Perhaps there is a difference between completely unsubstantiated accusations vs real evidence, perhaps.

---

----
Don't hold back

Well, swimfan, for all the heat you sometimes (justifiably) take on this forum, in this case your cynicism appears to have been well founded.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Well, is he still your hero? ;)

No, I'm really disappointed.

---

----
Don't hold back

I'm going to wait for the 'B' sample test results before coming to a final conclusion ... but still it sux.

I say the right things in a very wrong way. There was a reason, I stopped posting right after I accused him doping.

I am not going to continue this argument, I wish I was WRONG though.

PS: Call doper, junkie or anything you want, but been there done that.

Often times I don't care for the tenor of your posts- but that is one person's opinion. That in no way suggests you should ever stop posting. Ever.

Keep posting.

State your opinion from the hip (ever notice how many views your posts get? People want to see what you say...)

Play by the rules (which you do 99.9% of the time).

Don't back down. People like you add something tangiable to the forum and that is important.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Don't worry, I love you too Tom :)

Cynicism is another word for truth. Kind of the opposite of "faith" (i.e., something you know isn't true but believe anyway...)... you don't want it to be true but deep down you know it is.

Here's what we need to reorganize cycling: some HONESTY! Here are my suggested team entrants for the 2007 Le Tour:

1. Team Miami Vice. Specialty = stimulants. Lead rider = XXX.

2. Team Amgen. Specialty = gene manipulation. Lead rider = NEWCOMER.

3. Team Ferrari / Italian Medical Federation. Specialty = EPO. Lead rider = XXX.

4. Team Tappas / Spanish Pharmaceutical Grouppe. Specialty = Blood Doping. Lead Riders = XXX, XXX.

5. Team Trump. Specialty = Steroids. Lead rider = XXX.

6. Team Major League Baseball. Specialty = HGH. Lead rider = XXX.

Rules: Each team may only provide their riders with the Specialty Boost listed above. Combined teams will administer 24 hour drug tests (via implanted microchips in liver broadcasting live WIFI results).

All riders must ride on stock steel frame bikes adjusting for height/weight only.

Finally, a fair tour DAY france, yeah baby!

<sigh>

Do you feel better about yourself after this little thread you created?

---

______________________________________________________

Proud Founder of the Jamis Mafia- Daring to be different.

You don't like me because I said that thing about fatties right? ;)
How much you weight?

Seriously? no, I don't give a crap about Floyd. I just don't like him. but this is sad for US cyclism, I am sad he is more known as an American cyclist rather than a Phonak cyclist.

Now this thing is over there is no need to discuss.

I just think it speaks volumes about someone when they have to start a thread announcing they were right about something.

---

______________________________________________________

Proud Founder of the Jamis Mafia- Daring to be different.

Do YOU still think that his performance was amazing?

I do.

If he took EPO or a stimulant on his winning stage then no, it wasn't amazing at all. The proven boost you get from something like that is approximately = to his winning margin.

If he took something which provided a long-term benefit (steroids? hgh?) early-on then yeah, it was still an amazing ride, but he wouldn't have even been close to getting the yellow jersey WITHOUT the drugs, probably.

But, if ALL the riders have periodically been doping, then it was still AMAZING to a degree. Who knows.

Personally, I hope they were all doping so that it least it was a semi-fair race. It would be the greatest shame if say, 9 of 10 riders doped but one didn't.... who knows, maybe Cadel Evans or Levi Leipheimer was the real winner, ha !!!!

You were bashed for calling someone out by name and without proof as being a doper. Because the facts now seem to support your accusation, it still doesn't make your accusation ok.

What if I accused you of being a pedophile, by name and without proof, on a public forum such as this?

If he took EPO or a stimulant on his winning stage then no, it wasn't amazing at all. The proven boost you get from something like that is approximately = to his winning margin.


He tested positive for elevated testoterone. NOT EPO.

I think the difference is that in this case it appears by any common sense measurement that the vast majority of professional cyclists take performance enhancing drugs.

Thus, swimfan was bucking the Floyd Bandwagon (which I, admittedly, had hopped on, and I still admire Floyd a great deal despite this) to point out what in retrospect might be deemed obvious -- the greatest comeback ride in the modern era (apparently) wasn't a comeback at all. It was a drug-fueled revenge ride by a man with absolutely nothing to lose and tons of sponsorship cash to gain.*

Most people aren't child rapists. But perhaps most professional bikers are dopers. BIG difference, I think.

*subject to B test, but again for the sake of cycling it's probably best that the B test is also positive, else people lose faith in the testing system.

Well... I didn't say I love you....

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

i've never been a big fan of floyd, i want to like him but every time i look at his face i just get reminded of white trash.. shave that thing on your chin floyd!

and more importantly, questioned the grandeur of his accomplishments immediately after stage 17 *and posted about it*

but, cycling gets hit hard sure, if bonds took up cycling...

---

-------

Almost died in a car crash. Currently in rehab.

While your rationalization is reasonable, it won't keep you from getting sued and having Dan testify against you.

"Forum rule concerning posts on athletes and doping

unless you want to get:

1. the spit sued out of you, and
2. me testifying at the trial against you, then...

please, no accusing athletes of doping if you have no solid evidence. you can talk about jan and ivan and the rest of them, because others have presented evidence against them. but when you say, "[somebody] is certainly doping, that's just obvious," then you cross over an important line.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman"

Fair enough, and I respect Slowman's rules, although a careful reading showed my post didn't accuse anyone of doping -- it just said that certain riders could ride on behalf of a drug-sponsored team IN THE FUTURE.

But, I deleted the names in my post. Certainly I don't want to offend anyone... :-)

swimfan wrote: "And you guys bashed me for this...the day after his "victiry" I said he doped!"

I wasn't suggesting you ran afoul of Dan's rules. I was explaining to swimfan that the reason everyone bashed him was because he ran afoul of Dan's forum rules (and by most accounts, basic ethical considerations most humans feel appropriate - i.e. you don't accuse someone by name in a public forum of an act or behavior for which you have no proof).

HILARIOUS! LOL!

"What if I accused you of being a pedophile, by name and without proof, on a public forum such as this?"

She told me she was 18!