Lance Armstrong pulls out of the Tour de France !!! [Archive]

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 23rd 10, 07:55 PM

"DA74" > wrote in message
...
On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a possibly-clean
> pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get away
> with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
============
Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
know jack.

And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.

You're Welcome,
DA74
=============

I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or forgot to
feed & water your brain this week.

I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly" clean
front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before you
leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing something
"big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before, let's
seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
stupid to go overboard.

But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin.

Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please explain
exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than cases
like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?

Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything about
it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken over
by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I rode
up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular it's
Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it took
for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to the
hand, but the hand doesn't care.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 23rd 10, 07:57 PM

"z, fred" > wrote in message
...
> Anton Berlin wrote:
>> On Jun 23, 8:35 am, Brad Anders > wrote:
>>> On Jun 23, 5:46 am, Anton Berlin > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jun 22, 4:56 pm, Brad Anders > wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 22, 2:46 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> "Anton Berlin" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Wouldn't he have to ?
>>>>>>> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/cycling/wires/06/22/2080.ap.cyc...
>>>>>> Care to share your reasoning with us?
>>>>> FWIW, I can't think of any other pro who has passed more WADA drug
>>>>> tests than Lance. A couple of possible conclusions you can draw is
>>>>> that either he's not taking drugs, or he knows how to take drugs in a
>>>>> way that has proven foolproof over a very long period of time.
>>>>> Regardless, seems like he has little to worry about on the dope
>>>>> testing front.
>>>>> Brad Anders
>>>> ****ing freek
>>>> http://www.active.com/cycling/Articles/WADA_rejects_report_that_clear...
>>> I agree, Dick Pound is a ****ing freek.
>>>
>>> Brad Anders- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> Because Lance can't bribe WADA like he did with the UCI ?
>
> I'm hardly the expert on bribes or bribing, but $100,000 doesn't seem like
> a whole lot of money when you consider that it probably would have to be
> split X number of ways, what LA could afford to pay, and what it would be
> worth to LA in both image and dollars to keep it quiet.

And there's something amusing about a "bribe" that's not paid for a couple
years until the UCI sends Lance a notice telling him to. In most circles,
offering a bribe and not paying would be worse than no bribe at all. And
making a public thing out of the fact the bribe wasn't paid...

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 23rd 10, 08:00 PM

"Fred Flintstein" > wrote in message
...
> On 6/23/2010 12:02 PM, DA74 wrote:
>> On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike >
>> wrote:
>>> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
>>> idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
>>> possibly-clean
>>> pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get
>>> away
>>> with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>>
>> Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
>> the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
>> no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
>> it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
>> know jack.
>>
>> And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
>> dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
>> pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
>> the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>>
>> You're Welcome,
>> DA74
>
> Fockstick,
>
> You have a weird approach to trolling. Coggan bit on it, and Mike
> might too. If I were Mike I'd tell you to suck it, but that's not
> his style.

Looking at my reply to DA74, I appear to have less style than you thought.
:-)

>
> Fred Flintstein
>
> PS If you're so knowledgeable about what goes on at the pointy end
> of the peloton, why were you asking me about dope that enhances
> recovery. That's pretty basic stuff, isn't it?

-- Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

DA74

June 23rd 10, 09:03 PM

On Jun 23, 11:22*am, Fred Flintstein
> wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 12:02 PM, DA74 wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike >
> > wrote:
> >> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> >> idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a possibly-clean
> >> pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get away
> >> with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > know jack.
>
> > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > You're Welcome,
> > DA74
>
> Fockstick,
>
> You have a weird approach to trolling. Coggan bit on it, and Mike
> might too. If I were Mike I'd tell you to suck it, but that's not
> his style.
>
> Fred Flintstein
>
> PS If you're so knowledgeable about what goes on at the pointy end
> of the peloton, why were you asking me about dope that enhances
> recovery. That's pretty basic stuff, isn't it?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

****tard of all ****tards,
Your Asperger's is acting up again. I wasn't asking you to inform me.
I was merely drawing you out to publicly illustrate your complete
ignorance on the topic you were writing about. And you didn't
disappoint. For those playing along at home:

You, Bob Schwartz wrote:
"If you are taking **** to enhance recovery you would pair that with
stimulants to ramp up your training volume."

Which of course is complete bull****. I called you on this and defied
you to name a single protocol for this doping procedure you outlined.
Very simple question. You then wrote:

"A number of years ago package from Belgium addressed to a former
pro's dad was discovered to be containing stimulants. When I asked an
ex-pro about that he said that probably it was from someone using them
to jack up their training load in preparation for Flanders and Paris-
Roubaix. You would use them in training but not for a race because of
the ease of detection."

Which was an amusing anecdote that you probably half made up but the
problem is that you never answered my question. This anecdote only
talks about stimulants. You said you pair up stimulants with "**** to
enhance recovery."

What is the "**** to enhance recovery" that one would pair up with
stimulants? If you are going to make a statement back it up. I simply
called bull****. You still cannot answer the question because Bob
Schwartz is full of ****.

Sucking it,
DA74

DA74

June 23rd 10, 09:19 PM

On Jun 23, 11:55*am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a possibly-clean
> > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get away
> > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> ============
> Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> know jack.
>
> And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> You're Welcome,
> DA74
> =============
>
> I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or forgot to
> feed & water your brain this week.
>
> I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly" clean
> front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before you
> leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
> people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing something
> "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
> squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
> you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before, let's
> seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
> stupid to go overboard.
>
> But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin.
>
> Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please explain
> exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
> faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than cases
> like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>
> Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything about
> it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken over
> by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I rode
> up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular it's
> Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it took
> for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to the
> hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Jacko,
Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think these
"young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base it's
almost endearing.

Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted from
doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still at
it:

"Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
trophy case didn't come easily"

You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
It's a fact.
-DA74

Fred Flintstein

June 23rd 10, 09:22 PM

On 6/23/2010 3:03 PM, DA74 wrote:
> Sucking it,
> DA74

Fockstick,

Anyone that knows what goes on in the pointy end of
the peloton would never even ask the question because
they would already know the answer.

Fred Flintstein

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 23rd 10, 10:02 PM

"DA74" > wrote in message
...
On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
> > possibly-clean
> > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get
> > away
> > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> ============
> Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> know jack.
>
> And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> You're Welcome,
> DA74
> =============
>
> I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or forgot to
> feed & water your brain this week.
>
> I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly" clean
> front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before you
> leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
> people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
> something
> "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
> squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
> you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before,
> let's
> seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
> stupid to go overboard.
>
> But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin.
>
> Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please
> explain
> exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
> faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than
> cases
> like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>
> Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything
> about
> it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken over
> by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I
> rode
> up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular it's
> Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it took
> for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to the
> hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
==========
Jacko,
Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think these
"young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base it's
almost endearing.

Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted from
doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still at
it:

"Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
trophy case didn't come easily"

You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
It's a fact.
-DA74
==========

So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change came to
cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided to just
let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt for the
sins of WWII or something?

Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

B. Lafferty[_3_]

June 23rd 10, 10:36 PM

On 6/23/2010 5:02 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "DA74" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:
>> "DA74" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>> On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>> wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
>> > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a >
>> possibly-clean
>> > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might
>> get > away
>> > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>>
>> ============
>> Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
>> the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
>> no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
>> it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
>> know jack.
>>
>> And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
>> dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
>> pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
>> the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>>
>> You're Welcome,
>> DA74
>> =============
>>
>> I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or
>> forgot to
>> feed & water your brain this week.
>>
>> I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly"
>> clean
>> front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before you
>> leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
>> people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
>> something
>> "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
>> squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
>> you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before,
>> let's
>> seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
>> stupid to go overboard.
>>
>> But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin.
>>
>> Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please
>> explain
>> exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
>> faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than
>> cases
>> like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>>
>> Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything
>> about
>> it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken
>> over
>> by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I
>> rode
>> up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular it's
>> Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it took
>> for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to
>> the
>> hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>>
>> --Mike Jacoubowsky
>> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
>> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
> ==========
> Jacko,
> Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
> clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think these
> "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
> that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
> maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base it's
> almost endearing.
>
> Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted from
> doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
> ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still at
> it:
>
> "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
> trophy case didn't come easily"
>
> You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
> doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
> your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
> It's a fact.
> -DA74
> ==========
>
> So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change came
> to cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
> soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided to
> just let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to,
> Euro-guilt for the sins of WWII or something?
>
> Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
getting caught.

Brad Anders

June 23rd 10, 11:08 PM

On Jun 23, 2:36*pm, "B. Lafferty" > wrote:

> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> getting caught.

Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
Landis' assertions seem to support this view.

The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
viewpoint fits your fancy.

Fred Flintstein

June 23rd 10, 11:15 PM

On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
>
>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
>> getting caught.
>
> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>
> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> viewpoint fits your fancy.

I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.

Fred Flintstein

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 23rd 10, 11:25 PM

"Brad Anders" > wrote in message
...
On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. Lafferty" > wrote:

> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> getting caught.
==========
Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
Landis' assertions seem to support this view.

The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
viewpoint fits your fancy.
==========

Not just the UCI (believing that a lack of positives was an indication
things were improving). The French for several years chose to treat every
positive test as evidence the sport was in chaos and perhaps beyond
redemption. They could have chosen to treat positive tests as an indication
of doing better against dopers. A lack of positive tests can be (and often
is) an indication that the dopers are ahead of the curve. That's why I like
the biological passport, because you start to see changes in obvious values
over time, as your testing catches up or lags behind the dopers. Eventually
you start to develop a sense for what might be relatively normal, which is
what I believe they're getting to now.

The sport needs both testing for specific agents as well as the biological
passport which measures more what the agents do than it does whether they
exist or not. That's my overly-simplified view of things, and why I'm
cautiously optimistic that things will get better over time.

I'm very much against doping, past & present. But I can rationalize a focus
on the present because I find it hard to buy the idea that any one rider or
team had a big advantage over other teams... whatever doping went on, was
likely widespread and without any silver bullet allowed to just one star
rider. Was it a level playing field? Not for all; it's obvious that some
teams lacked the finances and perhaps the ability to rationalize and/or fear
of prosecution to take part. Either that or their riders simply sucked
big-time compared to eveyrone else. But the two-speed peloton had an awful
lot of people at that higher speed. It can be argued that the best man did
win, whether the event was clean or dirty. And it can also be equally argued
that some may never have had a chance.

That was then. This is now. I, probably naively, feel that we're seeing
cleaner (not saying clean) racing than we did in the past.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 23rd 10, 11:27 PM

"Fred Flintstein" > wrote in message
...
> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
>>
>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
>>> getting caught.
>>
>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>>
>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
>
> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>
> Fred Flintstein

Not sure if it's still the case, but back in the day you could buy all
manner of prescription antibiotics, without a presecription, for your local
aquarium store. Even as a minor. All the 'cillin drugs, sulfa, you name it.
If it could be used to treat fin & tail rot, or other fungus, you could get
it. And who knows what else.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

z, fred

June 23rd 10, 11:46 PM

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "Fred Flintstein" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
>>>> getting caught.
>>>
>>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
>>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
>>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>>>
>>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
>>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
>>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
>>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
>>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
>>
>> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
>> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
>> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
>> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>>
>> Fred Flintstein
>
> Not sure if it's still the case, but back in the day you could buy all
> manner of prescription antibiotics, without a presecription, for your
> local aquarium store. Even as a minor. All the 'cillin drugs, sulfa, you
> name it. If it could be used to treat fin & tail rot, or other fungus,
> you could get it. And who knows what else.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Can't you do the same thing via the internet?

DA74

June 24th 10, 01:17 AM

On Jun 23, 1:22*pm, Fred Flintstein >
wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 3:03 PM, DA74 wrote:
>
> > Sucking it,
> > DA74
>
> Fockstick,
>
> Anyone that knows what goes on in the pointy end of
> the peloton would never even ask the question because
> they would already know the answer.
>
> Fred Flintstein

Bull**** Bob,

That's your fourth weak deflection to the simple question at hand. You
were sharing your vast knowledge with the OP. I'm just asking you to
expound and add some legitimacy to your post. Come on, share your
brilliance with those that don't know what goes on in the pointy end
of the peloton.

What is the "**** that enhances recovery" that a professional riders
pair with stimulants?

Still sucking it,
DA74

DA74

June 24th 10, 01:37 AM

On Jun 23, 2:02*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ....
> > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
> > > possibly-clean
> > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get
> > > away
> > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> > ============
> > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > know jack.
>
> > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > You're Welcome,
> > DA74
> > =============
>
> > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or forgot to
> > feed & water your brain this week.
>
> > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly" clean
> > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before you
> > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
> > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
> > something
> > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
> > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
> > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before,
> > let's
> > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
> > stupid to go overboard.
>
> > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin..
>
> > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please
> > explain
> > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
> > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than
> > cases
> > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>
> > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything
> > about
> > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken over
> > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I
> > rode
> > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular it's
> > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it took
> > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to the
> > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>
> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
> ==========
> Jacko,
> Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
> clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think these
> "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
> that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
> maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base it's
> almost endearing.
>
> Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted from
> doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
> ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still at
> it:
>
> "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
> trophy case didn't come easily"
>
> You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
> doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
> your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
> It's a fact.
> -DA74
> ==========
>
> So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change came to
> cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
> soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided to just
> let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt for the
> sins of WWII or something?
>
> Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Jacotard,
I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but we
won't include those yet.)

The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.

You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
protect the innocents.

(And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of the
culture - but that's another thread bro).
DA74

K. Fred Gauss[_6_]

June 24th 10, 01:45 AM

B. Lafferty wrote:

> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> getting caught.

That's the only kind of wake up call there is.

K. Fred Gauss[_6_]

June 24th 10, 01:52 AM

DA74 wrote:

> The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
> from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.

I'm a FAR bigger badass than Mike. I bought gas at a BP station this
morning, BITCH!

thirty-six

June 24th 10, 02:22 AM

On 23 June, 21:03, DA74 > wrote:
> On Jun 23, 11:22*am, Fred Flintstein
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On 6/23/2010 12:02 PM, DA74 wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike >
> > > wrote:
> > >> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > >> idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a possibly-clean
> > >> pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get away
> > >> with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> > > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > > know jack.
>
> > > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > > You're Welcome,
> > > DA74
>
> > Fockstick,
>
> > You have a weird approach to trolling. Coggan bit on it, and Mike
> > might too. If I were Mike I'd tell you to suck it, but that's not
> > his style.
>
> > Fred Flintstein
>
> > PS If you're so knowledgeable about what goes on at the pointy end
> > of the peloton, why were you asking me about dope that enhances
> > recovery. That's pretty basic stuff, isn't it?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> ****tard of all ****tards,
> Your Asperger's is acting up again. I wasn't asking you to inform me.
> I was merely drawing you out to publicly illustrate your complete
> ignorance on the topic you were writing about. And you didn't
> disappoint. For those playing along at home:
>
> You, Bob Schwartz wrote:
>
> "If you are taking **** to enhance recovery you would pair that with
> stimulants to ramp up your training volume."
>
> Which of course is complete bull****. I called you on this and defied
> you to name a single protocol for this doping procedure you outlined.
> Very simple question. You then wrote:
>
> "A number of years ago package from Belgium addressed to a former
> pro's dad was discovered to be containing stimulants. When I asked an
> ex-pro about that he said that probably it was from someone using them
> to jack up their training load in preparation for Flanders and Paris-
> Roubaix. You would use them in training but not for a race because of
> the ease of detection."
>
> Which was an amusing anecdote that you probably half made up but the
> problem is that you never answered my question. This anecdote only
> talks about stimulants. You said you pair up stimulants with "**** to
> enhance recovery."
>
> What is the "**** to enhance recovery" that one would pair up with
> stimulants? If you are going to make a statement back it up. I simply
> called bull****. You still cannot answer the question because Bob
> Schwartz is full of ****.
>
> Sucking it,
> DA74

Stimulants are not needed when "**** to enhance recovery" is used. If
you feel in need of stimulants when using "**** to enhance recovery"
then er, you havn't recovered and so need more rest or more "**** to
enhance recovery". You can take "**** to enhance recovery" on
alternate days, doubling up and this lessens the negative effect on
the immune response. BTW, there are better ways than using "**** to
enhance recovery" but requires tailoring to the individual which may
take some time.

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 24th 10, 02:25 AM

"DA74" > wrote in message
...
On Jun 23, 2:02 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
> > > possibly-clean
> > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get
> > > away
> > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> > ============
> > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > know jack.
>
> > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > You're Welcome,
> > DA74
> > =============
>
> > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or forgot
> > to
> > feed & water your brain this week.
>
> > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly"
> > clean
> > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before
> > you
> > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
> > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
> > something
> > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
> > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
> > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before,
> > let's
> > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
> > stupid to go overboard.
>
> > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin.
>
> > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please
> > explain
> > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
> > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than
> > cases
> > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>
> > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything
> > about
> > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken
> > over
> > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I
> > rode
> > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular
> > it's
> > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it
> > took
> > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to
> > the
> > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>
> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
> ==========
> Jacko,
> Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
> clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think these
> "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
> that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
> maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base it's
> almost endearing.
>
> Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted from
> doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
> ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still at
> it:
>
> "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
> trophy case didn't come easily"
>
> You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
> doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
> your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
> It's a fact.
> -DA74
> ==========
>
> So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change came to
> cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
> soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided to just
> let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt for
> the
> sins of WWII or something?
>
> Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
=============
Jacotard,
I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but we
won't include those yet.)

The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.

You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
protect the innocents.

(And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of the
culture - but that's another thread bro).
DA74
==============

I don't argue that doping was, and maybe is, rampant (but I do argue that
there's evidence it's on the decline). What I have said several times is
that if it's as pervasive as you and many others say, then Lance didn't have
an advantage over his peers. Some selection occurred, since few feel that
*everybody* doped, but for the most part, you envision a fairly level
playing field. With me so far?

So my association with anything to do with competitive cycling, and anyone
else's as well, is thus tainted?

I don't get that. As I said before, a 3 kph difference in speed between
racing clean vs dirty (and it will actually be less than that) isn't going
to make the race any less exciting to watch.

So what is it about this blood money stuff you think I'm associated with? Do
you think I have some secret knowledge of what goes on, and that I hide it
because it would be bad for sales? Let me tell you something you aren't
going to believe. If it came out that Lance clearly doped, even if he
confessed to it, it would have little if any impact on my bicycle sales.
People would say yeah, sports, they all do it. Everybody cheats. The biggest
loser if that were to happen would be to his Livestrong followers, the
hundreds of thousands with cancer who have looked up to him and have
benefitted from his organization. That would be sad. But that's not my
business.

And you know what? I've got a 17 year old son who rides, and I talk to him
about this stuff. What would it mean if it turned out that Lance was
cheating. How would that make him feel about what he does himself. Because
as a parent, sure, you worry about the influences popular figures have. But
he's his own person and that would really have no effect on him, other than
a bit of resignation.

Going after Lance & Trek and even me over this may be populist but
deceptive. It's the entire cycling industry that's gotten wrapped up in
sponsorship of your tainted peloton. Everybody's guilty. Or nobody. I'm
leaning toward it being one of those things about a society in which
cheating to get ahead isn't seen as being the evil thing it once was, using
corporate greed (Enron) as an example of its acceptance. That's really sad.
It's a powerful force to try and stop, and I think we sometimes expect too
much from WADA and UCI. You can legislate actions, but not thoughts.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

B. Lafferty[_3_]

June 24th 10, 02:31 AM

On 6/23/2010 6:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
>
>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
>> getting caught.
>
> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>
> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> viewpoint fits your fancy.
That was my point.

Fred Flintstein

June 24th 10, 02:53 AM

DA74 wrote:
> On Jun 23, 1:22 pm, Fred Flintstein >
> wrote:
>> On 6/23/2010 3:03 PM, DA74 wrote:
>>
>>> Sucking it,
>>> DA74
>> Fockstick,
>>
>> Anyone that knows what goes on in the pointy end of
>> the peloton would never even ask the question because
>> they would already know the answer.
>>
>> Fred Flintstein
>
> Bull**** Bob,
>
> That's your fourth weak deflection to the simple question at hand. You
> were sharing your vast knowledge with the OP. I'm just asking you to
> expound and add some legitimacy to your post. Come on, share your
> brilliance with those that don't know what goes on in the pointy end
> of the peloton.
>
> What is the "**** that enhances recovery" that a professional riders
> pair with stimulants?
>
> Still sucking it,
> DA74

Four times and you still haven't figured it out.

http://www.inimical.com/images/records/JFCCover.jpg

Fred Flintstein

DA74

June 24th 10, 03:00 AM

On Jun 23, 6:22*pm, thirty-six > wrote:
> On 23 June, 21:03, DA74 > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 23, 11:22*am, Fred Flintstein
>
> > > wrote:
> > > On 6/23/2010 12:02 PM, DA74 wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > > >> idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a possibly-clean
> > > >> pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get away
> > > >> with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> > > > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > > > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > > > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > > > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > > > know jack.
>
> > > > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > > > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > > > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > > > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > > > You're Welcome,
> > > > DA74
>
> > > Fockstick,
>
> > > You have a weird approach to trolling. Coggan bit on it, and Mike
> > > might too. If I were Mike I'd tell you to suck it, but that's not
> > > his style.
>
> > > Fred Flintstein
>
> > > PS If you're so knowledgeable about what goes on at the pointy end
> > > of the peloton, why were you asking me about dope that enhances
> > > recovery. That's pretty basic stuff, isn't it?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > ****tard of all ****tards,
> > Your Asperger's is acting up again. I wasn't asking you to inform me.
> > I was merely drawing you out to publicly illustrate your complete
> > ignorance on the topic you were writing about. And you didn't
> > disappoint. For those playing along at home:
>
> > You, Bob Schwartz wrote:
>
> > "If you are taking **** to enhance recovery you would pair that with
> > stimulants to ramp up your training volume."
>
> > Which of course is complete bull****. I called you on this and defied
> > you to name a single protocol for this doping procedure you outlined.
> > Very simple question. You then wrote:
>
> > "A number of years ago package from Belgium addressed to a former
> > pro's dad was discovered to be containing stimulants. When I asked an
> > ex-pro about that he said that probably it was from someone using them
> > to jack up their training load in preparation for Flanders and Paris-
> > Roubaix. You would use them in training but not for a race because of
> > the ease of detection."
>
> > Which was an amusing anecdote that you probably half made up but the
> > problem is that you never answered my question. This anecdote only
> > talks about stimulants. You said you pair up stimulants with "**** to
> > enhance recovery."
>
> > What is the "**** to enhance recovery" that one would pair up with
> > stimulants? If you are going to make a statement back it up. I simply
> > called bull****. You still cannot answer the question because Bob
> > Schwartz is full of ****.
>
> > Sucking it,
> > DA74
>
> Stimulants are not needed when "**** to enhance recovery" is used. *If
> you feel in need of stimulants when using "**** to enhance recovery"
> then er, you havn't recovered and so need more rest or more "**** to
> enhance recovery". *You can take "**** to enhance recovery" on
> alternate days, doubling up and this lessens the negative effect on
> the immune response. *BTW, there are better ways than using "**** to
> enhance recovery" but requires tailoring to the individual which may
> take some time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Can you please tell this to Schwartz? He's telling people on the
internets that pros pair stimulants with "**** to enhance recovery" so
they can train harder. I keep asking him to inform the masses about
this secret doping protocol that the pros are using but he won't
oblige. It must be a remarkable doping protocol. A Belgian pro told
him about it. Well, told a friend who told Bob, you know how it is...

Thanks,
DA74

Frederick the Great[_2_]

June 24th 10, 03:24 AM

In article >,
"z, fred" > wrote:

> Anton Berlin wrote:
> > On Jun 23, 8:35 am, Brad Anders > wrote:
> >> On Jun 23, 5:46 am, Anton Berlin > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jun 22, 4:56 pm, Brad Anders > wrote:
> >>>> On Jun 22, 2:46 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> "Anton Berlin" > wrote in message
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>> Wouldn't he have to ?
> >>>>>> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/cycling/wires/06/22/2080.ap.cyc...
> >>>>> Care to share your reasoning with us?
> >>>> FWIW, I can't think of any other pro who has passed more WADA drug
> >>>> tests than Lance. A couple of possible conclusions you can draw is
> >>>> that either he's not taking drugs, or he knows how to take drugs in a
> >>>> way that has proven foolproof over a very long period of time.
> >>>> Regardless, seems like he has little to worry about on the dope
> >>>> testing front.
> >>>> Brad Anders
> >>> ****ing freek
> >>> http://www.active.com/cycling/Articles/WADA_rejects_report_that_clear...
> >> I agree, Dick Pound is a ****ing freek.
> >>
> >> Brad Anders- Hide quoted text -
> >>
> >> - Show quoted text -
> >
> > Because Lance can't bribe WADA like he did with the UCI ?
>
> I'm hardly the expert on bribes or bribing, but $100,000 doesn't seem
> like a whole lot of money when you consider that it probably would have
> to be split X number of ways, what LA could afford to pay, and what it
> would be worth to LA in both image and dollars to keep it quiet.

You'd be surprised at the low prices people put on their word.

--
Old Fritz

Frederick the Great[_2_]

June 24th 10, 03:31 AM

In article >,
Fred Flintstein > wrote:

> On 6/23/2010 3:03 PM, DA74 wrote:
> > Sucking it,
> > DA74
>
> Fockstick,
>
> Anyone that knows what goes on in the pointy end of
> the peloton would never even ask the question because
> they would already know the answer.

We (royal we) do not know that delta alpha 7^2 + 5^2
does not know the answer.

--
Old Fritz

thirty-six

June 24th 10, 03:31 AM

On 24 June, 03:00, DA74 > wrote:
> On Jun 23, 6:22*pm, thirty-six > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 23 June, 21:03, DA74 > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 23, 11:22*am, Fred Flintstein
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On 6/23/2010 12:02 PM, DA74 wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > > > >> idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a possibly-clean
> > > > >> pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get away
> > > > >> with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>
> > > > > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > > > > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > > > > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > > > > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > > > > know jack.
>
> > > > > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > > > > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > > > > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > > > > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > > > > You're Welcome,
> > > > > DA74
>
> > > > Fockstick,
>
> > > > You have a weird approach to trolling. Coggan bit on it, and Mike
> > > > might too. If I were Mike I'd tell you to suck it, but that's not
> > > > his style.
>
> > > > Fred Flintstein
>
> > > > PS If you're so knowledgeable about what goes on at the pointy end
> > > > of the peloton, why were you asking me about dope that enhances
> > > > recovery. That's pretty basic stuff, isn't it?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > ****tard of all ****tards,
> > > Your Asperger's is acting up again. I wasn't asking you to inform me.
> > > I was merely drawing you out to publicly illustrate your complete
> > > ignorance on the topic you were writing about. And you didn't
> > > disappoint. For those playing along at home:
>
> > > You, Bob Schwartz wrote:
>
> > > "If you are taking **** to enhance recovery you would pair that with
> > > stimulants to ramp up your training volume."
>
> > > Which of course is complete bull****. I called you on this and defied
> > > you to name a single protocol for this doping procedure you outlined.
> > > Very simple question. You then wrote:
>
> > > "A number of years ago package from Belgium addressed to a former
> > > pro's dad was discovered to be containing stimulants. When I asked an
> > > ex-pro about that he said that probably it was from someone using them
> > > to jack up their training load in preparation for Flanders and Paris-
> > > Roubaix. You would use them in training but not for a race because of
> > > the ease of detection."
>
> > > Which was an amusing anecdote that you probably half made up but the
> > > problem is that you never answered my question. This anecdote only
> > > talks about stimulants. You said you pair up stimulants with "**** to
> > > enhance recovery."
>
> > > What is the "**** to enhance recovery" that one would pair up with
> > > stimulants? If you are going to make a statement back it up. I simply
> > > called bull****. You still cannot answer the question because Bob
> > > Schwartz is full of ****.
>
> > > Sucking it,
> > > DA74
>
> > Stimulants are not needed when "**** to enhance recovery" is used. *If
> > you feel in need of stimulants when using "**** to enhance recovery"
> > then er, you havn't recovered and so need more rest or more "**** to
> > enhance recovery". *You can take "**** to enhance recovery" on
> > alternate days, doubling up and this lessens the negative effect on
> > the immune response. *BTW, there are better ways than using "**** to
> > enhance recovery" but requires tailoring to the individual which may
> > take some time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Can you please tell this to Schwartz? He's telling people on the
> internets that pros pair stimulants with "**** to enhance recovery" so
> they can train harder. I keep asking him to inform the masses about
> this secret doping protocol that the pros are using but he won't
> oblige. It must be a remarkable doping protocol. A Belgian pro told
> him about it. Well, told a friend who told Bob, you know how it is...
>
> Thanks,
> DA74

I imagine some serious endocrinological disturbances would occur
within about three months of using both and the 'athlete' would appear
burnt out. The reason for using stimulants could be that the use of
# has already suppressed the adrenal stress response. This is why
the use of # should be carefully considered and if 'necessary' it be
used either on alternate days or grouped days on/off.

Use of # does not allow harder training, but more frequent due to
speedier 'recovery' times.

z, fred

June 24th 10, 03:44 AM

Frederick the Great wrote:
> In article >,
> "z, fred" > wrote:
>
>> Anton Berlin wrote:
>>> On Jun 23, 8:35 am, Brad Anders > wrote:
>>>> On Jun 23, 5:46 am, Anton Berlin > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 22, 4:56 pm, Brad Anders > wrote:
>>>>>> On Jun 22, 2:46 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Anton Berlin" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> Wouldn't he have to ?
>>>>>>>> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/cycling/wires/06/22/2080.ap.cyc...
>>>>>>> Care to share your reasoning with us?
>>>>>> FWIW, I can't think of any other pro who has passed more WADA drug
>>>>>> tests than Lance. A couple of possible conclusions you can draw is
>>>>>> that either he's not taking drugs, or he knows how to take drugs in a
>>>>>> way that has proven foolproof over a very long period of time.
>>>>>> Regardless, seems like he has little to worry about on the dope
>>>>>> testing front.
>>>>>> Brad Anders
>>>>> ****ing freek
>>>>> http://www.active.com/cycling/Articles/WADA_rejects_report_that_clear...
>>>> I agree, Dick Pound is a ****ing freek.
>>>>
>>>> Brad Anders- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> Because Lance can't bribe WADA like he did with the UCI ?
>> I'm hardly the expert on bribes or bribing, but $100,000 doesn't seem
>> like a whole lot of money when you consider that it probably would have
>> to be split X number of ways, what LA could afford to pay, and what it
>> would be worth to LA in both image and dollars to keep it quiet.
>
> You'd be surprised at the low prices people put on their word.
>

Presumably higher than one could expect to profit from a tell-all.

H. Fred Kveck

June 24th 10, 03:47 AM

In article >,
DA74 > wrote:

> On Jun 23, 6:22*pm, thirty-six > wrote:

> > Stimulants are not needed when "**** to enhance recovery" is used. *If
> > you feel in need of stimulants when using "**** to enhance recovery"
> > then er, you havn't recovered and so need more rest or more "**** to
> > enhance recovery". *You can take "**** to enhance recovery" on
> > alternate days, doubling up and this lessens the negative effect on
> > the immune response. *BTW, there are better ways than using "**** to
> > enhance recovery" but requires tailoring to the individual which may
> > take some time.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Can you please tell this to Schwartz? He's telling people on the
> internets that pros pair stimulants with "**** to enhance recovery" so
> they can train harder. I keep asking him to inform the masses about
> this secret doping protocol that the pros are using but he won't
> oblige. It must be a remarkable doping protocol. A Belgian pro told
> him about it. Well, told a friend who told Bob, you know how it is...

If I saw that a position I was taking was agreed with by thirty-six, I'd be
rethinking my position. Just sayin'.

Frederick the Great[_2_]

June 24th 10, 04:02 AM

In article >,
Fred Flintstein > wrote:

> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> > On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
> >
> >> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> >> getting caught.
> >
> > Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> > to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> > Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
> >
> > The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> > because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> > that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> > where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> > viewpoint fits your fancy.
>
> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.

You know the honchos at FIFA are giving cycling
the old horse laugh. What a buncha maroons.

--
Old Fritz

Michael Press

June 24th 10, 04:08 AM

In article >,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" > wrote:

> "Brad Anders" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. Lafferty" > wrote:
>
> > Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> > getting caught.
> ==========
> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>
> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> viewpoint fits your fancy.
> ==========
>
> Not just the UCI (believing that a lack of positives was an indication
> things were improving). The French for several years chose to treat every
> positive test as evidence the sport was in chaos and perhaps beyond
> redemption. They could have chosen to treat positive tests as an indication
> of doing better against dopers. A lack of positive tests can be (and often
> is) an indication that the dopers are ahead of the curve. That's why I like
> the biological passport, because you start to see changes in obvious values
> over time, as your testing catches up or lags behind the dopers. Eventually
> you start to develop a sense for what might be relatively normal, which is
> what I believe they're getting to now.
>
> The sport needs both testing for specific agents as well as the biological
> passport which measures more what the agents do than it does whether they
> exist or not. That's my overly-simplified view of things, and why I'm
> cautiously optimistic that things will get better over time.

Increased positive test rate is not better.

> I'm very much against doping, past & present.

I cannot see why.

--
Michael Press

DA74

June 24th 10, 05:53 AM

On Jun 23, 7:31*pm, Frederick the Great > wrote:
> In article >,
> *Fred Flintstein > wrote:
>
> > On 6/23/2010 3:03 PM, DA74 wrote:
> > > Sucking it,
> > > DA74
>
> > Fockstick,
>
> > Anyone that knows what goes on in the pointy end of
> > the peloton would never even ask the question because
> > they would already know the answer.
>
> We (royal we) do not know that delta alpha 7^2 + 5^2
> does not know the answer.
>
> --
> Old Fritz

Wink. Nod.

Over 'n out,
delta alpha 7^2 + 5^2

DA74

June 24th 10, 06:01 AM

On Jun 23, 7:47*pm, "H. Fred Kveck" >
wrote:
> In article >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *DA74 > wrote:
> > On Jun 23, 6:22 pm, thirty-six > wrote:
> > > Stimulants are not needed when "**** to enhance recovery" is used. If
> > > you feel in need of stimulants when using "**** to enhance recovery"
> > > then er, you havn't recovered and so need more rest or more "**** to
> > > enhance recovery". You can take "**** to enhance recovery" on
> > > alternate days, doubling up and this lessens the negative effect on
> > > the immune response. BTW, there are better ways than using "**** to
> > > enhance recovery" but requires tailoring to the individual which may
> > > take some time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Can you please tell this to Schwartz? He's telling people on the
> > internets that pros pair stimulants with "**** to enhance recovery" so
> > they can train harder. I keep asking him to inform the masses about
> > this secret doping protocol that the pros are using but he won't
> > oblige. It must be a remarkable doping protocol. A Belgian pro told
> > him about it. Well, told a friend who told Bob, you know how it is...
>
> * *If I saw that a position I was taking was agreed with by thirty-six, I'd be
> rethinking my position. Just sayin'.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Whatchoo talkin' bout Willis? Trevor is a bro. Anyone who wants to
scrub a new tyre and thinks of acetone, hypochlorite or petroleum
product along with a powered scrubbing disc or using a scraper is A-OK
in my book.

And in case you're wondering, I know this because a Belgian Pro told
my friend this is how the pros do it.

Thanks,
delta alpha 7^2 + 5^2

DA74

June 24th 10, 06:15 AM

On Jun 23, 6:53*pm, Fred Flintstein >
wrote:
> DA74 wrote:
> > On Jun 23, 1:22 pm, Fred Flintstein >
> > wrote:
> >> On 6/23/2010 3:03 PM, DA74 wrote:
>
> >>> Sucking it,
> >>> DA74
> >> Fockstick,
>
> >> Anyone that knows what goes on in the pointy end of
> >> the peloton would never even ask the question because
> >> they would already know the answer.
>
> >> Fred Flintstein
>
> > Bull**** Bob,
>
> > That's your fourth weak deflection to the simple question at hand. You
> > were sharing your vast knowledge with the OP. I'm just asking you to
> > expound and add some legitimacy to your post. Come on, share your
> > brilliance with those that don't know what goes on in the pointy end
> > of the peloton.
>
> > What is the "**** that enhances recovery" that a professional riders
> > pair with stimulants?
>
> > Still sucking it,
> > DA74
>
> Four times and you still haven't figured it out.
>
> http://www.inimical.com/images/records/JFCCover.jpg
>
> Fred Flintstein- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Oh it's figured out Asshat. You talk out of your ass and can't back it
up when called on it. I just thought you'd at least have some
semblance of pride and make something else up. Subterfuge. Something.
Jesus ****ing Christ you dragged this out.

Don't you hate when you get your Schwartz twisted?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S25Zf8svHZQ

-delta alpha 7^2 + 5^2

Michael Press

June 24th 10, 06:34 AM

In article >,
"z, fred" > wrote:

> Frederick the Great wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "z, fred" > wrote:
> >
> >> Anton Berlin wrote:
> >>> On Jun 23, 8:35 am, Brad Anders > wrote:
> >>>> On Jun 23, 5:46 am, Anton Berlin > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Jun 22, 4:56 pm, Brad Anders > wrote:
> >>>>>> On Jun 22, 2:46 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> "Anton Berlin" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>> Wouldn't he have to ?
> >>>>>>>> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/cycling/wires/06/22/2080.ap.cyc...
> >>>>>>> Care to share your reasoning with us?
> >>>>>> FWIW, I can't think of any other pro who has passed more WADA drug
> >>>>>> tests than Lance. A couple of possible conclusions you can draw is
> >>>>>> that either he's not taking drugs, or he knows how to take drugs in a
> >>>>>> way that has proven foolproof over a very long period of time.
> >>>>>> Regardless, seems like he has little to worry about on the dope
> >>>>>> testing front.
> >>>>>> Brad Anders
> >>>>> ****ing freek
> >>>>> http://www.active.com/cycling/Articles/WADA_rejects_report_that_clear...
> >>>> I agree, Dick Pound is a ****ing freek.
> >>>>
> >>>> Brad Anders- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> Because Lance can't bribe WADA like he did with the UCI ?
> >> I'm hardly the expert on bribes or bribing, but $100,000 doesn't seem
> >> like a whole lot of money when you consider that it probably would have
> >> to be split X number of ways, what LA could afford to pay, and what it
> >> would be worth to LA in both image and dollars to keep it quiet.
> >
> > You'd be surprised at the low prices people put on their word.
> >
>
> Presumably higher than one could expect to profit from a tell-all.

You'd be surprised. People sell themselves cheaply.

--
Michael Press

DA74

June 24th 10, 06:43 AM

On Jun 23, 6:25*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jun 23, 2:02 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ....
> > On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > wrote:
>
> > > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> > ....
> > > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
> > > > possibly-clean
> > > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get
> > > > away
> > > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects.."
>
> > > ============
> > > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > > know jack.
>
> > > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > > You're Welcome,
> > > DA74
> > > =============
>
> > > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or forgot
> > > to
> > > feed & water your brain this week.
>
> > > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly"
> > > clean
> > > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before
> > > you
> > > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
> > > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
> > > something
> > > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
> > > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
> > > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before,
> > > let's
> > > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
> > > stupid to go overboard.
>
> > > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin.
>
> > > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please
> > > explain
> > > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
> > > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than
> > > cases
> > > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>
> > > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything
> > > about
> > > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken
> > > over
> > > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I
> > > rode
> > > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular
> > > it's
> > > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it
> > > took
> > > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to
> > > the
> > > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>
> > > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
> > ==========
> > Jacko,
> > Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
> > clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think these
> > "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
> > that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
> > maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base it's
> > almost endearing.
>
> > Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted from
> > doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
> > ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still at
> > it:
>
> > "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
> > trophy case didn't come easily"
>
> > You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
> > doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
> > your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
> > It's a fact.
> > -DA74
> > ==========
>
> > So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change came to
> > cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
> > soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided to just
> > let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt for
> > the
> > sins of WWII or something?
>
> > Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>
> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> =============
> Jacotard,
> I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
> about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
> got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
> sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but we
> won't include those yet.)
>
> The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
> from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.
>
> You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
> it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
> this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
> protect the innocents.
>
> (And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of the
> culture - but that's another thread bro).
> DA74
> ==============
>
> I don't argue that doping was, and maybe is, rampant (but I do argue that
> there's evidence it's on the decline). What I have said several times is
> that if it's as pervasive as you and many others say, then Lance didn't have
> an advantage over his peers. Some selection occurred, since few feel that
> *everybody* doped, but for the most part, you envision a fairly level
> playing field. With me so far?
>
> So my association with anything to do with competitive cycling, and anyone
> else's as well, is thus tainted?
>
> I don't get that. As I said before, a 3 kph difference in speed between
> racing clean vs dirty (and it will actually be less than that) isn't going
> to make the race any less exciting to watch.
>
> So what is it about this blood money stuff you think I'm associated with? Do
> you think I have some secret knowledge of what goes on, and that I hide it
> because it would be bad for sales? Let me tell you something you aren't
> going to believe. If it came out that Lance clearly doped, even if he
> confessed to it, it would have little if any impact on my bicycle sales.
> People would say yeah, sports, they all do it. Everybody cheats. The biggest
> loser if that were to happen would be to his Livestrong followers, the
> hundreds of thousands with cancer who have looked up to him and have
> benefitted from his organization. That would be sad. But that's not my
> business.
>
> And you know what? I've got a 17 year old son who rides, and I talk to him
> about this stuff. What would it mean if it turned out that Lance was
> cheating. How would that make him feel about what he does himself. Because
> as a parent, sure, you worry about the influences popular figures have. But
> he's his own person and that would really have no effect on him, other than
> a bit of resignation.
>
> Going after Lance & Trek and even me over this may be populist but
> deceptive. It's the entire cycling industry that's gotten wrapped up in
> sponsorship of your tainted peloton. Everybody's guilty. Or nobody. I'm
> leaning toward it being one of those things about a society in which
> cheating to get ahead isn't seen as being the evil thing it once was, using
> corporate greed (Enron) as an example of its acceptance. That's really sad.
> It's a powerful force to try and stop, and I think we sometimes expect too
> much from WADA and UCI. You can legislate actions, but not thoughts.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Mikey Mike,
That sure is a long reply to a simple concept. Your first point (that
LA didn't have an advantage) is invalid because you are making a huge
assumption, that teams had equal access to doping programs. What you
fail to understand is that at that time some teams had team-sponsored
doping programs and some had already disbanded theirs and riders made
their own arrangements with or without team assistance.

It is entirely within the realm of possibility if not an almost
established fact that USPS had a superior team-sponsored program that
was engineered by Ferrari. If their is any truth to Vaughters, Andreu,
Livingston, Steffen and Landis then this was in fact the case.
Livingston was said to have been shocked that T-Mobile didn't have a
team sponsored program. Vaughters was shocked that Credit Agricole
didn't have a team sponsored program. You should examine your beliefs
regarding this issue.

Now let's get this clear: I'm not singling you out. I'm not saying you
are tainted. I'm just saying that you happen to shill bikes for a
company that has leveraged (smartly in my view) a disproportionate
amount of benefit from illegal blood doping activities. And for this
you have benefitted right along with them. It's not a judgement on my
part. It's just a fact. You have benefitted monetarily from doping.
You have been an apparently unwitting yet apparently unquestioning
part of the doping machine. It's a fact.

And no, I don't think you have any special knowledge. I know you don't
have any special knowledge if your posts are an indication. And who
cares about a 3kph speed difference in the peloton. That is irrelevant
as it doesn't negate the fact that you have benefitted from doping.
And of course your sales wouldn't be impacted at this point if LA gets
busted. Your money is in the bank. That goodwill has been baked into
the Trek brand for the last decade. And no one is talking about your
kid. He's got nothing to do with anything here.

The fact of the matter is that you are a member of the doping-
industrial complex. Welcome bro.
-DA74

AlphaAlpha8^2+3

June 24th 10, 07:08 AM

"Mike Jacoubowsky" > wrote:
>"DA74" > wrote in message
...
>On Jun 23, 2:02 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>wrote:
>> "DA74" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>> On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > "DA74" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>> > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>> > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
>> > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
>> > > possibly-clean
>> > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he
>might get
>> > > away
>> > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects."
>>
>> > ============
>> > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
>> > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You
>have
>> > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you
>think
>> > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You
>don't
>> > know jack.
>>
>> > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your
>Trek
>> > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end
>of the
>> > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here
>but
>> > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>>
>> > You're Welcome,
>> > DA74
>> > =============
>>
>> > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed
>or forgot
>> > to
>> > feed & water your brain this week.
>>
>> > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly"
>
>> > clean
>> > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read
>before
>> > you
>> > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks
>that
>> > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
>> > something
>> > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and
>whomever
>> > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going
>to claim
>> > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever
>before,
>> > let's
>> > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for
>someone
>> > stupid to go overboard.
>>
>> > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just
>sayin.
>>
>> > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping,
>please
>> > explain
>> > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone
>is 3 kph
>> > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other
>than
>> > cases
>> > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>>
>> > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything
>> > about
>> > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads
>taken
>> > over
>> > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a
>climb I
>> > rode
>> > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular
>
>> > it's
>> > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what
>it
>> > took
>> > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to
>talk to
>> > the
>> > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>>
>> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
>> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
>> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>>
>> ==========
>> Jacko,
>> Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
>> clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think
>these
>> "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious
>and
>> that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
>> maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base
>it's
>> almost endearing.
>>
>> Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted
>from
>> doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
>> ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still
>at
>> it:
>>
>> "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
>> trophy case didn't come easily"
>>
>> You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
>> doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
>> your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
>> It's a fact.
>> -DA74
>> ==========
>>
>> So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change
>came to
>> cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
>> soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided
>to just
>> let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt
>for
>> the
>> sins of WWII or something?
>>
>> Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>>
>> --Mike Jacoubowsky
>> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
>> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>=============
>Jacotard,
>I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
>about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
>got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
>sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but
>we
>won't include those yet.)
>
>The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
>from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.
>
>You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
>it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
>this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
>protect the innocents.
>
>(And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of
>the
>culture - but that's another thread bro).
>DA74
>==============
>
>I don't argue that doping was, and maybe is, rampant (but I do argue
>that
>there's evidence it's on the decline). What I have said several times
>is
>that if it's as pervasive as you and many others say, then Lance didn't
>have
>an advantage over his peers. Some selection occurred, since few feel
>that
>*everybody* doped, but for the most part, you envision a fairly level
>
>playing field. With me so far?
>
>So my association with anything to do with competitive cycling, and
>anyone
>else's as well, is thus tainted?
>
>I don't get that. As I said before, a 3 kph difference in speed between
>
>racing clean vs dirty (and it will actually be less than that) isn't
>going
>to make the race any less exciting to watch.
>
>So what is it about this blood money stuff you think I'm associated
>with? Do
>you think I have some secret knowledge of what goes on, and that I
>hide it
>because it would be bad for sales? Let me tell you something you aren't
>
>going to believe. If it came out that Lance clearly doped, even if
>he
>confessed to it, it would have little if any impact on my bicycle
>sales.
>People would say yeah, sports, they all do it. Everybody cheats. The
>biggest
>loser if that were to happen would be to his Livestrong followers,
>the
>hundreds of thousands with cancer who have looked up to him and have
>
>benefitted from his organization. That would be sad. But that's not
>my
>business.
>
>And you know what? I've got a 17 year old son who rides, and I talk
>to him
>about this stuff. What would it mean if it turned out that Lance was
>
>cheating. How would that make him feel about what he does himself.
>Because
>as a parent, sure, you worry about the influences popular figures
>have. But
>he's his own person and that would really have no effect on him, other
>than
>a bit of resignation.
>
>Going after Lance & Trek and even me over this may be populist but
>
>deceptive. It's the entire cycling industry that's gotten wrapped
>up in
>sponsorship of your tainted peloton. Everybody's guilty. Or nobody.
>I'm
>leaning toward it being one of those things about a society in which
>
>cheating to get ahead isn't seen as being the evil thing it once was,
>using
>corporate greed (Enron) as an example of its acceptance. That's really
>sad.
>It's a powerful force to try and stop, and I think we sometimes expect
>too
>much from WADA and UCI. You can legislate actions, but not thoughts.
>
>--Mike Jacoubowsky
>Chain Reaction Bicycles
>www.ChainReaction.com
>Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>

That is quite a bit of protestation my friend. Did he hurt you bro?
Alpha^2

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 24th 10, 07:20 AM

======
"DA74" > wrote
The fact of the matter is that you are a member of the doping-
industrial complex. Welcome bro.
-DA74
======

Scary to think we're close to agreement on that point.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"DA74" > wrote in message
...
On Jun 23, 6:25 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jun 23, 2:02 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> > On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > wrote:
>
> > > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> > ...
> > > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
> > > > possibly-clean
> > > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he
> > > > might get
> > > > away
> > > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual
> > > > suspects."
>
> > > ============
> > > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even
> > > mention
> > > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You
> > > have
> > > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you
> > > think
> > > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You
> > > don't
> > > know jack.
>
> > > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your
> > > Trek
> > > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of
> > > the
> > > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here
> > > but
> > > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > > You're Welcome,
> > > DA74
> > > =============
>
> > > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or
> > > forgot
> > > to
> > > feed & water your brain this week.
>
> > > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a
> > > "possibly"
> > > clean
> > > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read
> > > before
> > > you
> > > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone
> > > thinks that
> > > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
> > > something
> > > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and
> > > whomever
> > > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to
> > > claim
> > > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever
> > > before,
> > > let's
> > > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for
> > > someone
> > > stupid to go overboard.
>
> > > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just
> > > sayin.
>
> > > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping,
> > > please
> > > explain
> > > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is
> > > 3 kph
> > > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other
> > > than
> > > cases
> > > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>
> > > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour,
> > > everything
> > > about
> > > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads
> > > taken
> > > over
> > > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a
> > > climb I
> > > rode
> > > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in
> > > particular
> > > it's
> > > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what
> > > it
> > > took
> > > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to
> > > talk to
> > > the
> > > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>
> > > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
> > ==========
> > Jacko,
> > Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
> > clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think
> > these
> > "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
> > that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
> > maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base
> > it's
> > almost endearing.
>
> > Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted
> > from
> > doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
> > ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still
> > at
> > it:
>
> > "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
> > trophy case didn't come easily"
>
> > You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
> > doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even
> > including
> > your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
> > It's a fact.
> > -DA74
> > ==========
>
> > So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change
> > came to
> > cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
> > soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided
> > to just
> > let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt
> > for
> > the
> > sins of WWII or something?
>
> > Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>
> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> =============
> Jacotard,
> I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
> about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
> got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
> sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but we
> won't include those yet.)
>
> The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
> from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.
>
> You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
> it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
> this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
> protect the innocents.
>
> (And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of the
> culture - but that's another thread bro).
> DA74
> ==============
>
> I don't argue that doping was, and maybe is, rampant (but I do argue
> that
> there's evidence it's on the decline). What I have said several times
> is
> that if it's as pervasive as you and many others say, then Lance
> didn't have
> an advantage over his peers. Some selection occurred, since few feel
> that
> *everybody* doped, but for the most part, you envision a fairly level
> playing field. With me so far?
>
> So my association with anything to do with competitive cycling, and
> anyone
> else's as well, is thus tainted?
>
> I don't get that. As I said before, a 3 kph difference in speed
> between
> racing clean vs dirty (and it will actually be less than that) isn't
> going
> to make the race any less exciting to watch.
>
> So what is it about this blood money stuff you think I'm associated
> with? Do
> you think I have some secret knowledge of what goes on, and that I
> hide it
> because it would be bad for sales? Let me tell you something you
> aren't
> going to believe. If it came out that Lance clearly doped, even if he
> confessed to it, it would have little if any impact on my bicycle
> sales.
> People would say yeah, sports, they all do it. Everybody cheats. The
> biggest
> loser if that were to happen would be to his Livestrong followers, the
> hundreds of thousands with cancer who have looked up to him and have
> benefitted from his organization. That would be sad. But that's not my
> business.
>
> And you know what? I've got a 17 year old son who rides, and I talk to
> him
> about this stuff. What would it mean if it turned out that Lance was
> cheating. How would that make him feel about what he does himself.
> Because
> as a parent, sure, you worry about the influences popular figures
> have. But
> he's his own person and that would really have no effect on him, other
> than
> a bit of resignation.
>
> Going after Lance & Trek and even me over this may be populist but
> deceptive. It's the entire cycling industry that's gotten wrapped up
> in
> sponsorship of your tainted peloton. Everybody's guilty. Or nobody.
> I'm
> leaning toward it being one of those things about a society in which
> cheating to get ahead isn't seen as being the evil thing it once was,
> using
> corporate greed (Enron) as an example of its acceptance. That's really
> sad.
> It's a powerful force to try and stop, and I think we sometimes expect
> too
> much from WADA and UCI. You can legislate actions, but not thoughts.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Mikey Mike,
That sure is a long reply to a simple concept. Your first point (that
LA didn't have an advantage) is invalid because you are making a huge
assumption, that teams had equal access to doping programs. What you
fail to understand is that at that time some teams had team-sponsored
doping programs and some had already disbanded theirs and riders made
their own arrangements with or without team assistance.

It is entirely within the realm of possibility if not an almost
established fact that USPS had a superior team-sponsored program that
was engineered by Ferrari. If their is any truth to Vaughters, Andreu,
Livingston, Steffen and Landis then this was in fact the case.
Livingston was said to have been shocked that T-Mobile didn't have a
team sponsored program. Vaughters was shocked that Credit Agricole
didn't have a team sponsored program. You should examine your beliefs
regarding this issue.

Now let's get this clear: I'm not singling you out. I'm not saying you
are tainted. I'm just saying that you happen to shill bikes for a
company that has leveraged (smartly in my view) a disproportionate
amount of benefit from illegal blood doping activities. And for this
you have benefitted right along with them. It's not a judgement on my
part. It's just a fact. You have benefitted monetarily from doping.
You have been an apparently unwitting yet apparently unquestioning
part of the doping machine. It's a fact.

And no, I don't think you have any special knowledge. I know you don't
have any special knowledge if your posts are an indication. And who
cares about a 3kph speed difference in the peloton. That is irrelevant
as it doesn't negate the fact that you have benefitted from doping.
And of course your sales wouldn't be impacted at this point if LA gets
busted. Your money is in the bank. That goodwill has been baked into
the Trek brand for the last decade. And no one is talking about your
kid. He's got nothing to do with anything here.

The fact of the matter is that you are a member of the doping-
industrial complex. Welcome bro.
-DA74

Mike Jacoubowsky

June 24th 10, 07:29 AM

"AlphaAlpha8^2+3" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike Jacoubowsky" > wrote:
>>"DA74" > wrote in message
...
>>On Jun 23, 2:02 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>>wrote:
>>> "DA74" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> ...
>>> On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > "DA74" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> ...
>>> > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
>>> > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
>>> > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
>>> > > possibly-clean
>>> > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he
>>might get
>>> > > away
>>> > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual
>>> > > suspects."
>>>
>>> > ============
>>> > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even
>>> > mention
>>> > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You
>>have
>>> > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you
>>think
>>> > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You
>>don't
>>> > know jack.
>>>
>>> > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your
>>Trek
>>> > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end
>>of the
>>> > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here
>>but
>>> > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>>>
>>> > You're Welcome,
>>> > DA74
>>> > =============
>>>
>>> > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed
>>or forgot
>>> > to
>>> > feed & water your brain this week.
>>>
>>> > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a
>>> > "possibly"
>>
>>> > clean
>>> > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read
>>before
>>> > you
>>> > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone
>>> > thinks
>>that
>>> > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
>>> > something
>>> > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and
>>whomever
>>> > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going
>>to claim
>>> > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever
>>before,
>>> > let's
>>> > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for
>>someone
>>> > stupid to go overboard.
>>>
>>> > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just
>>sayin.
>>>
>>> > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping,
>>please
>>> > explain
>>> > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone
>>is 3 kph
>>> > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other
>>than
>>> > cases
>>> > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>>>
>>> > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour,
>>> > everything
>>> > about
>>> > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads
>>taken
>>> > over
>>> > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a
>>climb I
>>> > rode
>>> > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in
>>> > particular
>>
>>> > it's
>>> > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what
>>it
>>> > took
>>> > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to
>>talk to
>>> > the
>>> > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>>>
>>> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
>>> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
>>> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> Jacko,
>>> Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
>>> clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think
>>these
>>> "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious
>>and
>>> that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
>>> maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base
>>it's
>>> almost endearing.
>>>
>>> Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted
>>from
>>> doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
>>> ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still
>>at
>>> it:
>>>
>>> "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
>>> trophy case didn't come easily"
>>>
>>> You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
>>> doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even
>>> including
>>> your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
>>> It's a fact.
>>> -DA74
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change
>>came to
>>> cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
>>> soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided
>>to just
>>> let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt
>>for
>>> the
>>> sins of WWII or something?
>>>
>>> Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>>>
>>> --Mike Jacoubowsky
>>> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
>>> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>=============
>>Jacotard,
>>I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
>>about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
>>got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
>>sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but
>>we
>>won't include those yet.)
>>
>>The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
>>from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.
>>
>>You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
>>it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
>>this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
>>protect the innocents.
>>
>>(And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of
>>the
>>culture - but that's another thread bro).
>>DA74
>>==============
>>
>>I don't argue that doping was, and maybe is, rampant (but I do argue
>>that
>>there's evidence it's on the decline). What I have said several times
>>is
>>that if it's as pervasive as you and many others say, then Lance
>>didn't
>>have
>>an advantage over his peers. Some selection occurred, since few feel
>>that
>>*everybody* doped, but for the most part, you envision a fairly level
>>
>>playing field. With me so far?
>>
>>So my association with anything to do with competitive cycling, and
>>anyone
>>else's as well, is thus tainted?
>>
>>I don't get that. As I said before, a 3 kph difference in speed
>>between
>>
>>racing clean vs dirty (and it will actually be less than that) isn't
>>going
>>to make the race any less exciting to watch.
>>
>>So what is it about this blood money stuff you think I'm associated
>>with? Do
>>you think I have some secret knowledge of what goes on, and that I
>>hide it
>>because it would be bad for sales? Let me tell you something you
>>aren't
>>
>>going to believe. If it came out that Lance clearly doped, even if
>>he
>>confessed to it, it would have little if any impact on my bicycle
>>sales.
>>People would say yeah, sports, they all do it. Everybody cheats. The
>>biggest
>>loser if that were to happen would be to his Livestrong followers,
>>the
>>hundreds of thousands with cancer who have looked up to him and have
>>
>>benefitted from his organization. That would be sad. But that's not
>>my
>>business.
>>
>>And you know what? I've got a 17 year old son who rides, and I talk
>>to him
>>about this stuff. What would it mean if it turned out that Lance was
>>
>>cheating. How would that make him feel about what he does himself.
>>Because
>>as a parent, sure, you worry about the influences popular figures
>>have. But
>>he's his own person and that would really have no effect on him, other
>>than
>>a bit of resignation.
>>
>>Going after Lance & Trek and even me over this may be populist but
>>
>>deceptive. It's the entire cycling industry that's gotten wrapped
>>up in
>>sponsorship of your tainted peloton. Everybody's guilty. Or nobody.
>>I'm
>>leaning toward it being one of those things about a society in which
>>
>>cheating to get ahead isn't seen as being the evil thing it once was,
>>using
>>corporate greed (Enron) as an example of its acceptance. That's really
>>sad.
>>It's a powerful force to try and stop, and I think we sometimes expect
>>too
>>much from WADA and UCI. You can legislate actions, but not thoughts.
>>
>>--Mike Jacoubowsky
>>Chain Reaction Bicycles
>>www.ChainReaction.com
>>Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>>
>
> That is quite a bit of protestation my friend. Did he hurt you bro?
> Alpha^2

DA74 helped me work through a few things. I'm still not sure where
DA74's coming from though. He's either an extraordinarily-repentent
sinner (not likely), is attempting to suppress a high level of guilt
over the fact that he's a continuing doper, or just another rbr guy
making it all up as he goes along.

It's funny that doping didn't bother me at all when I was racing, and it
was going on all around me at the time. I never considered it anything
more than an extension of their recreational drug use (typically
uppers/amphetamines, nothing terribly sophisticated). And the ultimate
irony that, even back then (mid-70s) guys were using inhalers that
didn't need them, and there I was, terminal allergies, couldn't breathe
worth a darn (worse now on a cool day) and never considered it. Did I
lose races to some of those guys? Yeah, sometimes, but I never once
thought it was because they were doping, and I still don't. But that was
then, this is now. Doping of that era carried both up & down sides
(uppers caused problems on hot days, for example). Current doping
appears to be highly tuned to the individual and, done "properly"
doesn't appear to have an obvious downside during the event.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

[email protected]

June 24th 10, 08:21 AM

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 15:08:26 -0700 (PDT), Brad Anders
> wrote:

>The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
>because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
>that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
>where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
>viewpoint fits your fancy.

Arguably it is the same thing, just not in the sense that the UCI is
trumpeting and not in the sense that the results reflect a 'clean'
intent. It will probably result in fewer bumps in the statistical
results, replacing it with a sophisticated slight rise, especially if
they keep switching which direction the tours come up the hills.

A result that allows the UCI to claim all riders are clean and Lemond
to claim all riders are dirty is probably the appropriate compromise
line, if we can all put up with some form of the UCI and Lemond at the
same time.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Betty[_2_]

June 24th 10, 11:58 AM

Michael Press wrote:
> You'd be surprised. People sell themselves cheaply.

Its not a hookers market.

Betty[_2_]

June 24th 10, 12:05 PM

AlphaAlpha8^2+3 wrote:

I think I prefer h^^2.

Betty[_2_]

June 24th 10, 12:21 PM

K. Fred Gauss wrote:
> I'm a FAR bigger badass than Mike. I bought gas at a BP station this
> morning, BITCH!

So did Tony Hayward and Stanley McCrystal.

Fred Flintstein

June 24th 10, 01:45 PM

On 6/24/2010 12:15 AM, DA74 wrote:
> -delta alpha 7^2 + 5^2

Fockstick,

You mean N+1, don't you?

Fred Flintstein

Anton Berlin

June 24th 10, 02:23 PM

On Jun 23, 5:15*pm, Fred Flintstein >
wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>
> > On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > *wrote:
>
> >> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> >> getting caught.
>
> > Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> > to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> > Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>
> > The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> > because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> > that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> > where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> > viewpoint fits your fancy.
>
> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>
> Fred Flintstein

For ****s sake, soccer (because of the money and the supemodels) is
probably worse than cycling.

Tour de France winners jack off to photos of benched soccer player's
girlfriends.

Anton Berlin

June 24th 10, 02:25 PM

On Jun 23, 5:25*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
wrote:
> "Brad Anders" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. Lafferty" > wrote:
>
> > Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> > getting caught.
>
> ==========
> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>
> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> viewpoint fits your fancy.
> ==========
>
> Not just the UCI (believing that a lack of positives was an indication
> things were improving). The French for several years chose to treat every
> positive test as evidence the sport was in chaos and perhaps beyond
> redemption. They could have chosen to treat positive tests as an indication
> of doing better against dopers. A lack of positive tests can be (and often
> is) an indication that the dopers are ahead of the curve. That's why I like
> the biological passport, because you start to see changes in obvious values
> over time, as your testing catches up or lags behind the dopers. Eventually
> you start to develop a sense for what might be relatively normal, which is
> what I believe they're getting to now.
>
> The sport needs both testing for specific agents as well as the biological
> passport which measures more what the agents do than it does whether they
> exist or not. That's my overly-simplified view of things, and why I'm
> cautiously optimistic that things will get better over time.
>
> I'm very much against doping, past & present. But I can rationalize a focus
> on the present because I find it hard to buy the idea that any one rider or
> team had a big advantage over other teams... whatever doping went on, was
> likely widespread and without any silver bullet allowed to just one star
> rider. Was it a level playing field? Not for all; it's obvious that some
> teams lacked the finances and perhaps the ability to rationalize and/or fear
> of prosecution to take part. Either that or their riders simply sucked
> big-time compared to eveyrone else. But the two-speed peloton had an awful
> lot of people at that higher speed. It can be argued that the best man did
> win, whether the event was clean or dirty. And it can also be equally argued
> that some may never have had a chance.
>
> That was then. This is now. I, probably naively, feel that we're seeing
> cleaner (not saying clean) racing than we did in the past.
>
> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

I think you're wrong - we're seeing across the board level playing
field doping that is just under detection when done right. But
everyonce in a while someone ****s up.

Maybe even like the real doping world, sacrificial lambs are given a
stronger dose that keeps the eye off the star.

Anton Berlin

June 24th 10, 02:26 PM

On Jun 23, 5:46*pm, "z, fred" > wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> > "Fred Flintstein" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> >>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > *wrote:
>
> >>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> >>>> getting caught.
>
> >>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> >>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> >>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>
> >>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> >>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> >>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> >>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> >>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
>
> >> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
> >> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
> >> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
> >> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>
> >> Fred Flintstein
>
> > Not sure if it's still the case, but back in the day you could buy all
> > manner of prescription antibiotics, without a presecription, for your
> > local aquarium store. Even as a minor. All the 'cillin drugs, sulfa, you
> > name it. If it could be used to treat fin & tail rot, or other fungus,
> > you could get it. And who knows what else.
>
> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > Chain Reaction Bicycles
> >www.ChainReaction.com
> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
> Can't you do the same thing via the internet?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Go to mexico or india. Just about anything can be bought and cheaply.

Anton Berlin

June 24th 10, 02:27 PM

On Jun 23, 7:37*pm, DA74 > wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2:02*pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> ....
> > On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > wrote:
>
> > > "DA74" > wrote in message
>
> > ....
> > > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> > > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> > > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
> > > > possibly-clean
> > > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he might get
> > > > away
> > > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual suspects.."
>
> > > ============
> > > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even mention
> > > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You have
> > > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you think
> > > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You don't
> > > know jack.
>
> > > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your Trek
> > > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end of the
> > > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here but
> > > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
>
> > > You're Welcome,
> > > DA74
> > > =============
>
> > > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or forgot to
> > > feed & water your brain this week.
>
> > > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a "possibly" clean
> > > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read before you
> > > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone thinks that
> > > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
> > > something
> > > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and whomever
> > > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going to claim
> > > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever before,
> > > let's
> > > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for someone
> > > stupid to go overboard.
>
> > > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just sayin.
>
> > > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping, please
> > > explain
> > > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone is 3 kph
> > > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other than
> > > cases
> > > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
>
> > > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour, everything
> > > about
> > > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads taken over
> > > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a climb I
> > > rode
> > > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in particular it's
> > > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what it took
> > > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to talk to the
> > > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
>
> > > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
>
> > ==========
> > Jacko,
> > Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
> > clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think these
> > "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious and
> > that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
> > maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base it's
> > almost endearing.
>
> > Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted from
> > doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
> > ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still at
> > it:
>
> > "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
> > trophy case didn't come easily"
>
> > You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
> > doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even including
> > your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
> > It's a fact.
> > -DA74
> > ==========
>
> > So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change came to
> > cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
> > soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided to just
> > let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt for the
> > sins of WWII or something?
>
> > Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
>
> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Jacotard,
> I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
> about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
> got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
> sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but we
> won't include those yet.)
>
> The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
> from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.
>
> You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
> it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
> this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
> protect the innocents.
>
> (And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of the
> culture - but that's another thread bro).
> DA74- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Take it easy on Jabouskey, he has to sleep with himself.

(primarily because no one else will )

Anton Berlin

June 24th 10, 02:32 PM

the real sin of Trek* is their use of coercion in suppressing the
truth. If they really cared about cycling they let Lemond and
Armstrong battle it out without taking sides.

* besides their cheap as **** frames that constantly break and
fracture any time a real athlete puts some torque on one.

z, fred

June 24th 10, 03:08 PM

Anton Berlin wrote:
> On Jun 23, 5:15 pm, Fred Flintstein >
> wrote:
>> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
>>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
>>>> getting caught.
>>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
>>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
>>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
>>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
>>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
>>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
>>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
>> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
>> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
>> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
>> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>>
>> Fred Flintstein
>
> For ****s sake, soccer (because of the money and the supemodels) is
> probably worse than cycling.
>
> Tour de France winners jack off to photos of benched soccer player's
> girlfriends.

How many soccer players jack off to photos of Giro d'Italia winners'
sisters?

z, fred

June 24th 10, 03:09 PM

z, fred

June 24th 10, 03:10 PM

Anton Berlin wrote:
> On Jun 23, 5:15 pm, Fred Flintstein >
> wrote:
>> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
>>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
>>>> getting caught.
>>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
>>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
>>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
>>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
>>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
>>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
>>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
>> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
>> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
>> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
>> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>>
>> Fred Flintstein
>
> For ****s sake, soccer (because of the money and the supemodels) is
> probably worse than cycling.
>
> Tour de France winners jack off to photos of benched soccer player's
> girlfriends.

Nobody is jacking off to this:

http://i44.tinypic.com/ak8xaa.jpg

Anton Berlin

June 24th 10, 03:13 PM

On Jun 24, 9:09*am, "z, fred" > wrote:
> Anton Berlin wrote:
> > On Jun 23, 5:15 pm, Fred Flintstein >
> > wrote:
> >> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>
> >>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > *wrote:
> >>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> >>>> getting caught.
> >>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> >>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> >>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
> >>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> >>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> >>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> >>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> >>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
> >> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
> >> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
> >> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
> >> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>
> >> Fred Flintstein
>
> > For ****s sake, soccer (because of the money and the supemodels) is
> > probably worse than cycling.
>
> > Tour de France winners jack off to photos of benched soccer player's
> > girlfriends.
>
> Hey village idiot: it's players, not player's.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

We have a new village idiot on standby....!

If you're going to correct someone at least be right about it.
Player's girlfriends - as in the girlfriends of the players.

z, fred

June 24th 10, 03:15 PM

Anton Berlin wrote:
> On Jun 24, 9:09 am, "z, fred" > wrote:
>> Anton Berlin wrote:
>>> On Jun 23, 5:15 pm, Fred Flintstein >
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > wrote:
>>>>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
>>>>>> getting caught.
>>>>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
>>>>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
>>>>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
>>>>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
>>>>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
>>>>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
>>>>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
>>>>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
>>>> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
>>>> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
>>>> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
>>>> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>>>> Fred Flintstein
>>> For ****s sake, soccer (because of the money and the supemodels) is
>>> probably worse than cycling.
>>> Tour de France winners jack off to photos of benched soccer player's
>>> girlfriends.
>> Hey village idiot: it's players, not player's.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> We have a new village idiot on standby....!
>
> If you're going to correct someone at least be right about it.
> Player's girlfriends - as in the girlfriends of the players.

Only fag's [sic] look at typos.

RicodJour

June 24th 10, 03:24 PM

On Jun 24, 10:13*am, Anton Berlin > wrote:
> On Jun 24, 9:09*am, "z, fred" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Anton Berlin wrote:
> > > On Jun 23, 5:15 pm, Fred Flintstein >
> > > wrote:
> > >> On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>
> > >>> On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > *wrote:
> > >>>> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> > >>>> getting caught.
> > >>> Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> > >>> to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> > >>> Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
> > >>> The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> > >>> because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> > >>> that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> > >>> where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> > >>> viewpoint fits your fancy.
> > >> I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
> > >> these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
> > >> walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
> > >> all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>
> > >> Fred Flintstein
>
> > > For ****s sake, soccer (because of the money and the supemodels) is
> > > probably worse than cycling.
>
> > > Tour de France winners jack off to photos of benched soccer player's
> > > girlfriends.
>
> > Hey village idiot: it's players, not player's.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> We have a new village idiot on standby....!
>
> If you're going to correct someone at least be right about it.
> Player's girlfriends - as in the girlfriends of the players.

Odd - I always thought it was players', you know, because it is.

Why don't you parse out the permutations as an exercise?

R

Zeno

June 24th 10, 03:38 PM

On Jun 22, 3:42*pm, Anton Berlin > wrote:
> Wouldn't he have to ?
>
> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/cycling/wires/06/22/2080.ap.cyc...

Anton --

Many thanks for taking time off from wanking to post this. OTH, I
guess it's not really time off.

Never mind

Zeno

thirty-six

June 24th 10, 04:43 PM

On 24 June, 06:01, DA74 > wrote:
> On Jun 23, 7:47*pm, "H. Fred Kveck" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article >,
>
> > *DA74 > wrote:
> > > On Jun 23, 6:22 pm, thirty-six > wrote:
> > > > Stimulants are not needed when "**** to enhance recovery" is used. If
> > > > you feel in need of stimulants when using "**** to enhance recovery"
> > > > then er, you havn't recovered and so need more rest or more "**** to
> > > > enhance recovery". You can take "**** to enhance recovery" on
> > > > alternate days, doubling up and this lessens the negative effect on
> > > > the immune response. BTW, there are better ways than using "**** to
> > > > enhance recovery" but requires tailoring to the individual which may
> > > > take some time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Can you please tell this to Schwartz? He's telling people on the
> > > internets that pros pair stimulants with "**** to enhance recovery" so
> > > they can train harder. I keep asking him to inform the masses about
> > > this secret doping protocol that the pros are using but he won't
> > > oblige. It must be a remarkable doping protocol. A Belgian pro told
> > > him about it. Well, told a friend who told Bob, you know how it is...
>
> > * *If I saw that a position I was taking was agreed with by thirty-six, I'd be
> > rethinking my position. Just sayin'.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Whatchoo talkin' bout Willis? Trevor is a bro. Anyone who wants to
> scrub a new tyre and thinks of acetone, hypochlorite or petroleum
> product along with a powered scrubbing disc or using a scraper is A-OK
> in my book.

Those tyres still havn't seen any rain, or positions, so praying for
good weather would have been enough.

>
> And in case you're wondering, I know this because a Belgian Pro told
> my friend this is how the pros do it.
>
> Thanks,
> delta alpha 7^2 + 5^2

Frederick the Great[_2_]

June 24th 10, 06:38 PM

In article >,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" > wrote:

> "AlphaAlpha8^2+3" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Mike Jacoubowsky" > wrote:
> >>"DA74" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>On Jun 23, 2:02 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> >>wrote:
> >>> "DA74" > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>> ...
> >>> On Jun 23, 11:55 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > "DA74" > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>> ...
> >>> > On Jun 23, 8:38 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" >
> >>> > wrote:> Lance has nothing to worry about. Others may; some young
> >>> > > idiot is going to see an opportunity to take advantage of a
> >>> > > possibly-clean
> >>> > > pointy end of the pack and do something stupid, thinking he
> >>might get
> >>> > > away
> >>> > > with it. But it won't be Lance, or any other of the "usual
> >>> > > suspects."
> >>>
> >>> > ============
> >>> > Listen up Big Jacobowski, you are ****ing delusional to even
> >>> > mention
> >>> > the words "possibly-clean" at the pointy end of the peloton. You
> >>have
> >>> > no clue what goes on there. It's not your world even though you
> >>think
> >>> > it is. You're a fanboy and a low level industry retailer. You
> >>don't
> >>> > know jack.
> >>>
> >>> > And while we're at it let's get something else straight - Your
> >>Trek
> >>> > dealership has benefitted greatly from doping at the pointy end
> >>of the
> >>> > pack. Maybe you're trying to justify something to yourself here
> >>but
> >>> > the fact remains: you have blood money on your hands.
> >>>
> >>> > You're Welcome,
> >>> > DA74
> >>> > =============
> >>>
> >>> > I can't tell whether you woke up on the wrong side of the bed
> >>or forgot
> >>> > to
> >>> > feed & water your brain this week.
> >>>
> >>> > I said that some riders might want to take advantage of a
> >>> > "possibly"
> >>
> >>> > clean
> >>> > front of the pack. I didn't say it was clean. Get a clue, read
> >>before
> >>> > you
> >>> > leap. People look for competitive advantages, and if someone
> >>> > thinks
> >>that
> >>> > people are running "cleaner" then there's more advantage to doing
> >>> > something
> >>> > "big" and maybe getting away with it. The more WADA and UCI and
> >>whomever
> >>> > squeeze, and they ARE squeezing (although I'm sure you're going
> >>to claim
> >>> > you're privy to knowing that it's actually worse now than ever
> >>before,
> >>> > let's
> >>> > seem some evidence on the table), the greater the incentive for
> >>someone
> >>> > stupid to go overboard.
> >>>
> >>> > But you won't come back with an articulate response to that. Just
> >>sayin.
> >>>
> >>> > Regarding Trek and others deriving great benefit from doping,
> >>please
> >>> > explain
> >>> > exactly how this is so? People don't buy bikes because someone
> >>is 3 kph
> >>> > faster this year than 20 years ago. It's the spectacle, and other
> >>than
> >>> > cases
> >>> > like Simpson, how does doping enhance the spectacle?
> >>>
> >>> > Fanboy? Maybe, not sure. I love the spectacle of the 'Tour,
> >>> > everything
> >>> > about
> >>> > it, the people who come out of the villages to watch, the roads
> >>taken
> >>> > over
> >>> > by cyclists, watching the best riders in the world suffer on a
> >>climb I
> >>> > rode
> >>> > up a few hours prior. If I'm a real "fan" of any rider in
> >>> > particular
> >>
> >>> > it's
> >>> > Chris Horner. So now you're going to foam at the mouth about what
> >>it
> >>> > took
> >>> > for Chris to dominate the national scene here? I'd tell you to
> >>talk to
> >>> > the
> >>> > hand, but the hand doesn't care.
> >>>
> >>> > --Mike Jacoubowsky
> >>> > Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> >>> > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
> >>>
> >>> ==========
> >>> Jacko,
> >>> Again, you are ****ing delusional to mention the words "possibly
> >>> clean" and the pointy end of the peloton. Do you seriously think
> >>these
> >>> "young idiots" get on CyclingNews and read that WADA is serious
> >>and
> >>> that maybe the top stars are clean or cleaner so they figure that
> >>> maybe they can ride dirtier and win? You are so ****ing off base
> >>it's
> >>> almost endearing.
> >>>
> >>> Trek and blood money? You seriously don't think you've benefitted
> >>from
> >>> doping? You're ****ing delusional all over again. You've seen Treks
> >>> ads capitalizing on all the TdF wins all these years. They're still
> >>at
> >>> it:
> >>>
> >>> "Greatness Is Built Into Our DNA. The nine yellow jerseys in our
> >>> trophy case didn't come easily"
> >>>
> >>> You also know that around a half dozen former US Postal riders were
> >>> doping from either admissions or positives. And I'm not even
> >>> including
> >>> your sacred cow. Wake up bro. You're living off dirty blood money.
> >>> It's a fact.
> >>> -DA74
> >>> ==========
> >>>
> >>> So Lance and his team are dirty and nobody else? Some great change
> >>came to
> >>> cycling after Festina, such that lo and behold, all teams but the
> >>> soon-to-be-born US Postal got religion and rode clean, and decided
> >>to just
> >>> let Postal get away with it. What do you ascribe this to, Euro-guilt
> >>for
> >>> the
> >>> sins of WWII or something?
> >>>
> >>> Yep, that's it. Thanks for the helping me see the light.
> >>>
> >>> --Mike Jacoubowsky
> >>> Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com
> >>> Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA- Hide quoted text -
> >>>
> >>> - Show quoted text -
> >>=============
> >>Jacotard,
> >>I'm not referring to any other teams here. I'm specifically talking
> >>about the Trek sponsored USPS team. Just off the top of my head we've
> >>got Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Andreu, Vaughters and Joachim. (And your
> >>sacred cow tested positive in retro tests dating to '99 samples but
> >>we
> >>won't include those yet.)
> >>
> >>The fact remains that you've made blood money. You have benefitted
> >>from doping. THAT'S A FACT JAC.
> >>
> >>You just need to come to terms with it. Like Chang correctly said,
> >>it's the way of the world. I'm just astounded that you haven't put
> >>this together yet...or maybe you have and you're playing coy to
> >>protect the innocents.
> >>
> >>(And by the way, the Festina affair simply reduced the openness of
> >>the
> >>culture - but that's another thread bro).
> >>DA74
> >>==============
> >>
> >>I don't argue that doping was, and maybe is, rampant (but I do argue
> >>that
> >>there's evidence it's on the decline). What I have said several times
> >>is
> >>that if it's as pervasive as you and many others say, then Lance
> >>didn't
> >>have
> >>an advantage over his peers. Some selection occurred, since few feel
> >>that
> >>*everybody* doped, but for the most part, you envision a fairly level
> >>
> >>playing field. With me so far?
> >>
> >>So my association with anything to do with competitive cycling, and
> >>anyone
> >>else's as well, is thus tainted?
> >>
> >>I don't get that. As I said before, a 3 kph difference in speed
> >>between
> >>
> >>racing clean vs dirty (and it will actually be less than that) isn't
> >>going
> >>to make the race any less exciting to watch.
> >>
> >>So what is it about this blood money stuff you think I'm associated
> >>with? Do
> >>you think I have some secret knowledge of what goes on, and that I
> >>hide it
> >>because it would be bad for sales? Let me tell you something you
> >>aren't
> >>
> >>going to believe. If it came out that Lance clearly doped, even if
> >>he
> >>confessed to it, it would have little if any impact on my bicycle
> >>sales.
> >>People would say yeah, sports, they all do it. Everybody cheats. The
> >>biggest
> >>loser if that were to happen would be to his Livestrong followers,
> >>the
> >>hundreds of thousands with cancer who have looked up to him and have
> >>
> >>benefitted from his organization. That would be sad. But that's not
> >>my
> >>business.
> >>
> >>And you know what? I've got a 17 year old son who rides, and I talk
> >>to him
> >>about this stuff. What would it mean if it turned out that Lance was
> >>
> >>cheating. How would that make him feel about what he does himself.
> >>Because
> >>as a parent, sure, you worry about the influences popular figures
> >>have. But
> >>he's his own person and that would really have no effect on him, other
> >>than
> >>a bit of resignation.
> >>
> >>Going after Lance & Trek and even me over this may be populist but
> >>
> >>deceptive. It's the entire cycling industry that's gotten wrapped
> >>up in
> >>sponsorship of your tainted peloton. Everybody's guilty. Or nobody.
> >>I'm
> >>leaning toward it being one of those things about a society in which
> >>
> >>cheating to get ahead isn't seen as being the evil thing it once was,
> >>using
> >>corporate greed (Enron) as an example of its acceptance. That's really
> >>sad.
> >>It's a powerful force to try and stop, and I think we sometimes expect
> >>too
> >>much from WADA and UCI. You can legislate actions, but not thoughts.
> >>
> >>--Mike Jacoubowsky
> >>Chain Reaction Bicycles
> >>www.ChainReaction.com
> >>Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
> >>
> >
> > That is quite a bit of protestation my friend. Did he hurt you bro?
> > Alpha^2
>
> DA74 helped me work through a few things. I'm still not sure where
> DA74's coming from though. He's either an extraordinarily-repentent
> sinner (not likely), is attempting to suppress a high level of guilt
> over the fact that he's a continuing doper, or just another rbr guy
> making it all up as he goes along.
>
> It's funny that doping didn't bother me at all when I was racing, and it
> was going on all around me at the time. I never considered it anything
> more than an extension of their recreational drug use (typically
> uppers/amphetamines, nothing terribly sophisticated). And the ultimate
> irony that, even back then (mid-70s) guys were using inhalers that
> didn't need them, and there I was, terminal allergies, couldn't breathe
> worth a darn (worse now on a cool day) and never considered it. Did I
> lose races to some of those guys? Yeah, sometimes, but I never once
> thought it was because they were doping, and I still don't. But that was
> then, this is now. Doping of that era carried both up & down sides
> (uppers caused problems on hot days, for example). Current doping
> appears to be highly tuned to the individual and, done "properly"
> doesn't appear to have an obvious downside during the event.

So people are getting better medical advice,
and you treat it as if it is _bad_ thing.

--
Old Fritz

Frederick the Great[_2_]

June 24th 10, 06:43 PM

In article >,
Betty > wrote:

> AlphaAlpha8^2+3 wrote:
>
> I think I prefer h^^2.

= h^h

--
Old Fritz

Frederick the Great[_2_]

June 24th 10, 06:49 PM

In article
>,
Anton Berlin > wrote:

> On Jun 23, 5:15Â*pm, Fred Flintstein >
> wrote:
> > On 6/23/2010 5:08 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> >
> > > On Jun 23, 2:36 pm, "B. > Â*wrote:
> >
> > >> Festina was wake up call to teams wanting to win at any cost--except
> > >> getting caught.
> >
> > > Festina was sloppy and they got caught. I think the "wake up call" was
> > > to tell teams and individuals that they needed to be more careful.
> > > Landis' assertions seem to support this view.
> >
> > > The UCI has been trumpeting how that the peloton is getting "cleaner"
> > > because there are fewer positive tests. The alternate explanation is
> > > that teams and individuals have refined their methods to the point
> > > where the chance of being detected is quite low. Pick which ever
> > > viewpoint fits your fancy.
> >
> > I wish cycling did things the way soccer does. They never have
> > these problems. All those sides in countries where anyone can
> > walk into the pharmacy and buy medicine for their horse, they're
> > all clean as can be. That's how cycling should do it.
>
> For ****s sake, soccer (because of the money and the supemodels) is
> probably worse than cycling.

Yes, we know this.

> Tour de France winners jack off to photos of benched soccer player's
> girlfriends.

We do not want to know this.

--
Old Fritz

thirty-six

June 24th 10, 07:26 PM

On 24 June, 16:43, thirty-six > wrote:
> On 24 June, 06:01, DA74 > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 23, 7:47*pm, "H. Fred Kveck" >
> > wrote:
>
> > > In article >,
>
> > > *DA74 > wrote:
> > > > On Jun 23, 6:22 pm, thirty-six > wrote:
> > > > > Stimulants are not needed when "**** to enhance recovery" is used.. If
> > > > > you feel in need of stimulants when using "**** to enhance recovery"
> > > > > then er, you havn't recovered and so need more rest or more "**** to
> > > > > enhance recovery". You can take "**** to enhance recovery" on
> > > > > alternate days, doubling up and this lessens the negative effect on
> > > > > the immune response. BTW, there are better ways than using "**** to
> > > > > enhance recovery" but requires tailoring to the individual which may
> > > > > take some time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Can you please tell this to Schwartz? He's telling people on the
> > > > internets that pros pair stimulants with "**** to enhance recovery" so
> > > > they can train harder. I keep asking him to inform the masses about
> > > > this secret doping protocol that the pros are using but he won't
> > > > oblige. It must be a remarkable doping protocol. A Belgian pro told
> > > > him about it. Well, told a friend who told Bob, you know how it is....
>
> > > * *If I saw that a position I was taking was agreed with by thirty-six, I'd be
> > > rethinking my position. Just sayin'.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Whatchoo talkin' bout Willis? Trevor is a bro. Anyone who wants to
> > scrub a new tyre and thinks of acetone, hypochlorite or petroleum
> > product along with a powered scrubbing disc or using a scraper is A-OK
> > in my book.
>
> Those tyres still havn't seen any rain, or positions, so praying for
> good weather would have been enough.

The water board are now threatening a hosepipe ban. Which probably
means unless it rains persistently for the next two weeks, it will
probably be enforced at some time this year. B'stfrds are selling our
water to neighbouring districts, the City constructed a reservoir
which has supplied well in excess of requirements for many years. And
there is still the ground water which previously supplied all needs
of a greater population.