Prudhomme considers Tour de France stages without race radios

"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message
...
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote in message
...
| "Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message
| ...
|
| It was much easier to believe in Floyd's good judgment before he stood
by
| while his friend and business partner made that call to Greg LeMond...
| during his initial hearing.
|
| Not to point out something strange but exactly what are you talking
about?
| Floyd wasn't anywhere near that guy when he called LeMond and what's
more,
| he would have stopped him if he were. Floyd isn't a fool, he's a hick.

Tom: Hard to believe you either missed or forgot the following, which was
widely known and available all over the 'net (in this case, cut & pasted
from the relevant section on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_LeMond)-

"LeMond later stated to reporters that Geoghegan had admitted making the
call, and "tried to apologize".[14] Landis has admitted to being in the
same
room as Geoghegan when the call was made,[16] and defended his decision
not
to fire Geoghegan until after the LeMond testimony, saying he had been
waiting for legal advice."

Fact: Floyd was in the same room.
Fact: He knew the phone call was being made, or knew about it immediately
afterward.

Knowing those facts, what conclusion do you wish to draw that's so
different
from my own?

Yikes! But what I would think is that Floyd was half drunk and thought it
was a joke. Remember that he really is a yokel.

In article ,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:


Yikes! But what I would think is that Floyd was half drunk and thought it
was a joke. Remember that he really is a yokel.

Was Floyd drunk at the time of the post on his web site as well? Or was
it that mean Geoghegan guy again?

jyh.

"jean-yves hervé" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
Yikes! But what I would think is that Floyd was half drunk and thought it
was a joke. Remember that he really is a yokel.

Was Floyd drunk at the time of the post on his web site as well? Or was
it that mean Geoghegan guy again?

Firstly let's remember that the lab tests were EXTREMELY questionable. There
isn't a single court in the USA that would allow evidence so lousy to be
used. Yet the UCI claims that it is inviolable.

Secondly, Floyd is a hick and really doesn't realize what it looks like to
put stuff like that out on the internet.

Sophisticates such as yourself aside, most people realize that Floyd put in
a good ride but that the real problem was that the peloton didn't react
properly. Nothing in his performance suggested that he had any better
performance than the top 20 in the peloton.

In article ,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

"jean-yves hervé" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
Yikes! But what I would think is that Floyd was half drunk and thought it
was a joke. Remember that he really is a yokel.

Was Floyd drunk at the time of the post on his web site as well? Or was
it that mean Geoghegan guy again?

Firstly let's remember that the lab tests were EXTREMELY questionable. There
isn't a single court in the USA that would allow evidence so lousy to be
used. Yet the UCI claims that it is inviolable.

Secondly, Floyd is a hick and really doesn't realize what it looks like to
put stuff like that out on the internet.

Sophisticates such as yourself aside, most people realize that Floyd put in
a good ride but that the real problem was that the peloton didn't react
properly. Nothing in his performance suggested that he had any better
performance than the top 20 in the peloton.

I did not say anything regarding Floyd Landis' guilt, the validity of
the test, or the vast Franco-Swiss conspiracy to frame all American
riders. All I am saying is that between the phone call and the web
post (1), Landis has exposed a very nasty side of himself that is very
far from the "good-natured hick" image that had been peddled to the
media.

jyh.


(1) From the Wiki Floyd Landis page:

LeMond's testimony is arguably supported by an online posting Floyd
Landis made on the Daily Peloton forum, in which he states that LeMond
disclosed personal information of a sensitive nature to Landis, and
threatened to use the information to damage LeMond if he continues to
involve himself in Landis's USADA appeal process:

Unfortunately, the facts that he divulged to me in the hour which he
spoke and gave no opportunity for me to do the same, would damage his
character severely and I would rather not do what has been done to me.
However, if he ever opens his mouth again and the word Floyd comes out,
I will tell you all some things that you will wish you didn't know...

jean-yves hervé wrote:
I did not say anything regarding Floyd Landis' guilt, the validity of the
test, or the vast Franco-Swiss conspiracy

So the French and Swiss are also part of the Liberal Conspiracy. I
thought the fact that Assos are Swiss was a bit suspicious and their
cheese is unholy.

"jean-yves hervé" wrote in message
...

LeMond's testimony is arguably supported by an online posting Floyd
Landis made on the Daily Peloton forum, in which he states that LeMond
disclosed personal information of a sensitive nature to Landis, and
threatened to use the information to damage LeMond if he continues to
involve himself in Landis's USADA appeal process:

Let's remember that LeMond approached Landis and told him to come clean and
confess to having doped. LeMond then was being very public about accusing
seven times Tour winner Lance Armstrong of doping and he barely knew the
guy. Landis thought he was being pretty sophisticated by being completely
non-committal and giving LeMond nothing to argue about. Yet of course LeMond
simply started telling all of the cycling reporters that he had asked Landis
to confess.

As I pointed out, you're not some 30 year old who grew up out on a farm with
a religion that didn't allow you to use most modern inventions. Floyd not
only grew up out there but attended those schools that stressed religion at
the cost of everything else. Floyd is just learning behavior you already
knew before your 21st birthday. Give the guy a enough of a break to
understand that he doesn't know the expanse of his seemingly (to him)
unimportant comments/insults etc.

In article , "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com
wrote:

"jean-yves hervé" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
Yikes! But what I would think is that Floyd was half drunk and thought it
was a joke. Remember that he really is a yokel.

Was Floyd drunk at the time of the post on his web site as well? Or was
it that mean Geoghegan guy again?

Firstly let's remember that the lab tests were EXTREMELY questionable. There
isn't a single court in the USA that would allow evidence so lousy to be
used. Yet the UCI claims that it is inviolable.

Secondly, Floyd is a hick and really doesn't realize what it looks like to
put stuff like that out on the internet.

Whether I believe Floyd was or was not guilty notwithstanding, this is the
stupidest line of excuse making I think I've ever seen in this group. Claiming that
something bad happened while Floyd was drunk would get you laughed out of court if
you tried it there.

Sophisticates such as yourself aside,

After making that moronic excuse for Floyd, you have the temerity to mock
Jean-Yves?!?!?!?!

--
tanx,
Howard

Whatever happened to
Leon Trotsky?
He got an icepick
That made his ears burn.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article ,
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

"jean-yves hervé" wrote in message
...

LeMond's testimony is arguably supported by an online posting Floyd
Landis made on the Daily Peloton forum, in which he states that LeMond
disclosed personal information of a sensitive nature to Landis, and
threatened to use the information to damage LeMond if he continues to
involve himself in Landis's USADA appeal process:

Let's remember that LeMond approached Landis and told him to come clean and
confess to having doped. LeMond then was being very public about accusing
seven times Tour winner Lance Armstrong of doping and he barely knew the
guy. Landis thought he was being pretty sophisticated by being completely
non-committal and giving LeMond nothing to argue about. Yet of course LeMond
simply started telling all of the cycling reporters that he had asked Landis
to confess.

This is not about Lemond but about Landis and the disturbing insight
into his characters that the two incidents (the phone call and the web
forum post) give us.

As I pointed out, you're not some 30 year old who grew up out on a farm with
a religion that didn't allow you to use most modern inventions. Floyd not
only grew up out there but attended those schools that stressed religion at
the cost of everything else. Floyd is just learning behavior you already
knew before your 21st birthday. Give the guy a enough of a break to
understand that he doesn't know the expanse of his seemingly (to him)
unimportant comments/insults etc.

Do you seriously believe that the phone call and the threat to post
Lemond's story on a web site are indications of a nice good boy who's
just learning to deal with "modern inventions"? The back tie during
Lemond's audition at the trial was pure teenage hick stuff, but the
phone call and web forum post are really creepy.

jyh.

On Mar 16, 4:23 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

Let's remember that LeMond approached Landis and told him to come clean and
confess to having doped.

dumbass,

that's not what lemond did.

when lemond was asked about floyd by the press he merely said "IF
floyd is guilty he should come clean". he didn't actually accuse floyd
of anything or tell him to confess even if he is innocent.

floyd called lemond and according to lemond said something along the
lines of "if I confessed i would hurt a lot of my friends", the "soft
confession". that's how floyd dragged lemond into the case.

"Amit Ghosh" wrote in message
...
On Mar 16, 4:23 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

Let's remember that LeMond approached Landis and told him to come clean
and
confess to having doped.

dumbass,

that's not what lemond did.

when lemond was asked about floyd by the press he merely said "IF
floyd is guilty he should come clean". he didn't actually accuse floyd
of anything or tell him to confess even if he is innocent.

floyd called lemond and according to lemond said something along the
lines of "if I confessed i would hurt a lot of my friends", the "soft
confession". that's how floyd dragged lemond into the case.

Why don't you invent even more incendiary conversations?