Luckily the folks on their high horse are just a few vocal minority!! I would gladly do any race Lance was in. As I have said before, if I were in his shoes, and ALL the others that raced before, during and STILL, I might have done the same thing.

Do not let the few distract you from the bigger picture. This is the tactic I see on TV all the time. The few think if they are vocal enough, and get TV time, they can get their opinion forced onto the rest of us.
If someone does not like what a business is doing, just go to another business. No need to try and destroy it for ones ego or what ever reason drives them.


Dave, this was your 1st post on the topic today ^, so can you honestly say you were simply trying to add merit to the discussion, because to me it comes across as simply stirring the pot. If that's your style of posting, great, and I hope you dont think I'm "attacking" you. I asked you before who are all these people that are attacking in this thread? I've said that many on here simply have brought up some legit concerns, just as others have countered those concerns. I think kny said it best when he said Rev3 will likely be fine in the end with all the potential negative with this move, but I dont think they are immune from criticism. I know a lot of people respect Rev3 and what they do for the triathlon community, and I think Rev3 just wants to make it known that this is more of a cancer awareness opportunity than a "race" setting. I just think if it's that, then let's have that from the beginning, surprised they waited so late in the game for this race, to now make it the event they seem to want to push now.

I'll bite. I know I shouldn't, but I'm sick of tagging SavageMan photos and the break is welcome.

If you are not trolling, a claim of which I am skeptical, then there is certainly little in the way of debate occurring. And, you don't seem to respond to questions posed of you, such as who I attacked other than Lance, but here goes. Let's debate:

You state we have a difference of opinion. I state that my opinion is accepted fact, but I will step back from that claim and allow you to provide the reasoning behind your opinion, whatever it is.

My opinion is that Lance is a lie, a bully, and a cheat. My basis for that opinion is as follows:
1 - Lance cheated. USADA has opened a case for this and Lance chose to not contest it. He is thus sanctioned. He is thus a cheat. It is intellectually dishonest to have an opinion that differs on this account.
2 - Lance lied. Lance has said time and time again publicly and to people's faces that he never doped. Given 1 above, he is a liar.
3 - Lance bullied. Without rehashing the infinite stories of Lemond, Andreu, Landis, McIlvaine, Andersen, Krimmage, Bassones, Simeoni, I will base my opinion on the numerous accounts of these folks and others that illustrate Lance's tendency to bully those who speak out against either LA or doping in cycling.

You never actually state your opinion, but rather just claim that our opinions differ. It is hard to debate someone who does not make their opinion clear, so I will assume simply that your opinion is that you believe the opposite: that Lance did not cheat, did not lie, and did not bully.

So, h20fun, if you are not simply trolling but are really here to debate your difference in opinion, please provide the basis behind your opinion. And, because you never responded to my inquiry as to whom I attacked that put my race in a bad name, please also respond to that as well.

Thank you,
Kyle Yost
SavageMan Triathlon Founder and Race Director

I just do not agree with your opinions. I do not see you have facts to support them, and I do not have any facts to say you are wrong.

I am just saying you can make your point on your opinion without the personal attacks, but since you do not see you say or post anything that are attacks, all I can do is leave it that we have a different opinion and view on how you post. Not saying you are wrong, but, just offering why is it worth so much negative energy on your part. Sure would rather see stuff on your race and how you are going to do well at it. But again, just my opinion.

Just throwing out the troll comments is an attack, but again, just my opinion and experience in life. Have you ever seen me post a comment like this about anyone on ST? Nope, and never will.

.

Kyle...READ

NOOOO! I do have facts to support my opinion. Don't say that I do not.
1 - Lance is currently sanctioned for being a cheat.
2 - Lance has stated that he never cheated. Here, read this one. http://www.bicycling.com/...e-armstrongs-endgame
3 - Lance has bullied. Here's a starter. http://www.bicycling.com/...ong-hunts-down-rider

So, you can't just say I don't have facts and you don't have facts so our opinions are on equal ground. It doesn't work that way.

Come on, let's debate. You said you wanted to debate.

Ok, my bad. I'm off. Debate over. Back to work. Nothing to see here....nothing to see here....

Kyle...READ

Most of us can understand differences in religion or political opinion - but whatever anyone's opinion is on Lance the opposite is incomprehensible.

I get that the race isn't sanctioned - so allowing Lance to race isn't against the rules. But I don't think the RD is honoring the ban - he is weaseling a way around it - and anyone who races is supporting that action.

It just doesn't seem right. In most sports banned is banned, and those that aren't banned don't go racing against those that are - for any reason. IIRC back in the amature days of track and field (at least in the UK where i was in the 70s) racing against a banned athlete was enough to get a ban.......

Now that this race has become an non-sanctioned USAT event, I hope that the rules of how the race will be governed will be announced. If they have been established, please correct me, but at this point looking on their website, I'm still trying to find out what the rulebook is they will follow for this unsanctioned race. The MACTC collegiate conference will be holding it's conference championship there, so the rules that are to be used is very important for the team that I will be sending to this race.

Except there is a clear answer to this issue.

Lance cant race in a USAT sanctioned race because he's sanctioned for doping. This race that was an sanctioned USAT event, now in order to get Lance to race went away from the sanctioning. I think that's about the most factual you can get within these events. Now because of that, Rev3 and Lance are not doing anything wrong.

Now that this race has become an non-sanctioned USAT event, I hope that the rules of how the race will be governed will be announced. If they have been established, please correct me, but at this point looking on their website, I'm still trying to find out what the rulebook is they will follow for this unsanctioned race. The MACTC collegiate conference will be holding it's conference championship there, so the rules that are to be used is very important for the team that I will be sending to this race.

I am waiting on word from our conference director to determine the rules of the race. Our conference has worked very closely with the RD and we are very thankful for allowing all the racers to be treated like a "pro" and race at a reduced rate in order to use this event as our conference championship.

For that I'm happy with, I just dont personally agree with the decision to go with an non-sanctioned race this late in the process. If this was an non-sanctioned race 8 months ago, I'd have not as big an issue (I highly doubt the conference would have choosen this event, or atleast I would not have voted on an non usat sanctioned event for the conference champs), but this late in the game, seems just odd. But we will adjust, go out there and give it our best, and cheer on everyone for the great race and cause they are doing.

Now that the race is no longer sanctioned that also means it will not be officiated. Are you cool with your athletes competing in a championship race that will be run on the honor system when it comes to drafting and other possible advantages?

Now that the race is no longer sanctioned that also means it will not be officiated. Are you cool with your athletes competing in a championship race that will be run on the honor system when it comes to drafting and other possible advantages?

It will be officiated. It will be run according to USAT rulebook. As a participant you won't notice a thing, unless perhaps as a participant or volunteer, something should occur such that you require the insurance policy.

What is interesting is how Rev3/USAT will handle the use of USAT-certified and trained officials for a non USAT race. In my opinion it is poor form by Rev3 to request the time and skills of the officials trained and certified by USAT while not using USAT sanctioning for the race, but it is also poor form of USAT to prohibit these people who are effectively volunteers from working utilizing their skills outside of the USAT box. Don't believe for a second that these conversations and debates aren't occurring right now. USAT is in a bad situation. On principle they should prohibit their officials from officiating, but in practice they realistically cannot.

Interesting stuff.

Maui5150 wrote:

Integrity is not something that waivers. It is there or it isn't. When people start making exceptions for a perceived better good, they open up a slippery slope. And sorry, in this case I don't see a few thousand more making a difference, especially given what could be possible outside of this if it really mattered.

Nice to see principles matter