Jump to content

It's Race Day... Y'all.


Recommended Posts

Pocono....  TNT @ 1:00 EDT... 500 miles of YeeeHaaaw! biggrin.gif

Yer livin' in the wrong part of the country, pardner! Y'all need a Stetson, a dusty bandana and a herd of cattle to drive for a "YeeeHaaaw" to have real meanin'!! tongue.giflaugh.gifbiggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yer livin' in the wrong part of the country, pardner! Y'all need a Stetson, a dusty bandana and a herd of cattle to drive for a "YeeeHaaaw" to have real meanin'!!

Looky here now...

700 horses tied to a wee bit o'rubber and a wheel t'hang onto while yer goin' hell bent fer leather, 500 miles 'round a paved track, rubbing fenders and bumpers with 42 other guys that'd just as soon see you hit that wall that's hangin'out just inches off your right fender..... ?

That there is some gen-yew-ine YeeeeeHaaaaaw! biggrin.gifohmy.gifbiggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Starman

Check out F1 from Hockenheim today. The first lap was WILD! Not exactly the arrogant procession F1 has been tagged with of late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sitting here at work with my 6 hat on...big smile..nice to see MM finish strongly..hope to see him bcak in the 6 next year..JR had a good day today with Busch/Martin/Edwards in the top 4...gotta hand it to Edwards..that boy can drive..started from the back of the pack, Impressive...

Git 'er done!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...

I knew that Malcolm, it's sickening. He was the most self-righteous **bleep** out there when questioned about performance enhancement.

I hate the fact that they have to do it to succeed. I say, let 'em take anything they want! It'll tar them all with the same brush and at least we'd know who was actually the best!

The upshot would be that our kids would get to see them get the sponsorship deals they so crave that would actually reflect their value to society :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not defending Lance Armstrong. I abhor that athletes are doping to gain an edge. But if the anti-doping folks were prosecutors in the justice system, they'd have their case tossed out on its ass for a failure to provide due process. The sporting body had a testing program in place during the competitions and Armstrong passed every one of those tests. This is not unlike some guy passing a roadside breathalyzer test but the cops keep going back and grilling his fellow party goers until they find someone who will testify that he'd just skated by the test and was in fact intoxicated when he was tested. Tough luck folks, he passed your legal test at the time. If it isn't good enough, fix the test.

It would be foolish to assume that Armstrong was the only top runner in those tours that was doping to win. If Armstrong has lost his tour victories, who goes on a similar witch hunt for the 2nd place guys and so on and so on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There simply isn’t any real evidence to support the continuing allegations, only innuendo?

Armstrong completed several rounds of cytotoxic chemo-therapy. The treatment he received certainly would have included corticosteroids, not the anabolic type. When the various therapeutic agents were introduced into his body in conjunction with an incredibly rigid dietary regime and exercise program, a certain degree of ‘super humanization’ of his cells may have followed and could provide the justification for his performance advantage? Real science anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not defending Lance Armstrong. I abhor that athletes are doping to gain an edge. But if the anti-doping folks were prosecutors in the justice system, they'd have their case tossed out on its ass for a failure to provide due process. The sporting body had a testing program in place during the competitions and Armstrong passed every one of those tests. This is not unlike some guy passing a roadside breathalyzer test but the cops keep going back and grilling his fellow party goers until they find someone who will testify that he'd just skated by the test and was in fact intoxicated when he was tested. Tough luck folks, he passed your legal test at the time. If it isn't good enough, fix the test.

It would be foolish to assume that Armstrong was the only top runner in those tours that was doping to win. If Armstrong has lost his tour victories, who goes on a similar witch hunt for the 2nd place guys and so on and so on?

Condisering the second place finisher in three of the Tours is an admitted drug cheat I am not sure who you give the title too. JO nailed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Condisering the second place finisher in three of the Tours is an admitted drug cheat I am not sure who you give the title too. JO nailed it.

Well there you go. If only the financial watchdogs were half as diligent at going after the Wall St. cheaters as the USADA is at chasing the athletes. :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

"If only the financial watchdogs were half as diligent at going after the Wall St. cheaters as the USADA is at chasing the athletes"

Spot on JO! The real question might be; why aren't the financial watchdogs pursuing real criminals? Is society so dumbed-down today that we're easily distracted from substance in favour of filler?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If only the financial watchdogs were half as diligent at going after the Wall St. cheaters as the USADA is at chasing the athletes"

Is society so dumbed-down today that we're easily distracted from substance in favour of filler?

Y'all think :Scratch-Head:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course they don't, but apparently you'd have to go back to the 23rd place rider from the year of Armstrong's last win to find a rider who hasn't been either tested positive for, or hasn't admitted to, doping to win. It's a sad state of affairs for the entire sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is the proof? We still haven't seen and difinitive proof only hearsay.

With many of the respondents being directly involved with Armstrong in these issues, much of the evidence could hardly be called "hearsay", in which a person "says" information they "heard", rather than "experienced" (very much like many of the "truisms" we have in aviation).

Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience.

Many of the drugs and processes involved with sports doping are not very good for you (...has anyone even suggested that Armstrong's own trademark cancer might have been caused by years of doping??).

Some might ask (and have) that, if these athletes want to hurt themselves for fame and fortune, then why would we stand in their way? Simplistically, I might agree, but for the millions of hopeful athletes (many of them children) out there who would follow in their footsteps of partaking in dangerous practices with only a slight hope of success, thus causing themselves lifelong harm for an unachievable dream. That, in my opinion, is the most dangerous aspect of allowing dopers to succeed.

How can a parent encourage a child to follow in the footsteps of an athlete knowing that the only way to achieve such success is to poison that child? Has our drive for fame and fortune caused us to stoop that low?

For some to suggest that it was ok for Armstrong to cheat because everyone right behind him was cheating makes me shake my head. Literally.

Often these cheaters, like many criminals, are ahead of the technology that can catch them today. The only thing that can possibly deter those that might cheat is continuing and definitive proof that authorities will continue to test and that they will be exposed and stripped of their honours and live the rest of their lives in shame.

But it is not the Ben Johnson's out there that should take the biggest hit... it is the dope dealers that push them to partake that should pay the highest price. And it would appear, by testimony of people directly involved, that Armstrong is the worst of both sides of the equation. His insistence that they dope was not to help them, it was so they could provide strategic assistance to him during the course of the race so he could win.

I am a strong supporter of Livestrong and I believe it should survive, and will, without Armstrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I do not agree with stripping the titles because, at the time, he was tested as per the international standards and found to be clear of any performance enhancing drugs or other forrms of doping. In other words he played by the rules of the game and won. Now several years later he is being challenged on a different set of rules where apparently concrete proof is not needed.

Perhaps we should find him guilty of not warning people of impending earthquakes too.

The world is falling apart for your entertainment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...