View Poll Results: S-a dopat Lance?

Voters
70. You may not vote on this poll
  • Nu

    22 31.43%
  • Da

    48 68.57%
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 22 to 42 of 164

Thread: S-a dopat Armstrong?

  1. #22
    sport legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,303
    Reputatie
    1
    Si totusi... de ce l-au gasit dopat doar in 1999? Adica intr-un singur an din cei 7 in care a castigat turul. Sau ce... vor sa spuna ca a luat in 1999 pentru toti cei 7 ani?

  2. #23
    Anti-prostie Apolini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    618
    Reputatie
    1
    Nu cred ca Amstrong sa dopat la Turul Frantei din 99, dintre toti ciclistii care au participat unul s-a dopat, adica oricare! De ce au dat vina exact pe Armstrog? Pentru ca a castigat Turul Frantei de prea multe ori?

  3. #24
    HERE'S JOHNNY!! Darkslowstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    La capatul Stelei
    Posts
    7,402
    Reputatie
    1
    Intrebarea este daca s-a dopat cu EPO in 1999 si atunci nu erau teste care sa depisteze EPO cum l-au depistat? Si daca l-au depistat de ce au facut o exceptie in 1999 pt un ciclist cvasi-necunoscut la acea data? Multa intrebari de bun simt la care cei care -il acuza pe Lance ar face bine sa se gandeasca.

  4. #25
    HERE'S JOHNNY!! Darkslowstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    La capatul Stelei
    Posts
    7,402
    Reputatie
    1
    Un articol tare pe Eurosport:

    L'Equipe: Armstrong declara razboi


    Lance Armstrong's flirtation with a possible Tour de France return - "to piss off the French" - has provided l'Equipe with more firepower. Yet claims from the paper that the Texan has started a new Franco-American war are as erroneous as they are intended to further subvert and serve their cause.



    A nation convicts "guilty" Armstrong
    Armstrong return: The peloton reacts

    "The gauntlet has been thrown down," wrote l'Equipe on Wednesday. "Accused in our own pages for having repetitively used EPO during the 1999 Tour de France, Armstrong has now chosen to shift the focus of this issue definitively to one of a Franco-American war."

    How apt. L'Equipe and France are now the victims. For most of the public, however, this has been a Franco-American issue for a long time, and not due to Armstrong, but to the very paper which now cries wolf.

    The proud French have notoriously found Armstrong's complete domination of their race over the last seven years as hard to swallow as a three-course English Sunday lunch (just ask President Chirac how bad a prospect that is!).

    "It's a love-hate relationship," Armstrong elucidated on American TV after the accusations of 23 August surfaced. "You know my past with the French media, the Sports minister, the Tour organisers, the laboratories, the judges, the police... It's a real witch-hunt."

    For all the hate - and the hate is flagrant each time you flick through the pages of l'Equipe or Le Monde, and each time you listen to the likes of Jean-Marie Leblanc speak evasively into his wobbly dewlaps - there is, or at least was, a little love.

    Despite present events, Armstrong has always enjoyed racing and spending time in France; he willingly tries to speak French to the press during the months of July and the French public have frequently been won over by his endearing and often infectious personality.

    But that disguises the fact that the French are pained not to have had a winner in their national race since Bernard Hinault's 1985 Indian summer; that Americans have won the race on ten different occasions since and that Armstrong apparently took the excitement and spontaneity out of their fête de juillet.

    As Hein Verbruggen, president of the International Cyling Union, announced after the breaking of the latest sham: "I have to say the situation is not pleasant but, for the moment, it only involves Lance Armstrong and France."

    It doesn't help either that the naturally cynical and pessimistic French find the American's winning battle against cancer and his triumphant return to the sport as, well, a trifle incroyable.

    "For them," Armstrong recently told Larry King on CNN, "my story is too beautiful to be true. One day, a French team-mate of mine told me: 'Listen Lance, the French don't like winners.' "

    They must have a pretty high opinion of themselves, then!

    "The fact is that cycling in France is in the process of going through one of its toughest periods," explained Armstrong. "They haven't won for twenty years now so naturally it's harder for them to accept."

    Granted, the seven-time successive Tour winner has, of late, not exactly heaped on lavish praise towards the French. But to be fair, he has been under an unrelenting barrage of attack from the nation for quite a time now. His frank words are a means of defence, just as is his reported coming out of retirement.

    Returning to the sport and racing once again in France would be a cunning, nay ingenious, move for the Texan. Understandably, it has set pulses racing in l'Héxagone. Both Jean-Marie Leblanc and Christian Prudhomme have refused to comment on the matter but are probably sweating under the collar at the potential damage this could do to the race, their own egos and the French nation as a whole. And to think that last July they thought they had seen the back of Armstrong.

    Likewise, l'Equipe, who will be bound to follow the race and do so with a modicum of professional integrity, will have to change their stance, or at least call a temporary ceasefire on the simmering war.

    For the time being, the sports broadsheet has in fact sunk to childlike whining: "But at the moment of taking his retirement on the Champs Elysées, he promised, spat on his hand and swore that he would not be returning: "My decision is 100% certain," he vouched. But look at him now.

    "His image is tarnished. And without a doubt, he thought that the best way to reply "to the sceptics and cynics" was to pedal once again over the roads of France."

    The paper seems to make it out that, as well as being the supposed drug cheat they are bent on making him, Armstrong has sunk even lower with this latest show of untrustworthiness. How dare he lie about his retirement, it's really not on, they cry...

    And yet it was a different tone when French footballing aces Zinidine Zidane, Claude Makelele and Liliam Thuram came out of the wilderness and announced their return to the sport after equally "100% certain" convictions that there would be no return.

    L'Equipe, and the French, naturally welcomed those changes of heart with open arms. Just as they would do - considering the present poor state of their nation's cycling - the unlikely return of Richard Virenque. And what was his infamous claim to fame?

    Back to the point, and bear with me for I'm about to tie things up now. If Armstrong is serious about his return to the sport, his motivation to win the race must be more than a desire to "piss off the French". If this was his sole incentive, he faces possible embarrassment if it all goes wrong, especially seeing the lengths at which he went to commit to retirement in the first place.

    Yet likewise, l'Equipe will not be able to galvanize their coverage of the event solely around this Armstrong vs us and the rest of the nation pretext, for then it would all sink to the levels of imbecile ridiculosity.

    It would nevertheless be pretty entertaining stuff.

  5. #26
    ...
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    2,420
    Reputatie
    1
    Dupa parerea mea, ARMSTRONG a ales drumul cel mai rau pentru a-si dovedi nevinovatia !
    Poate, cel mai usor ar fi sa se prezinte la un laborator din BERLIN care, in urma analizelor, sa constate cu un procent de 99,99 daca ARMSTRONG a luat sau nu !

    Altfel, chiar daca s-ar intampla inainte de concurs ca EL sa sufere un accident serios si sa nu se prezinte la LE TOUR asupra sa vor plana suspiciuni si mai mari decat acum...

  6. #27
    HERE'S JOHNNY!! Darkslowstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    La capatul Stelei
    Posts
    7,402
    Reputatie
    1
    Ricky, se prezinta dgeaba la un laborator, pt ca nu se mai poate determina acuma daca s-a dopat el in 99' sau nu. Trebuie sa-ti pui niste intrebari de bun simt in cazul acesta, de ex:

    "Intrebarea este daca s-a dopat cu EPO in 1999 si atunci nu erau teste care sa depisteze EPO cum l-au depistat? Si daca l-au depistat de ce au facut o exceptie in 1999 pt un ciclist cvasi-necunoscut la acea data? Multa intrebari de bun simt la care cei care -il acuza pe Lance ar face bine sa se gandeasca."

  7. #28
    ...
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    2,420
    Reputatie
    1
    DARK, normal ca nu mai poate fi depistat pentru '99 !
    Dar, de atunci EL a avut aceleasi rezultate !
    Deci, in urma testului se poate deduce daca in ultimul an s-a dopat sau nu (zic si eu o zona de timp).
    DACA NU s-a dopat pentru acest an atunci e inutil sa mai mergi inapoi !
    Zic eu...

  8. #29
    sport legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,303
    Reputatie
    1
    Ricky, sigur a fost controlat si recontrolat Armstrong in ultimii 7 ani mai mult decat toti ciclistii, deci nu ar mai avea rost nici un control. Tocmai aici zic eu ca e problema... de ce l-au gasit dopat chiar in anul 1999, adica in primul an cand a castigat turul, si de atunci nimic? Prin asta vor sa spuna ca el de fapt s-a dopat in fiecare an de atunci incoace sau ce...

  9. #30
    Ancient fia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Pe pârtie
    Posts
    8,522
    Reputatie
    1
    Ricky, in turul Frantei se fac cate 20-30 (daca nu mai multe) controale pe ZI!
    Si Armstrong crede-ma ca din 21 de zile e controloat cel putin de 10 ori....
    Deci nu se pune problema sa se fi dopat.....

    Din cate stiu eu povestea e cam asa:
    Aveau niste probe de la ciclisti din 1999. Probe ANONIME! Le-au luat ca sa descopere noi metode de a depista EPO. Din astea au "dedus" (nu ma intreba cum) care e "proba" de la Armstrong si au testat-o acum si a iesit pozitiva.

    La momentul respectiv in 1999 cand iti dai seama ca i s-au facut 1000 de controale nu a iesit niciodata pozitiv.

    Din cate stiu eu Armstrong a fost o singura data "pozitiv", dar legal, cand era bolnav si cu acordul celor din Tur si al medicilor a luat ceva (gen Nurofenul gimnastei noastre).
    [B][COLOR=DarkRed]C-asa sunt eu rapidist, c-asa sunt eu RAPIDist[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=Silver]Niciodata nu sunt trist, niciodata nu sunt trist[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=DarkRed]Si la bine si la rau, si la bine la si la rau[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=Silver]RAPID este clubul meu, RAPID este clubul meu.[/COLOR][/B]

  10. #31
    HERE'S JOHNNY!! Darkslowstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    La capatul Stelei
    Posts
    7,402
    Reputatie
    1
    Ricky, nu ai fost atent un amanunt, o mica neconcordanta. L'Equipe a spus, printre altele, ca Lance a fost depistat pozitiv in 99' pt EPO si mai apoi ca EPO nu se putea depista la acea data. Unde e adevarul? Cum putea fi depistat pt ceva pt care nu exista test in 99'? Si daca a fost depistat de ce este singurul care nu a fost exclus din tur si suspendat atunci? Te asigur ca Leblanc si Prud'homme nu-l au foarte drag pe Armstrong, in fiecare an au incercat sa-i puna bete in roate cu ceva.
    Toata povestea e cusuta cu ata alba si ma indoiesc ca probele francezilor vor rezista in fata instantei, unde articolele din ziar nu se mai pun, ci doar dovezile solide.

  11. #32
    THE VIKING Dorin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,382
    Reputatie
    0
    O idee paranoida" Dar daca nu a avut cancer si totul a fost o inscenare ca sa poata folosi hormoni care sa-i modifice ,pozitiv, calitatile fizice"
    Oricum din cate stiu eu , testul este facut pe singesau urina congelate si pastrate din 99 . Testul e facut in zilele noastre.Probabil ca nu a mai luat EPO in anii de glorie dar intrebarea se pune , ce a luat? Peste cativa ani vin alte teste si din probele pastrate acum cu sfintenie poate apare altceva..... Dorin
    THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE

  12. #33
    ...
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    2,420
    Reputatie
    1
    DARK, nu cred ca se pune problema cu '99 !
    E clar, au recunoscut laboratoarele, ca atunci n-a existat aparatura necesara !
    Pentru ca sa nu ma repet (lipsa de timp), poate poti sa citesti unul dintre posturile mele anterioare in care am subliniat faptul ca LABORATORUL NU AVEA DREPTUL SA TINA PROBELE NOMINAL ATATA TIMP !

    Si-apoi, hai sa fim seriosi ; crede cineva ca exista in lume un ciclist care sa pedaleze, zi dezi, cate 4-5-6 ore...FARA ?

    Ca nu sunt de acord ca ACUM se scormoneste rahatul...e alta poveste dar, te rog, nu te supara, eu nu cred ca este un ciclist, intre primii (hai sa spun o cifra ) 20 care sa nu se...ajute !

    De aceea si cred ca situatia s-ar rezolva usor !

    Stii cumva cazul DAUM ? Cel care era pe cale sa devina antrenorul echipei de fotbal a Germaniei ?
    Höness l-a dat in...gat ! Daum a sustinut ca...NU SI NU !
    Si a dat un fir de par la proba ! Si-acum e...la turci...

    Cum am zis undeva mai sus : din pacate, "laboratoarele sportivilor" sunt cu un pas inaintea celor pentru depistare !
    s cum tot mai multe voci se ridica: exista si o acceptare tacita CHIAR a unor foruri SUS-PUSE care accepta acest lucru !
    Zic expertii : cu speranta ca stadioanele nu vor ramane goale daca se vor face controluri la SANGE !

    Pe AICI, prin "vestul salbatic", un atlet trebuie sa anunte federatie atunci cand paraseste localitatea de domiciliu pentru un antrenament sau...orice !
    Este mai rau decat in armata !
    VESTUL comenteaza la faptul ca UNELE tari din EST nu recurg la aceste controale anti-doping chiar si la antrenamente !
    De fapt, nici USA nu recurge la astfel de controale...

    In rest...
    s-auzim numai de bine !

    P.S. In fata instantei, spun expertii, L'EQUIPE NU ARE NICI O SANSA : pe motiv ca porbele s-au pastrat ILEGAL !

  13. #34
    Ancient fia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Pe pârtie
    Posts
    8,522
    Reputatie
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorin
    O idee paranoida" Dar daca nu a avut cancer si totul a fost o inscenare ca sa poata folosi hormoni care sa-i modifice ,pozitiv, calitatile fizice"
    Asta sigur nu e adevarat decat daca in masochismul lui si-a scos un testicul si a facut chimioterapie 2 ani. A! Si s-a si sterilizat.
    [B][COLOR=DarkRed]C-asa sunt eu rapidist, c-asa sunt eu RAPIDist[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=Silver]Niciodata nu sunt trist, niciodata nu sunt trist[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=DarkRed]Si la bine si la rau, si la bine la si la rau[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=Silver]RAPID este clubul meu, RAPID este clubul meu.[/COLOR][/B]

  14. #35
    HERE'S JOHNNY!! Darkslowstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    La capatul Stelei
    Posts
    7,402
    Reputatie
    1
    L'Equipe nici macar nu cred ca poate demonstra ca probele ii apartin lui Armstrong. Sau ca probele sunt intacte din 99', ca s-au vazut si cazuri de contaminare intentionata a unor probe.
    Ricky, am vazut ce ai postat mai sus, de aceea am si zis ca L'equipe nu are sanse la tribunal. Mai subliniez inca o data ce am spus anterior: cum a fost depistat pozitiv cu EPO in 1999 cand testele au fost dezvoltate abia in 2001. Francezii sustin ca el a fost depistat pozitiv in 1999. De ce nu l-au suspendat atunci?

    Dorin, asta deja este SF. El a a ramas cu niste urme (dupa cum zicea fia) dupa chimioterapie, nu cred ca nimeni ar putea avea tupeul sa se indoiasca public de asta. Exista niste limite totusi.

  15. #36
    sport legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,303
    Reputatie
    1
    Ei zic ca l-au depistat pozitiv anu asta pe probele din 1999, deci nu in 1999.

  16. #37
    HERE'S JOHNNY!! Darkslowstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    La capatul Stelei
    Posts
    7,402
    Reputatie
    1
    Eu am inteles ca ar fi fost depistat si in 99 dar nu a fost suspendat. O sa ma mai documentez.

  17. #38
    THE VIKING Dorin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,382
    Reputatie
    0
    Ideea era doar paranoida... Gaz pe foc adica!
    THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE

  18. #39
    sport legend Lucky_OLD_G's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    cu un pas in fatza ta....
    Posts
    739
    Reputatie
    1
    ce intrebare tampita.......e ca si cum l-ai vedea pe ruud gullit fara plete si l-ai intreba....domnu gullit v-atzi tuns????????????????
    [COLOR="Red"][SIZE="4"][/SIZE][/COLOR]
    [FONT="Garamond"][/FONT]
    Steaua campioana en-titre....Dinamo echipa cu parcarea vopsita......Steaua semifinalista in europa.........restu ...hahalere nea jean si horoba........Steaua trup si suflet ptr 23.......Divizia lui mitica plina de femei....

  19. #40
    Ancient fia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Pe pârtie
    Posts
    8,522
    Reputatie
    1
    Cat de usor este sa comentezi cand nu intelegi.
    [B][COLOR=DarkRed]C-asa sunt eu rapidist, c-asa sunt eu RAPIDist[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=Silver]Niciodata nu sunt trist, niciodata nu sunt trist[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=DarkRed]Si la bine si la rau, si la bine la si la rau[/COLOR][/B]
    [B][COLOR=Silver]RAPID este clubul meu, RAPID este clubul meu.[/COLOR][/B]

  20. #41
    HERE'S JOHNNY!! Darkslowstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    La capatul Stelei
    Posts
    7,402
    Reputatie
    1
    E usor sa comentezi, dar din cate spui tu nu faci decat sa arunci cu noroi. stii macar despre ce este vorba, Lucky?

  21. #42
    sport legend Lucky_OLD_G's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    cu un pas in fatza ta....
    Posts
    739
    Reputatie
    1
    Nu ....
    [COLOR="Red"][SIZE="4"][/SIZE][/COLOR]
    [FONT="Garamond"][/FONT]
    Steaua campioana en-titre....Dinamo echipa cu parcarea vopsita......Steaua semifinalista in europa.........restu ...hahalere nea jean si horoba........Steaua trup si suflet ptr 23.......Divizia lui mitica plina de femei....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •