Hecklers starting to joust with the Dope King

On Jun 7, 11:27*am, "marco" wrote:
Brad Anders wrote:
Anton, you said you just stopped by his shop this past weekend, and it
sounds like you will likely have (or have had) the opportunity to
challenge Lance. Tell us what you did, or what you're going to do, we
all need the guidance. Are you going to bring your dual syringes
again?
Anton Berlin wrote:
I wouldn't go out of my way to run into him but if I did I doubt I
would waste my time or voice. *Lance is pretty practiced at denial.

A week before the Tour of California, my wife and I were driving to the
nursery when we came up behind a slow moving SUV following two riders. I
knew immediately who it was--Lance riding with a friend of mine. I told my
wife and she got really excited (she's got a thing for celebrities). I
rolled down the passenger window and proceeded to pass the SUV and slow down
beside the riders. Lance turned toward us looking a bit annoyed. Out of
respect for my friend, I resisted my initial temptation to heckle him ...but
we didn't acknowledge him either. We just yelled "Hi" to my friend.

It's one thing to have a harsh opinion about somebody, but it's something
different to confront them directly, especially if the issue doesn't really
impact you. Actually, I'm conflicted... I do feel really bad for those guys
who stayed clean even though it meant a one-way ticket home. That's why the
doping apologists like --D-y bug me. Yeah, the system is corrupt, but still
some guys have enough integrity to say "No".

I have struggled with my views on doping in cycling for a long time,
and I've advocated harsh sanctions against dopers in this n.g. as long
ago as '94 or possibly earler. My current view is that effective,
undetectable doping methods have existed for years, and while great
progress has been made in detection, such methods will continue to
exist and develop. Cycling will never be rid of doping, and neither
will other endurance sports.

So, what do you do as a fan? For me, my choices are to quit following
the sport or to assume that what I'm watching is a reasonably level
playing field, where the top guys I'm watching are doing essentially
the same things as their competitors. Those that go too far to gain an
unfair advantage pay the price. Those that are too careless pay the
price. Those that burn everyone on the way pay the price. There is
plenty of evidence that these eventualities are exactly what is
happening. Who knows, it may happen to Lance. Time will tell.

What is the impact on me as a cyclist, and as a parent? As a cyclist,
I don't care if pros are doping. I don't race any more, so I don't
care about master's fatties doping themselves to the gills to win the
COVETED STARS AND STRIPES JERSEY. As a parent, I would never advocate
a pro sports career to my kids in the first place, especially cycling,
no matter what talent level they show. In cycling, it's pretty clear
that for the ultra-elite, when they reach a certain level (and maybe,
way before then), they're confronted with a very ugly reality, which
is that effective, undetectable doping strategies exist that make the
difference at the 0.05% level that separates the winners from the also-
rans. Given the gigantic investment in time and effort that a cyclist
at this level has put into the sport at that point, it's not
surprising that some decide to drink the Kool-Aide and do what they
need to. Some don't, and that takes a lot of guts to do. As for my
kids, I'd rather see them pursue a career that has more potential for
lifelong accomplishment, and treat athletics as a requirement for a
healthy life and fun.

Brad Anders

Brad Anders wrote:

I have struggled with my views on doping in cycling for a long time,
and I've advocated harsh sanctions against dopers in this n.g. as long
ago as '94 or possibly earler. My current view is that effective,
undetectable doping methods have existed for years, and while great
progress has been made in detection, such methods will continue to
exist and develop. Cycling will never be rid of doping, and neither
will other endurance sports.

So, what do you do as a fan? For me, my choices are to quit following
the sport or to assume that what I'm watching is a reasonably level
playing field, where the top guys I'm watching are doing essentially
the same things as their competitors. Those that go too far to gain an
unfair advantage pay the price. Those that are too careless pay the
price. Those that burn everyone on the way pay the price.

+1 ( +N in fact - as many I know feel the same way) .

All I hope is that I never come to see the day that those I revered are
shown to have been doping during their heyday (although their 'doping
family trees' suggest it may only be a matter of time) ... :-(


Regards,
Steven Perryman

In article
,
Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:

On Jun 6, 4:39Â*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:
Lance better talk to his attorneys before he realizes too late you
can't punch people for telling the truth.

They ain't 'fighting words' if they're true. Â*(of course I have no
idea what the laws in LU are)

But in Amerika it's open season on Lance.

http://gantdaily.com/2010/06/06/heck...armstrongs-thi...

The LANCE has previously shown hecklers that he is
not to be trifled with:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b... 42006738809f3

http://magliarosa.wordpress.com/2009...diabo-moderno/

Should have dispatched a water carrier to dismount
and rub snow in tool boy's face.

--
Michael Press

In article
,
Anton Berlin wrote:

On Jun 7, 11:17Â*am, Brad Anders wrote:
On Jun 7, 7:52Â*am, Anton Berlin wrote:

Probably a publicity stunt paid for by Lance. Â*(and yes I saw it when
it came out)

Question this ---Why does John Elway pull one car out of the snowy
ditch every winter and there just happens to be a tv station and news
photographer there when he does it?

Is it because he's a genuine nice guy or is because he has 17 car
dealerships in Denver and people like to buy cars from a nice guy?

Lance Inc has a bigger media machine than most companies up to a $B in
annual revenues.

It's just sad that the guy didn't step up when challenged, sooner or
later someone will and that's when it gets interesting.

Anton, you said you just stopped by his shop this past weekend, and it
sounds like you will likely have (or have had) the opportunity to
challenge Lance. Tell us what you did, or what you're going to do, we
all need the guidance. Are you going to bring your dual syringes
again?

thanks,

Brad Anders

I wouldn't go out of my way to run into him but if I did I doubt I
would waste my time or voice. Lance is pretty practiced at denial.

Why isn't he suing Landis ? In the past he did the next day.

More proof that LANCE took drugs for performance!

--
Michael Press

In article
,
Anton Berlin wrote:

Brad,

I kill a little time at work ranting on these boards and the stories
in the Dallas newspaper but other than that I don't really care that
much.

I'm not an ex-pro, just one of many ex cat1s that exist. Life is busy
enough and the arenas I do my battles in are far more personal to
me.

And the reality is I don't any real passion or anger towards Lance or
even BP or Wall Street as examples.

It's a long haul and there are far greater forces in the universe
working to balance these things out.

Lance and all of the other cheaters in the world have a psychology
that allows them not to realize that simple fundamental reality.

I do not believe you as you claim to dispassionately
observe. You write with venom; with a serious,
humorless, edge; with a kind of energy the matter does
not deserve; a matter that has nothing to do with you
personally or your endeavor to get along in the world.

--
Michael Press

S Perryman wrote:
those I revered

There's your problem right there.

On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 11:27:34 -0700 (PDT), Anton Berlin
wrote:

It's a long haul and there are far greater forces in the universe
working to balance these things out.

But evidently many aren't willing to chance it...

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

Anton Berlin wrote:
It's a long haul and there are far greater forces in the universe
working to balance these things out.

Dark energy doesn't work if you get your candles wrong.

On Jun 7, 1:27*pm, "marco" wrote:
Brad Anders wrote:
Anton, you said you just stopped by his shop this past weekend, and it
sounds like you will likely have (or have had) the opportunity to
challenge Lance. Tell us what you did, or what you're going to do, we
all need the guidance. Are you going to bring your dual syringes
again?
Anton Berlin wrote:
I wouldn't go out of my way to run into him but if I did I doubt I
would waste my time or voice. *Lance is pretty practiced at denial.

A week before the Tour of California, my wife and I were driving to the
nursery when we came up behind a slow moving SUV following two riders. I
knew immediately who it was--Lance riding with a friend of mine. I told my
wife and she got really excited (she's got a thing for celebrities). I
rolled down the passenger window and proceeded to pass the SUV and slow down
beside the riders. Lance turned toward us looking a bit annoyed. Out of
respect for my friend, I resisted my initial temptation to heckle him ...but
we didn't acknowledge him either. We just yelled "Hi" to my friend.

It's one thing to have a harsh opinion about somebody, but it's something
different to confront them directly, especially if the issue doesn't really
impact you. Actually, I'm conflicted... I do feel really bad for those guys
who stayed clean even though it meant a one-way ticket home. That's why the
doping apologists like --D-y bug me. Yeah, the system is corrupt, but still
some guys have enough integrity to say "No".

Or, the powers that be could formulate practical rules that could be
practically enforced, on the day.
IOW, no "test interpretations" that require political/professional
status from interpreters in order to hold force, no retro-testing, no
pie-in-the-sky promises to "clean up Sport" for the advertisers, who
are, aside from a minority of unrealistic fans, the only ones who
"care", and that only because sponsoring "cheaters" makes them look
bad.

That's not apologizing. That's trying to get real about a complicated
situation that has no easy "solutions".
BTW, I feel bad for the guys who stay clean including myself who saw
others ride away to the medals. I could have juiced, as reports
indicate at least some of those guys were doing.
Again, people will take reputedly dangerous substances and egregiously
cheat in other ways to win *anything*, anywhere, any time.
I just want some nice entertainment with no "scandals" attending.
Let's work in that direction, shall we?
--D-y

Brad Anders wrote:
I have struggled with my views on doping in cycling for a long time,
and I've advocated harsh sanctions against dopers in this n.g. as long
ago as '94 or possibly earler. My current view is that effective,
undetectable doping methods have existed for years, and while great
progress has been made in detection, such methods will continue to
exist and develop. Cycling will never be rid of doping, and neither
will other endurance sports.

So, what do you do as a fan? For me, my choices are to quit following
the sport or to assume that what I'm watching is a reasonably level
playing field, where the top guys I'm watching are doing essentially
the same things as their competitors. Those that go too far to gain an
unfair advantage pay the price. Those that are too careless pay the
price. Those that burn everyone on the way pay the price. There is
plenty of evidence that these eventualities are exactly what is
happening. Who knows, it may happen to Lance. Time will tell.

What is the impact on me as a cyclist, and as a parent? As a cyclist,
I don't care if pros are doping. I don't race any more, so I don't
care about master's fatties doping themselves to the gills to win the
COVETED STARS AND STRIPES JERSEY. As a parent, I would never advocate
a pro sports career to my kids in the first place, especially cycling,
no matter what talent level they show. In cycling, it's pretty clear
that for the ultra-elite, when they reach a certain level (and maybe,
way before then), they're confronted with a very ugly reality, which
is that effective, undetectable doping strategies exist that make the
difference at the 0.05% level that separates the winners from the also-
rans. Given the gigantic investment in time and effort that a cyclist
at this level has put into the sport at that point, it's not
surprising that some decide to drink the Kool-Aide and do what they
need to. Some don't, and that takes a lot of guts to do. As for my
kids, I'd rather see them pursue a career that has more potential for
lifelong accomplishment, and treat athletics as a requirement for a
healthy life and fun.


Well said, and I share some of your viewpoints above, particularly the part
about keeping your kids away from this particular sport. Not because of
doping but rather because the training commitment is too time consuming and,
in my opinion, becoming too dangerous on public roads. I am happy that my
own kids have stuck to more traditional sports.

I do agree with you that there will always be doping in cycling, but perhaps
we disagree about how much effort should be put into catching and exposing
the cheaters. You're right that doping techniques will stay ahead of
testing, but with more investment the gap can be narrowed. If the sport is
serious about cleaning itself up, then it will make the investment. With
enough effort, I believe doping could become the exception rather than the
norm.

Why make the effort? Several reasons. First, the fallacy in the
"they're-all-doing-it-so-who-cares" argument is that not everyone benefits
to the same extent when doped, even if they were all on the same program. It
does not maintain a level playing field.

Second, they're not all doing it. As long as doping is against the rules,
there will be riders who have the moral fortitude to say "No" and I think
they deserve a substantial amount of anti-doping effort on their behalf.
Fighting for the underdog and all that righteous stuff. I have friends who
raced clean at various pro levels, including one who spent a couple years on
Pro Tour teams, and it breaks my heart to see and hear what they're up
against.

Third, it seems to me that cycling is at a crossroad in its anti-doping
"fight"... either it really steps up to the challenge, or it turns a blind
eye like many other sports have done. If the latter path is taken, I have no
doubt that doping will spread like a cancer into lower and lower levels.
Several notable busts have shown that it's already metastasizing. Twenty
years ago, the typical local/regional race in the US would have a clean
P/1/2 field. In the last 5-10 years or so, it's changed...typically you'd
have a handful of riders on a program, and that's probably the case with
some masters fields now also. It will reach the situation where everyone who
pins on a number expects to be racing against dopers. I think that would
ruin bike racing as a participation sport. Unlike some rec-league softball
goon on steroids or a bowler on beta-blockers, a masters fatty or a young
cat 2 using epo and hgh that he/she bought in mexico will crush his/her
clean competitors. It will be a paradigm shift (to use an over-used phrase)
that impacts tens of thousands of people and it will drive people out of the
sport. That has to be bad.

Obviously, rbr'ers are not representative of cycling fans. The majority of
people here will follow the sport no matter what happens with the doping
fight. My impression of the more casual fan base is that they are drawn to
the drama and suffer factor. Once it becomes widely accepted that most all
pro riders are doped, I believe that the casual fans will lose interest.

Anyway, I know my opinions don't reflect the majority here, and I'm ok with
that.

Mark