http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en
rec.bicycles.racing@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Floyd Landis Could Be Cycling's Jose Canseco - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/43a256e975de7482?hl=en
* Hey, where's Allen Lim? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/795e9be85851966c?hl=en
* Lemond - 6 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/bc2f64af3f18801c?hl=en
* Morotized Doping? - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/c78ad58063d0ada7?hl=en
* Floyd is a nice guy - 5 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/57dd4150d72b160d?hl=en
* Scott Sunderland leaves team sky. - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/c30f2fd3580dcbfe?hl=en
* Suspicion Is One Nemesis Armstrong Can't Outpedal - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/629bc9625b30b4ff?hl=en
* Shack statements - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/891622678a7f6e7f?hl=en
* Poor Brent Kay was delusional and duped by Floyd - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/7c46a5f76b32b84c?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Floyd Landis Could Be Cycling's Jose Canseco
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/43a256e975de7482?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 12:59 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/21/sportsline/main6506569.shtml
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 3:17 pm
From: Keith
On Sat, 22 May 2010 15:59:41 -0400, "B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/21/sportsline/main6506569.shtml
"Still, something is odd. Landis has little credibility but sounds
believable and Armstrong has a lot of credibility but seems shady.
Landis is a jerk. He's desperate. He has nothing. He may also be
telling the truth. Just like Canseco. "
Sad but true, LA's time as a fraud is up. He wasted 10 years of
cycling, he needs to answer for that.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hey, where's Allen Lim?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/795e9be85851966c?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 1:11 pm
From: Michael Press
In article <ht8232$9fp$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
"F. Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> >
> > Perhaps Coyle will tell us whether Lance's Tour wins resulted from
> > efficiency or doping or a combination thereof.
>
>
>
> Idiot -
>
> No human being knows the answer to that question. Our knowledge of the
> causes of performance success and failure in sport is way too primitive.
> Some evidence: the large number of busts in the first round of the NFL
> draft, an enterprise which, given the large amount of resources poured into
> it, would be deterministic if the science were there.
Many first round draftee busts
are from sleight-of-hand:
college coach and agent creating an
image of more than what is there.
--
Michael Press
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Lemond
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/bc2f64af3f18801c?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 1:22 pm
From: Frederick the Great
In article <B6WdnT5CfIiXR2rWnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On 5/21/2010 10:10 PM, Frederick the Great wrote:
> > In article<06adnT25besbaWvWnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > "B. Lafferty"<bl@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/21/2010 4:31 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> >>> http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_greg_lemond_believes_most_of_floyd_landis_statements_about_doping_in_cycling.html
> >>
> >> This is interesting:
> >>
> >> "In that lawsuit, LeMond subpoenaed Armstrong's ex-wife, Kristin
> >> Armstrong, for a deposition in which she was asked if she ever saw her
> >> ex-husband use performance-enhancing drugs. She did not answer, on
> >> orders from her attorney, Tim Herman, who has represented Lance
> >> Armstrong as well."
> >>
> >> I suspect that Trek (and Armstrong) were facing a motion to compel
> >> Kristen to answer the question, a motion that would likely be granted.
> >> Tthen the case settled (after a judge ruled the case would go to trial)
> >> and now it's all "confidential." Lovely.
> >>
> >> I wonder why Herman direct his client not to answer if the answer was,
> >> "I never saw or had any reason to believe that Lance was using any thing
> >> improper for performance enhancement."
> >
> > The answer is a new concept for you:
> >
> > It was none of their business.
> >
> Spoken like a true idiot. Carry on. :-)
When the facts are against you, and the law
is against you; then lie on the floor, kick
your feet, pound the floor with you little
fists, and scream.
--
Old Fritz
== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 1:24 pm
From: Michael Press
In article
<d91cca07-ee29-412e-8133-ba03e7af0b0d@r9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>,
Uncle Dave <davidcovey@t-online.de> wrote:
> On May 21, 9:31 pm, Brad Anders <pband...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_g...
>
> I always assumed Lemond must be doping because he was a yank and you
> know what a cheating bunch they are. They even make their own
> versions of perfectly good sports like rugby and cricket just so they
> can be world champions in something...
How _is_ that cricket thing going?
Pakistanis and Jamaicans still eating your lunch?
--
Michael Press
== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:31 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 5/22/2010 4:22 PM, Frederick the Great wrote:
> In article<B6WdnT5CfIiXR2rWnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "B. Lafferty"<bl@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/21/2010 10:10 PM, Frederick the Great wrote:
>>> In article<06adnT25besbaWvWnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>> "B. Lafferty"<bl@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/21/2010 4:31 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>>>> http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_greg_lemond_believes_most_of_floyd_landis_statements_about_doping_in_cycling.html
>>>>
>>>> This is interesting:
>>>>
>>>> "In that lawsuit, LeMond subpoenaed Armstrong's ex-wife, Kristin
>>>> Armstrong, for a deposition in which she was asked if she ever saw her
>>>> ex-husband use performance-enhancing drugs. She did not answer, on
>>>> orders from her attorney, Tim Herman, who has represented Lance
>>>> Armstrong as well."
>>>>
>>>> I suspect that Trek (and Armstrong) were facing a motion to compel
>>>> Kristen to answer the question, a motion that would likely be granted.
>>>> Tthen the case settled (after a judge ruled the case would go to trial)
>>>> and now it's all "confidential." Lovely.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder why Herman direct his client not to answer if the answer was,
>>>> "I never saw or had any reason to believe that Lance was using any thing
>>>> improper for performance enhancement."
>>>
>>> The answer is a new concept for you:
>>>
>>> It was none of their business.
>>>
>> Spoken like a true idiot. Carry on. :-)
>
> When the facts are against you, and the law
> is against you; then lie on the floor, kick
> your feet, pound the floor with you little
> fists, and scream.
>
Thanks for sharing, Fred.
== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:45 pm
From: Uncle Dave
On May 22, 9:24 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article
> <d91cca07-ee29-412e-8133-ba03e7af0...@r9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>,
> Uncle Dave <davidco...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
> > On May 21, 9:31 pm, Brad Anders <pband...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_g...
>
> > I always assumed Lemond must be doping because he was a yank and you
> > know what a cheating bunch they are. They even make their own
> > versions of perfectly good sports like rugby and cricket just so they
> > can be world champions in something...
>
> How _is_ that cricket thing going?
> Pakistanis and Jamaicans still eating your lunch?
England were crowned world champions just last week. Beat those damn
Aussies. Had to invent a new form of the game to do it mind...
UD
== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 3:47 pm
From: --D-y
On May 22, 11:43 am, Keith <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 May 2010 09:28:30 -0700 (PDT), --D-y <dustoyev...@mac.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > If for no other reason than the fact that he fits the doper profile
> >> > <g>.
> >> > --D-y
>
> >> We've done this discussion before. There was no doping back in the early
> >> 90's. And if there was, it didn't count.
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erythropoietin
>
> >Says epo was produced in the mid-80's, by 1985.
> >There have been other forms of doping.
>
> >HGH first produced synthetically in 1981:
> >http://www.somatropin.net/hgh-history.htm
>
> >"Here, take this nice big dose of amphetamine and tell me it doesn't
> >count".
>
> >In the "discussion we've had before", it has been disputed that an
> >"iron shot" would have effected the massive change in ability, where
> >Lemond was pack fodder in June and won the TdF in July.
>
> Wrong, read Fignon's book, he recalls Guimard and him were worried
> after Lemond won the final ITT in the Giro that year.
Who says he waited to dope until the Giro was over? He was riding
poorly, with the TdF coming up...
So he and or his handlers opened up a 44 of Instant Fitness (New and
Improved!!!) and the product lived up to its advertising.
Doper profile doper profile doper profile.
--D-y
== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 4:18 pm
From: Michael Press
In article
<38c1abbc-5ebe-46fc-bb32-abe65ec9fa36@q8g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
Uncle Dave <davidcovey@t-online.de> wrote:
> On May 22, 9:24 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <d91cca07-ee29-412e-8133-ba03e7af0...@r9g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>,
> > Uncle Dave <davidco...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 21, 9:31 pm, Brad Anders <pband...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/05/20/2010-05-20_g...
> >
> > > I always assumed Lemond must be doping because he was a yank and you
> > > know what a cheating bunch they are. They even make their own
> > > versions of perfectly good sports like rugby and cricket just so they
> > > can be world champions in something...
> >
> > How _is_ that cricket thing going?
> > Pakistanis and Jamaicans still eating your lunch?
>
> England were crowned world champions just last week. Beat those damn
> Aussies. Had to invent a new form of the game to do it mind...
The sun never sets. Good show.
--
Michael Press
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Morotized Doping?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/c78ad58063d0ada7?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 1:53 pm
From: Frederick the Great
In article
<0d07f5a2-389d-4655-816a-b427023dd260@q8g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
Brad Anders <pbanders@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 21, 5:57 pm, Frederick the Great <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <0227236a-cfb4-4361-9f09-720d627df...@y18g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> > Brad Anders <pband...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>
> > > I found some pics of Bill's setup.
> >
> > >http://bushnell.homeip.net/~bill/bike/pictures/power_gold_rush_build/...
> >
> > Lots of pictures of minutia, and finally on page 8 is a close up
> > of some working parts from which we can finally _infer_ the
> > energy transfer mechanism.
> >
> > I still have no clue about the servo mechanism controlling
> > the power output of the motor. Since the motor drives the
> > rear cluster directly, it needs to back off for shifting.
> >
> > Other than that, interesting.
>
> Hey, if you're interested, just email him, I'm sure his email is easy
> enough to figure out. I'm pretty sure he'd tell anything you want to
> know.
1. I am commenting on the web site.
2. I did not introduce the web site to this discussion.
3. I am not building an electric bicycle; and am more
interested in some other things.
4. If I were interested enough to write I would risk a
dialogue as diffuse as the web site.
5. There are full designs for electric bicycles on the
web, and elsewhere. Chalo Colina in rbt built several
effective electric bicycles.
--
Old Fritz
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 1:58 pm
From: Michael Press
In article <ht82dt$bft$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
"F. Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Frederick the Great" <rubrum@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:rubrum-]
> >
> > I still have no clue about the servo mechanism controlling
> > the power output of the motor. Since the motor drives the
> > rear cluster directly, it needs to back off for shifting.
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> No need for a servo. Just need on/off when shifting.
>
> A servo is way more than is needed for this application. Simple 100 watts or
> 0 watts will work just fine.
Yes, I know; and think about an on-off switch as a servomechanism.
There has to be a clutch, and that is a servomechanism.
Do you see why and how it can productively thought of
as a servomechanism? We still do not know how the electric motor
and drive participate in shifting; not that I am asking.
--
Michael Press
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Floyd is a nice guy
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/57dd4150d72b160d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:13 pm
From: Michael Press
In article <27524$4bf7a92e$53578816$24454@cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
"A. Dumas Fred" <alexandre@dumas.fr> wrote:
> http://www.cycle-smart.com/blog/2010/05/20/pretty-boy-floyd
From the article.
___________________________________________________________________________
Floyd's position went something like this: Oh fuck yes
I doped. I doped just like everyone else did. I did not
invent doping, and I understood that at the level I was
at, it was part of my job description, like Lance, like
George. So why should I be the only one who goes down
for it?
___________________________________________________________________________
The answer is that an honorable man abides with the
consequences of his actions. He does not try to make
other people suffer because of his actions.
--
Michael Press
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:18 pm
From: Frederick the Great
In article <751gv5dmbcphoutf88vbgi0ibn79goedo8@4ax.com>,
Keith <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 May 2010 08:00:59 -0700, "F. Kurgan Gringioni"
> <kgringioni@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> >news:IdmdnZ904OYDeGrWnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@giganews.com...
> >> On 5/22/2010 5:51 AM, A. Dumas Fred wrote:
> >>> http://www.cycle-smart.com/blog/2010/05/20/pretty-boy-floyd
> >>
> >> One of the better pieces on the overall situation that I've read. Adam
> >> has put Landis and his situation in perspective, rather eloquently, too.
> >
> >
> >
> >Dumbass -
> >
> >Myerson has it partly wrong and Floyd has it completely wrong.
> >
> >If Floyd was going after the system during the last 4 years, he should have
> >presented it as such, truthfully. He should not have included the "I DIDN'T
> >DOPE" part of the four year crusade.
>
> That's because he thought he would be allowed to come back by not
> breaking the omerta.
He was _negotiating_. He was _not_ keeping omerta.
He was _prepared_ to blab; and that means he was not keeping omerta.
--
Old Fritz
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:32 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
On 5/22/2010 5:13 PM, Michael Press wrote:
> In article<27524$4bf7a92e$53578816$24454@cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
> "A. Dumas Fred"<alexandre@dumas.fr> wrote:
>
>> http://www.cycle-smart.com/blog/2010/05/20/pretty-boy-floyd
>
> From the article.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Floyd's position went something like this: Oh fuck yes
> I doped. I doped just like everyone else did. I did not
> invent doping, and I understood that at the level I was
> at, it was part of my job description, like Lance, like
> George. So why should I be the only one who goes down
> for it?
> ___________________________________________________________________________
>
> The answer is that an honorable man abides with the
> consequences of his actions. He does not try to make
> other people suffer because of his actions.
>
You live in a very odd world.
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 3:06 pm
From: Fredmaster of Brainerd
On May 22, 2:13 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <27524$4bf7a92e$53578816$24...@cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
> "A. Dumas Fred" <alexan...@dumas.fr> wrote:
>
> >http://www.cycle-smart.com/blog/2010/05/20/pretty-boy-floyd
>
> From the article.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Floyd's position went something like this: Oh fuck yes
> I doped. I doped just like everyone else did. I did not
> invent doping, and I understood that at the level I was
> at, it was part of my job description, like Lance, like
> George. So why should I be the only one who goes down
> for it?
> ___________________________________________________________________________
>
> The answer is that an honorable man abides with the
> consequences of his actions. He does not try to make
> other people suffer because of his actions.
I'll try to remember this next time a Tour stage
is heading up a big mountain, some skinny VO2 freak
attacks, and the commentators exclaim, "They're
really suffering now!"
Seriously, there is a thin line between taking
your lumps honorably, and being an exploited
chump or a scapegoat. Sometimes it's not easy
to tell which is which. I have read little of what
Floyd said, and it sounds like he's achieving
maximum trainwreck for the truth-value he is
providing. But I also have some sympathy for the
idea that he doesn't have to play along to make
sure a system that screwed him continues to
operate smoothly.
If we continue with the Mafia analogy of omerta,
one of the things the Mafia is supposed to do is
that when a member goes to prison, his family is
provided for and he gets taken care of when he
gets out. This isn't done out of the goodness of
their hearts, it's done to give them an incentive
not to talk. Some people busted for dope get taken
care of, Floyd got treated like a pariah. In part
because he can't ride competitively any more
(I mean, compare him to the quickness of
re-integrating Ricco into the peloton). So I think
appeals to honorableness are beside the point.
Fredmaster Ben
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 4:35 pm
From: Michael Press
In article
<43eb2c29-eda1-46fe-bfc3-bad86a5f4352@o15g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Fredmaster of Brainerd <bjweiner@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 22, 2:13 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article <27524$4bf7a92e$53578816$24...@cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
> > "A. Dumas Fred" <alexan...@dumas.fr> wrote:
> >
> > >http://www.cycle-smart.com/blog/2010/05/20/pretty-boy-floyd
> >
> > From the article.
> > ___________________________________________________________________________
> > Floyd's position went something like this: Oh fuck yes
> > I doped. I doped just like everyone else did. I did not
> > invent doping, and I understood that at the level I was
> > at, it was part of my job description, like Lance, like
> > George. So why should I be the only one who goes down
> > for it?
> > ___________________________________________________________________________
> >
> > The answer is that an honorable man abides with the
> > consequences of his actions. He does not try to make
> > other people suffer because of his actions.
>
> I'll try to remember this next time a Tour stage
> is heading up a big mountain, some skinny VO2 freak
> attacks, and the commentators exclaim, "They're
> really suffering now!"
It is a potlatch.
Reminds me of stage 13 today. I thought the pundits'
anticipation of a slugfest was puffery, because
the stage ends with a flat portion. But they were right.
> Seriously, there is a thin line between taking
> your lumps honorably, and being an exploited
> chump or a scapegoat. Sometimes it's not easy
> to tell which is which.
When I realize that I am being exploited I take my
lumps, and do not try to get mine back. There is
nothing in it. I simply stop acting as a chump. It is
easier to learn how not to be exploited by taking one's
lumps, and moving on.
> I have read little of what
> Floyd said, and it sounds like he's achieving
> maximum trainwreck for the truth-value he is
> providing. But I also have some sympathy for the
> idea that he doesn't have to play along to make
> sure a system that screwed him continues to
> operate smoothly.
>
> If we continue with the Mafia analogy of omerta,
> one of the things the Mafia is supposed to do is
> that when a member goes to prison, his family is
> provided for and he gets taken care of when he
> gets out. This isn't done out of the goodness of
> their hearts, it's done to give them an incentive
> not to talk. Some people busted for dope get taken
> care of, Floyd got treated like a pariah. In part
> because he can't ride competitively any more
> (I mean, compare him to the quickness of
> re-integrating Ricco into the peloton). So I think
> appeals to honorableness are beside the point.
There is nothing in messing with other people
who have hurt me; unless I can swear out a
complaint in the matter with the civil authorities
in clear conscience.
--
Michael Press
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Scott Sunderland leaves team sky.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/c30f2fd3580dcbfe?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:17 pm
From: "A. Dumas Fred"
thirty-six wrote:
> Odd time for an anouncement?
His youngest son is very sick.
ann.: http://www.scottsunderland.com/NewsDetail.asp?Id=141
the son: http://www.scottsunderland.com/BlogPost.asp?Id=109
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:30 pm
From: thirty-six
On 22 May, 22:17, "A. Dumas Fred" <alexan...@dumas.fr> wrote:
> thirty-six wrote:
> > Odd time for an anouncement?
>
> His youngest son is very sick.
> ann.:http://www.scottsunderland.com/NewsDetail.asp?Id=141
> the son:http://www.scottsunderland.com/BlogPost.asp?Id=109
Yes, but to not wait until the end of the Giro, doesn't sound good?
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:39 pm
From: "A. Dumas Fred"
thirty-six wrote:
> On 22 May, 22:17, "A. Dumas Fred" wrote:
>> ann.:http://www.scottsunderland.com/NewsDetail.asp?Id=141
>> the son:http://www.scottsunderland.com/BlogPost.asp?Id=109
>
> Yes, but to not wait until the end of the Giro, doesn't sound good?
Who fucking cares about the fucking Tour of fucking Spaghettiland when
your youngest son is very ill? No, it doesn't sound good.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:59 pm
From: "H. Fred Kveck"
In article <dc44a$4bf84f03$53578816$13393@cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
"A. Dumas Fred" <alexandre@dumas.fr> wrote:
> thirty-six wrote:
> > On 22 May, 22:17, "A. Dumas Fred" wrote:
> >> ann.:http://www.scottsunderland.com/NewsDetail.asp?Id=141
> >> the son:http://www.scottsunderland.com/BlogPost.asp?Id=109
> >
> > Yes, but to not wait until the end of the Giro, doesn't sound good?
>
> Who fucking cares about the fucking Tour of fucking Spaghettiland when
> your youngest son is very ill? No, it doesn't sound good.
Dude, don't you understand? Sunderland being at that event that's for our
entertainment is far more important than some dumb sick kid. He can always make
another one.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Suspicion Is One Nemesis Armstrong Can't Outpedal
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/629bc9625b30b4ff?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 2:56 pm
From: "B. Lafferty"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/sports/cycling/21vecsey.html?ref=global
== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 3:07 pm
From: Keith
On Sat, 22 May 2010 17:56:17 -0400, "B. Lafferty" <bl@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/sports/cycling/21vecsey.html?ref=global
An interesting piece but I am puzzled by the end : "The United States
Anti-Doping Agency will investigate, and federal investigators will
make sure those questioned are telling the truth. But I have no faith
in organized cycling to take this on in any serious way.
No matter where it goes from here, I donÕt think Lance Armstrong can
break away from this one. "
On the hand the writer says this is going to be swept under the carpet
but then that LA won't recover ? I doubt he can be taken down and
things going on as before ?
== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 3:15 pm
From: raamman
On May 22, 6:07 pm, Keith <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 May 2010 17:56:17 -0400, "B. Lafferty" <b...@nowhere.com>
> wrote:
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/sports/cycling/21vecsey.html?ref=gl...
>
> An interesting piece but I am puzzled by the end : "The United States
> Anti-Doping Agency will investigate, and federal investigators will
> make sure those questioned are telling the truth. But I have no faith
> in organized cycling to take this on in any serious way.
>
> No matter where it goes from here, I donÕt think Lance Armstrong can
> break away from this one. "
>
> On the hand the writer says this is going to be swept under the carpet
> but then that LA won't recover ? I doubt he can be taken down and
> things going on as before ?
they used to burn people alive on suspicion of witchcraft didn't
they ? I would've hoped that most people would conduct themselves
according to what we consider "just" practices. Too bad so many still
live in the middle ages.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Shack statements
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/891622678a7f6e7f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 4:56 pm
From: ilan
On May 21, 8:49 pm, Scott <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> interesting reading, take a look at the email trail.
>
> http://www.livestrong.com/teamradioshack/
>
> Yeah, Landis seems credible alright.
They seem like a violation of copyright, you can't publish someone
else's e-mail without their permission.
-ilan
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Poor Brent Kay was delusional and duped by Floyd
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/7c46a5f76b32b84c?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, May 22 2010 5:07 pm
From: Ben Trovato
On May 21, 11:58 pm, raamman <raam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> from the AP story "Armstrong fires back again at Landis"
>
[Messick said]
> "I'm accustomed to teams saying we deserve to be part of this race.
> But this was a first, we never had someone try to do what he did. ...
> He recorded our first lunch. There was never a moment I didn't suspect
> he was going to leak all this stuff."
>
Messick's emails all seem written in the expectation that they would
become public. I'll bet all the responses were worked out a few weeks
ago.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.bicycles.racing"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.bicycles.racing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
Posts
