Surely with all the tests he's had come back negative then that says something? At a time when plenty of other's from his era have been caught how come he hasnt? He cant possibly have been the only one to have had something masking any doping can he? It just doesnt add up to me. I will admit to being biased in believing his innocence but I'm not blind to the facts of cycling in those days.

Haggis Fax wrote:

2. He never tested positive. His statements are very clear on this. Over 500 tests and no positive test. Note that he has never said 'I never doped' just that 'I never tested positive'.

I think you might want to read that statement right to the end

Like OQR above, I am slightly biased, as my avatar suggests, but I find it very difficult to believe that after so many negative tests that he can have been doping.

This to me just seems like a huge witch hunt, and as you rightly say, I'm not sure what they are hoping to achieve. As Armstrong has previously said, many of the testimonies are borne out of spite and shouldn't hold too much weight.

If he is found to be guilty of doping, then it wouldn't tarnish his achievements for me, as many of his competitors were involved in doping also. What it would do is tarnish his reputation given his continued denials over such a long period of time. Which is exactly what makes me think that it isn't true. It's a huge, huge risk for him to his reputation by denying any perceived guilt, rather than just coming clean. Maybe he's in too deep, but I suspect if the allegations were true he'd have just come clean by now, a la Landis.

There are doubts, of course there are, but I still believe he hasn't doped. What will be most interesting though, will be if Hincapie ever releases an autobiography...

Admittedly could have been worded better but I stand by it and I think you know what I mean.

His statements are very carefully worded. I can't recall ever seeing him come out and say 'I have never doped'. Saying 'I never tested positive' is a different statement all together.

Haggis Fax wrote:

Admittedly could have been worded better but I stand by it and I think you know what I mean.

His statements are very carefully worded. I can't recall ever seeing him come out and say 'I have never doped'. Saying 'I never tested positive' is a different statement all together.

The exact words "I have never doped" are within that statement.

Oooops. I stand corrected. I'd seen his response on twitter where he hadn't said that.

I know what you mean about his constant denials. It would be impossible for him to come clean now and almost impossible to prove that he doped.....unless they start digging out old samples.

Haggis Fax wrote:

Oooops. I stand corrected. I'd seen his response on twitter where he hadn't said that.

I know what you mean about his constant denials. It would be impossible for him to come clean now and almost impossible to prove that he doped.....unless they start digging out old samples.

Personally I think it should just be shelved now. So many people are so intent on taking him down that they've lost sight of what they were trying to achieve in the first place. Whether he's guilty of it or not his reputation is already tarnished to be honest, and there's nothing he can do about that. Everyone has their stance on the argument, they come down on one side or the other, and that won't change. Just let it be. There's nothing to be gained out of this now.

Thankfully the sport is as clean as it's ever been now, and the focus should be on keeping it that way.

One of the main problems is that he potentially committed illegal acts while technically being a government employee ( us postal) . That is why things are being taken so far it would seem. However like many have said he was surrounded by people in a sport where doping was encouraged and expected. All the main contenders at the time doing it some of which are still seen as cycling gods and well respected throughout the cycling world.
It is widely felt however that some of his doping has been masked as high up as the uci. Proving it however is another thing. This includes large sums of money which were used ironicallyto help purchase anti doping equipment!
I think the main thing for me though his his arrogance about the issue even going as far when questioned by those looking onto the doping to indicate that due to the amount of work he's done for cancer should mean he is allowed to get away with it.