LeMond cares nothing for American cycling, just himself...

The U.S. economy is in the dumps.

Now, millions of are tax dollars are going to be spent by a bunch of politicians trying to make a name for themselves on the word of a cheater, a doper, perjured himself in court, took vast amounts of money from people who believed in him, and sold a book of nothing but lies. If our tax dollars are going to be spent investigating sports, how about starting with prosecuting Floyd Landis for perjury, and requiring him to return all the donations based on his lies. Then there's LeMond, who was visciously attacked by Landis in his court battle, now holding hands with Landis trying to bring Lance down. Both men are just sad memories of the past. Once they were both heroes to me, now they just seem like vengeful, sore losers. Regardless of the outcome of all this, it will damage American cycling, and it is apparent that neither Landis or LeMond care nothing for American cycling, just themselves. Lastly, Armstrong has NEVER failed a doping control. LeMond bases his claims of Lance doping on his performances during his 7 year reign on the Tour, while LeMond had similar performances at a time when there was much less testing, so who's to say he didn't dope as well. Spend my tax dollars on stimulating this economy and getting the enormous amount of people who lost their jobs back to work, and let cycling's governing body deal with their rules and regulations, that's their job, not the U.S. governments. This all smells of a "witch hunt" as Lance warned, with Floyd Landis, the least credible cyclist in history identifying the witches. We also can't forget this isn't just about Lance.

Landis accused practically all of America's greatest cyclist, including George Hincapie of doping, but you don't hear LeMond tooting that horn because George wasn't more successful in the Tour than LeMond. It's Lance's name that makes the headlines, but this investigation encompasses all who road for U.S. Postal. What a prudent use of our tax dollars during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Just another example of what a wonderful job our government is doing to restore our economy.

http://zfacts.com/p/461.html


We are $13.5 Trillion in debt in this country. Why are we wasting a single penny on something like this?. What a waste of my taxpayer dollars. Is there a single intelligent person in any bureau of our government?.

Its an effin disgrace.

WARNING:
Angry fanboy crushed by fallen idol!!!!!


Jamie
(I can use my real name and not heap shit on anyone anonymously)

My work computer just caught fire. Sh1t dude, DRINK DECAFF!


Hang on though, that was fun. Ignore my previous advice and tell us more.
( pulls up chair, flicks on kettle, grabs packet of digestives )

Its Ulli I feel sorry for, all those second places because the postal team were at it

Fixed it for you. No way Jan was clean, but he was a bungling amateur at juicing compared to Lance.

just as much testing back in the day just not as sophisticated and they used different drugs mostly steriods or HGH.The sport is slowly being cleaned up for the good but there will always be sombody that cheats.Just makes me laugh the public only think its cycling and not some of the other top sports

Two points for the OP to consider:

1) if you'd bothered to check the forum name you might have guessed from the tld that this is not an American forum. There are a lot of American users on here - as there are from a number of countries all around the world - who contribute actively and whose opinions are all very welcome. But, for the most part we couldn't give a fig about what the US Govt decides to waste its money on, we're more concerned about what our own is up to.

2) Most posters on here are more interested in the actual bike itself, rather than the random human whose arse happens to be on it. Sure, we all have favourite riders, but you're unlikely to whip up a firestorm of debate about Lance-did-he-or-didn't-he on here, because it simply isn't a topic of major interest. There are plenty of other fora all over the web dedicated to races and racers, so stick with them.

More generally, I've read on a few other places that LA's legal team are working with a Texan lobbying firm called Public Strategies, who they've used during previous actions, such as the Lemond and SCA cases. One of PS's alleged tricks is to pay interns (typically students) minimum wage to trawl the web for relevant information. This includes registering on various fora and posting stuff either in support of LA or slating other riders, most notably Lemond and Landis. They're especially active on the cyclingnews.com fora, especially The Clinic which is dedicated to discussing doping issues, and if you're interested then there's discussion here:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread ... strategies

Bottom line - this post fits the profile, as does the one below it. My suggestion to the mods would be to merge the two, and probably any thing else the OP posts. I doubt there will be much of a reaction on this forum so I don't expect the OP will spend much time here. Worth keeping an eye on, though, and banning if/when they become too much of a whiny PITA WUM.

Cheers, Gareth.

It's the 'different drugs' aspect that's changed the game though. Of course there was doping back then, all sorts of nefarious stuff to get you to the finish line and start the next day. But, as Hinault said, "You can't turn a carthorse into a racehorse", meaning that GT contenders were born, not made. The lists of winners for all three GTs up to the late 80s bear this out.

Blood manipulation, most famously via EPO and transfusion, changed that completely. Does anyone really think that Bjarne "Mr 60%" Riis would have been a genuine GT contender in the 80's, even if the superstars like Hinault, Fignon, Lemond etc had been missing? Yet he can afford to drop back 10 places and scope out the opposition at the bottom of the climb to Hautacam, then drop them all for dead including the likes of Indurain, Chiapucci, Pantani etc., with a turn of speed that Cancellara would've been proud of in Paris-Roubaix. Or how about the stage up to Sestriere in the 1999 Tour where the select group are braking, crit-style, going to corners while climbing?! Or the frankly breathtaking drop in times for the ascent of l'Alpe d'Huez since the famous Hinault-Lemond duel in 1986?

That's just three famous examples and I don't want to get bogged down in details of all the the rest in the 90's and 00's. My point is that not all doping is equal and so the old "They've always been at it, all of them" shouldn't be generalised to dismiss the EPO-era and attempt to make it marginally more acceptable. How many times did you read about young neo-pro racers dying of cardiac arrests in their sleep prior to the early 90's? The potential rewards of EPO use are enormous and clear to all, so much so that impressionable athletes are pressured into accepting huge health risks without being fully (and in some case, probably not even remotely) aware of the dangers.

If LA did indeed dope in the matter that has been suggested in order to win, then he created an extremely dangerous example for younger riders. If you find yourself thinking "If I take enough stuff, then I can win anything", it can very quickly turn itself around to "I need to take all this stuff in order to stand a chance of winning". If you have too many carthorses under the illusion that they can turn into racehorses after all, then the knacker's yard is in for a very busy time.

My tuppence worth anyhow. I know I've glossed over Tom Simpson and Fignon's cancer to name just two, but they're not really relevant to the current issue surrounding LA/US Postal etc.

Cheers, Gareth.

I refuse to believe it.