http://recovoxnews.blogspot.com/2009/01/why-lance-armstrong-is-clean.html
I used to think that Brad Kearns is a smart guy. And I dearly hope Mark Sisson got cited out of context.
(I don’t know where to find the original article so I stole from the Recovox cheater(s).)
You really think its plausible that Lance was the only top pro not doping and managed to lay waste to everyone?
You really buy the story that he trained harder than everone? How does anyone know that?
What of
“I used to think that Brad Kearns is a smart guy. And I dearly hope Mark Sisson got cited out of context.”
did you not understand?
Cheers
Uli
I did not understand the “not”
lol
maybe brad is smart
and is getting PAID =)
What of
“I used to think that Brad Kearns is a smart guy. And I dearly hope Mark Sisson got cited out of context.”
did you not understand?
Cheers
Uli
Despite the title I think uli’s view on the article is pretty clear from his post.
I did not understand the “not”
lol
maybe brad is smart
and is getting PAID =)
What of
“I used to think that Brad Kearns is a smart guy. And I dearly hope Mark Sisson got cited out of context.”
did you not understand?
Cheers
Uli
good point! just sell your soul, no one cares anyway, right? 
This is nice: “Frankie Andreu’s chicken-shit confession of his own doping means little six years after his retirement”
The fact that a teammate and a domestique was doping means nothing… and that Frankie and his wife heard Lance tell his doctors that he had taken PED’s means nothing.
Keep drinking the kool-aid.
Ok, I’ll play along…How do you know he doped? What solid evidence do you have?
this argument is like trying to prove the existence of God. Both sides can go on forever and not get anywhere. Both sides will also call the other names and question their intelligence. Neither side will learn anything or budge from their beliefs, no matter how many cracks in their arguments may be found.
Ok, I’ll play along…How do you know he doped? What solid evidence do you have?
I don’t
We don’t know he doped
We don’t know he didn’t
I just think he probably did because:
all the top pro cyclists dope, and he was a top pro cyclist
there is no test for doping with your own blood, which makes all his negative test results meaingless
his performance throughout the year is consistent with someone doping with his own blood. he was superhuman for only 1 race each year.
lots of people around him have testified that he has doped. the taped phone call that lemond had with that woman is especially damning.
he works with ferrari, and everyone knows why you work with ferrari
Not enough to convict in a court of law in the USA
but enough for me to assume he doped
#1 alone is enough for me =)
Ok, I’ll play along…How do you know he doped? What solid evidence do you have?
The EPO-positive tests from 99 that have been linked to Lance by L’equipe. Rock solid.
I don’t blame the guy for taking drugs as everyone in pro cycling did/does.
I would disagree that this is ‘rock solid’
Ok, I’ll play along…How do you know he doped? What solid evidence do you have?
The EPO-positive tests from 99 that have been linked to Lance by L’equipe. Rock solid.
I don’t blame the guy for taking drugs as everyone in pro cycling did/does.
So basically you’re saying you’ve got a hot cup of jack squat served up at the Assumption Cafe to say that he doped while Lance has over 300 drug tests and the testomony of his doctors, trainers, and others that say he didn’t.
All of the other stuff you mentioned and the alledged EPO test was vetted by an independant arbitrator in the “bonus case” of 2004. In that the arbotrator found not one shred of evidence that Lance doped and ordered Lance to be paid his bonus and fined the company refusing to pay the bonus $2.5 million.
Bob
Absolutely I agree with the court case, that there was insufficient evidence to take any legal action. You don’t take legal action unless you can prove things beyond a reasonable doubt.
There is still “reasonable doubt”
I would disagree with the assertion that all have I have is a cup of jack squat though.
300 drug test, all of which would have come up negative if he was blood doping with his own blood, or EPO. Except 6 of them maybe didn’t come up negative once they had a test for EPO of course.
all of basoss test came up negative too, and ullrich, and lances teammates who have since confessed.
you are out of your fucking mind man
pro cyclists dope
its what they do!
So basically you’re saying you’ve got a hot cup of jack squat served up at the Assumption Cafe to say that he doped while Lance has over 300 drug tests and the testomony of his doctors, trainers, and others that say he didn’t.
All of the other stuff you mentioned and the alledged EPO test was vetted by an independant arbitrator in the “bonus case” of 2004. In that the arbotrator found not one shred of evidence that Lance doped and ordered Lance to be paid his bonus and fined the company refusing to pay the bonus $2.5 million.
Bob
Anyone else catch this “achieve our dreams (to feel happy, lose weight, go to sleep, sport wood, or get stronger and faster athletically”
Is it a dream to sport wood, and is he refering to what I think he is ?
Ummmm, sorry, but the arbitration case held the weight of law. It could have gone to court, but arbitration was decided by both sides. It was heard in front of, I believe, a former judge, but I could be wrong on that part. There was absolutely no evidence of doping found. None.
And, I’m not out of my fucking mind, I simpy don’t go making wild ass assumptions about people or situtation where the facts, the verified facts, stand in the way.
Bob
I like Brad Kearns and I don’t know if Lance Armstrong used performance enhancing drugs. Since he (Lance) says he did not and was never caught doing so I presume he did not.
The reference to Frankie Andreu is offensive to me though as Frankie is a friend and associate of mine- a friend firstly, and a fine one at that. He’s also a good person and a good family man, fine father to his children.
To me Frankie’s admission of using performance enhancing drugs, especially well after the fact, only speaks to his integrity, accountability and actual internal honesty. This dosen’t excuse or “make right” doing it in the first place, but it does speak to his honesty in the grand scheme of things and I respect that. Very much in fact.
While Brad Kearns may not know, care for or respect Frankie the same way I do (perhaps he dosen’t know Frankie very well) I would suggest his choice of words could have been better and still communicated his opinions as effecively while being a better reflection upon himself (Mr. Kearns) as a fine writer and athlete.
I have gone back and forth on this for a long time. Read all the books. Followed the legal cases. He’s a hero of mine, so I want to believe that he’s clean. A naive viewpoint I suppose.
The two things that I keep coming back to are:
why someone like Lance who already had a near death experience would risk his health again. No other pro cyclists (that I can think of anyways) have been to the brink and back the way that he was…so that makes him unique.
in the latter part of his career, why would he risk his reputation and everything that he built (LiveStrong in particular) by doping…it’s an enormous risk to him, his foundation, his supporters and employees…all of them would be at risk if he was caught. It would jeopardize all the positive things he is doing for the cancer community, which seems by all accounts to mean a tremendous amount to him personally. No other cyclist has as much riding on a clean record as he does. Again, he is unique in this regard. However, the cynic would say the fact that he has so much to lose supports the doping claim, or at least explains while he has never been caught.
Absolutely I agree with the court case, that there was insufficient evidence to take any legal action. You don’t take legal action unless you can prove things beyond a reasonable doubt.
Actually, in a civil case such as that one, the threshold is “preponderance of evidence.” That is a very different thing than “reasonable doubt,” which is why so many civil cases find for the plaintiff after a criminal case found for the defendant.
I don’t know if he doped or not (and I’ll probably never know for sure), but he doesn’t pass the “sniff test.” So, I do agree with you.