An Interesting Prediction
BLafferty
"It is funny to watch the modification of the Armstrong talking point.
At first it was "Never tested positive" "Most tested Athlete" As it
became clear that neither of these was true it became "Never
Sanctioned". When the extent of the UCI's corruption became clear even
this started sounding silly.
If you listen to Armstrong's most recent statements he now says "I
never, ever, ever, pressured people to dope" Key change.
I think Armstrong will admit to to doping and toss Weisel and others
under the bus. It is the smart move, he escapes with a slap on the wrist
and his groupies just move on to the "Everyone does it" "Level Playing
field" excuse."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Yes. He'll still have to perform his Oprah moment as a last stab at
maintaining his Cancerfighter cred. He'll keep fighting to prove he was
the best when everyone was on a program, rather than admitting he had a
better program."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
RicodJour
> Found in two posts on Cyclingnews' forum.
>
> "It is funny to watch the modification of the Armstrong talking point.
> At first it was "Never tested positive" "Most tested Athlete" As it
> became clear that neither of these was true
Who's been tested more?
R
Mike Jacoubowsky
news:20607fc7-ddaa-4838...@u10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>>R
The patience of people in this newsgroup looking for new & relevant content.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
RicodJour
> "RicodJour" <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
> On Nov 2, 5:03 pm, BLafferty <B...@nobody.com> wrote:
>
> > Found in two posts on Cyclingnews' forum.
>
> > "It is funny to watch the modification of the Armstrong talking point.
> > At first it was "Never tested positive" "Most tested Athlete" As it
> > became clear that neither of these was true
> >>Who's been tested more?
> >>R
>
> The patience of people in this newsgroup looking for new & relevant content.
Buddah bing! Good one.
On a different note, my mailman turns out to be an ex-wrench at a bike
shop, and he's trying to force me to borrow his tools. I've said no,
but my resistance is slipping. I have a Jesus era surplus truing
stand that has been through the wars, and it takes a little bit of
patience and a sacrificed goat to get good results with it. He'll be
dropping off a Park TS2 tomorrow. I'm lending him my rollers as a
hostage exchange.
Hey Mike, while I've got you on the line - have you ever tried out the
E-Motion Inside Ride rollers?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaYDZ-RSOTA
I figure you've played with all of the toys, and my King David era
rollers finally broke and I'm looking for a replacement. The price on
the E-Motion thing is pretty steep, so I'm looking for an excuse.
Have one handy?
R
Fred Flintstein
> Found in two posts on Cyclingnews' forum.
>
> "It is funny to watch the modification of the Armstrong talking point. At first it was "Never tested positive" "Most tested Athlete" As it became clear that neither of these was true it became "Never
> Sanctioned". When the extent of the UCI's corruption became clear even this started sounding silly.
>
> If you listen to Armstrong's most recent statements he now says "I never, ever, ever, pressured people to dope" Key change.
>
> I think Armstrong will admit to to doping and toss Weisel and others under the bus. It is the smart move, he escapes with a slap on the wrist and his groupies just move on to the "Everyone does it"
> "Level Playing field" excuse."
If you check that guy's profile you see that he posts a ton
and only to doping threads. He frequently posts about the
legal aspects fo the Armstrong investigation. And with a
writing style that looks familiar.
That's what I find interesting.
Fred Flintstein
Fred Fredburger
> "RicodJour" <rico...@worldemail.com> wrote in message
> news:20607fc7-ddaa-4838...@u10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 2, 5:03 pm, BLafferty <B...@nobody.com> wrote:
>> Found in two posts on Cyclingnews' forum.
>>
>> "It is funny to watch the modification of the Armstrong talking point.
>> At first it was "Never tested positive" "Most tested Athlete" As it
>> became clear that neither of these was true
>
>>> Who's been tested more?
>
>>> R
>
>
> The patience of people in this newsgroup looking for new & relevant
> content.
Thanks for that!
BLafferty
look at USADA testing from 2000 to 2005
http://www.usada.org/athlete-test-history
Armstrong 12
Hincapie 6
Uhl 17
M.Phelps 29
Now this does not include testing at the TdF for stage wins and
otherwise random test at the Tour.As the USADA site states:
"This search includes all in- and out-of-competition tests on U.S.
athletes conducted under USADA's testing program (October 1, 2000 - June
30, 2010). This includes tests conducted on U.S. athletes training
internationally by other testing entities at the request of USADA. The
World Anti-Doping Agency and an athlete's International Federation may
have performed additional tests, which are not included on this list."
BLafferty
Oh, do let us have your linguistic analysis on syntactical style and
tell us who this person is supposed to be, in your nonsensical opinion,
of course. LOL!!!
RicodJour
Let me paraphrase your nonsense. "I will try to distract from my
boneheaded comments with some patently absurd figures in an attempt to
pull my foot out of my mouth and ass at the same time." That about
sum it up?
25 stage wins, 83 days in yellow, other races, yeah, sure, twelve dope
test seems about right.
Man up, loser. Oops, sorry - I forgot you're a bottom.
R
Fredmaster of Brainerd
wrote:
That's weird.
I mean, what's weird is that you found it necessary to
do the research. I thought it was pretty clear after the
mention of Weisel.
Fredmaster Ben
drmofe
> I figure you've played with all of the toys, and my King David era
> rollers finally broke and I'm looking for a replacement. The price on
Oh, man.
I haven't read 1&2 Samuel for years but your reference to the King
David rollers prompted a quick online read.
There was some seriously weird shit going down in those days...
RicodJour
We've come a long way baby...oh, wait, is that the same tree...? ;)
R
Fred Flintstein
Dumbass,
Sorry, I lied. I don't find it that interesting. I'm not going to
spend that much time on it on a night when Dancing With the Starts
is on.
And I was wrong about Palin. But I'm feeling a little smug about
characterizing your mental illness as a guy talking to himself.
Fred Flintstein
BLafferty
I noted that. Also, I very much discount testing during the Tour,
particularly after a stage as those are easy tests to beat. That said,
other competitors in other sports, Phelps in swimming for example, also
undergo competition testing. So it's not clear to me that Armstrong's
most tested athlete claim is any more valid than his 28 million claim.
The guy is a liar or major proportions. Sad but true. Rant on, RICO
BLafferty
delusion. LOL!
RicodJour
> particularly after a stage as those are easy tests to beat. That said,
> other competitors in other sports, Phelps in swimming for example, also
> undergo competition testing. So it's not clear to me that Armstrong's
> most tested athlete claim is any more valid than his 28 million claim.
> The guy is a liar or major proportions. Sad but true. Rant on, RICO
You noted what exactly? Noted "please ignore what I wrote above as
it's obviously spurious and irrelevant"?
Everyone noted that your post was stupid. Michael Phelps is, what?
25 or something like that. Lance was World Champion when Phelps was
8. Phelps frequently wins more than one race per day. You think he
gets tested more than once a day?
Yeah, sure, the numbers add up - to your usual high level of
boobitude.
R
BLafferty
>> Now this does not include testing at the TdF for stage wins and
>> > >> otherwise random test at the Tour.As the USADA site states:
.................
Fred Flintstein
Dumbass,
Do you realize you've posted a ton recently, and only to
doping threads?
OCD never sleeps.
Fred Flintstein
RicodJour
>
> >> Now this does not include testing at the TdF for stage wins and
> >> > >> otherwise random test at the Tour.As the USADA site states:
> .................
I understood that you still can't admit that you made a stupid comment/
post. You post retarded proof that conveniently leaves out the main
AHJs for LANCE's dope testing.
It was akin to posting cycling death causes and leaving out vehicles
and hard surfaces. You know, stupid, stupid.
R
RicodJour
wrote:
I'm starting to miss Kunich. At least he wasn't a one trick pony.
R
BLafferty
ROTFL!! Show us the proof that the UniBaller is or was the most tested
athlete on the planet. Not that it really matters given what we know
about beating the drug tests. You can post that along with the source
for 28 million people battling cancer. RICO, you and the other children
posting here are really priceless. Keep the humor coming. :-)
RicodJour
Burden of proof, oh bag de douche. Let's recap:
You posted a purported other person's post in another forum:
"At first it was "Never tested positive" "Most tested Athlete" As it
became clear that neither of these was true"
I asked who has been tested more.
Instead of saying something sensible, like, "I didn't say that - the
other poster did." (denial of ownership)
or
"It's unproven that LANCE is the most tested athlete." (denial of
absolute)
or even
"Who do you think has been tested more?" (diversion)
You post possibly the single worst 'proof' on RBR. No mean feat.
Keep up the good work, Jowls. And have a few more Halloween treats.
R
BLafferty
poster to substantiate his/her claim. I'm more concerned about seeing
the UniBaller start substantiating his PR claims.
To be clear, this is the only cycling forum that I've posted to in well
over a year, probably longer. The tide has turned against your hero,
UnoTestículo, in all the other forums I've looked in on.
Please try to do something about the four hour plus hard on before you
hurt yourself any more than you have already. Carry on. :-)
Fred Flintstein
>
> To be clear, this is the only cycling forum that I've posted to in well
> over a year, probably longer.
Interesting.
Fred Flintstein
RicodJour
> On 11/3/2010 4:25 PM, RicodJour wrote:
>
> > Burden of proof, oh bag de douche. Let's recap:
>
> > You posted a purported other person's post in another forum:
> > "At first it was "Never tested positive" "Most tested Athlete" As it
> > became clear that neither of these was true"
>
> > I asked who has been tested more.
>
> > Instead of saying something sensible, like, "I didn't say that - the
> > other poster did." (denial of ownership)
> > or
> > "It's unproven that LANCE is the most tested athlete." (denial of
> > absolute)
> > or even
> > "Who do you think has been tested more?" (diversion)
>
> > You post possibly the single worst 'proof' on RBR. No mean feat.
>
> > Keep up the good work, Jowls. And have a few more Halloween treats.
>
> poster to substantiate his/her claim. I'm more concerned about seeing
> the UniBaller start substantiating his PR claims.
See? That was an almost normal response to my question about what
athlete had been tested more.
"Go ask the guy who posted it." Denial of Ownership. Old dogs can
learn new tricks.
R
BLafferty
RICO, I don't "own" the other poster's statement. I've done my best to
ascertain whether or not there is a source to substantiate Armstrong's
assertion. The best I could come up with is the USADA site. If you
have a better source that shows Armstrong is/was the most tested athlete
during a specific period of time, provide it. Give Livestrong a call as
my friend did regarding the 28 million cancer claim and ask them for
substantiation of the most tested statement. Carry on. :-)
Jimmy July
But he didn't bring sock puppets. Lafferty's got him beat on that score!
RicodJour
L'enema's principle occupation is beating. Beating a dead horse,
beating something to death, but primarily, just beating it (to
pictures of LANCE, and now maybe Popovych).
R
RicodJour
>
> I'm starting to miss Kunich. At least he wasn't a one trick pony.
I was serious about starting to miss Kunich. He got on my nerves, and
I certainly took umbrage with stuff he said, but I got the impression
he was a likable enough guy in real life, and didn't have a particular
axe to grind. He definitely livened the place up, and unlike some
people who started this thread, he didn't suck the air out of the room
with an obsession.
R
Fred Flintstein
Did you notice how we just had an election season without getting
overrun with off topic political stuff?
All it took was two people not being here.
Fred Flintstein
RicodJour
wrote:
> On 11/4/2010 1:26 PM, RicodJour wrote:
>
> > On Nov 3, 1:32 pm, RicodJour<ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I'm starting to miss Kunich. At least he wasn't a one trick pony.
>
> > I was serious about starting to miss Kunich. He got on my nerves, and
> > I certainly took umbrage with stuff he said, but I got the impression
> > he was a likable enough guy in real life, and didn't have a particular
> > axe to grind. He definitely livened the place up, and unlike some
> > people who started this thread, he didn't suck the air out of the room
> > with an obsession.
>
>
> overrun with off topic political stuff?
>
> All it took was two people not being here.
Until you mentioned it, no, I hadn't noticed. Other newsgroups made
up for it. And the political confetti that was nailed up to every
telephone pole and stuck in public property lawns everywhere. That's
my next windmill to tilt at.
R
Fredmaster of Brainerd
wrote:
I was no fan of Kunich, but have to admit feeling a
little sorry for him, not because I think he was likable
or anything, but because his behavior really did seem
to change after he hit his head and that is likely
linked to his disappearance, which seems more
complete than his previous absences. (Despite the humor
of FORKSTRONG, I do believe Kunich hit his head.)
Isaiah Berlin, making the distinction between thinkers
who collect diverse ideas and those who organize knowledge
by one overarching principle, said that there were two
kinds of thinkers, foxes and hedgehogs: the fox knows
many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.
Similarly on RBR there are two kinds of fools. Kunich was
a fool about many things, but Lafferty is a fool about one
big thing.
Fredphilosopher Ben
William Fred
news:toydnWcxF87in07R...@giganews.com:
>
> Did you notice how we just had an election season without getting
> overrun with off topic political stuff?
>
> All it took was two people not being here.
Wait, I'm still here, but just haven't had time or energy lately for off-
topic posts.
--
Bill Fred
A. Dumas
> I was no fan of Kunich, but have to admit feeling a
> little sorry for him, not because I think he was likable
> or anything, but because his behavior really did seem
> to change after he hit his head and that is likely
> linked to his disappearance, which seems more
> complete than his previous absences.
Yep, not sad to see him go, but I am for the apparent reason.
On the other side of the spectrum, Benjo also disappeared for a while
after he had been hit by a car. Fortunately he recovered enough to
defend his PhD thesis a few weeks ago, where I met him in meatspace:
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=156341947736325&id=47457434092
(public content but no comments when not logged in)
Fred Flintstein
Dumbass,
My state elected a senator that believes that climate change
is due to sunspots. So suck that!
Fred Flintstein
Fred Flintstein
> over a year, probably longer.
Did you see where the only guy (heh!) besides you that thinks
that Novitsky will make Weisel eat shit accused a Polish guy
of being a Trek dealer?
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?s=d97b8470a5415116c99490c9a2a3a00d&p=375190&postcount=139
Fred Flintstein
William Fred
> My state elected a senator that believes that climate change
> is due to sunspots. So suck that!
The only reasonable course of action for you is to move to Minnesota so
you can get Coleman elected. Together, the two would be unstoppable.
Although, after months of discussion of drugs and Armstrong, a good
political off-topic thread would be kind of refreshing.
--
Bill Fred
Phil H
>
> - Show quoted text -
But you add it to your list of why you call him a major liar just
because the desk clerk couldn't answer the question. How is it when
you get to the hard evidence, logic, or numbers, you fall flat on your
face .......every time?
http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/world/incidence/
http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/prod_consump/groups/cr_common/@nre/@sta/documents/generalcontent/cr_043265.pdf
According to GLOBOCAN, an estimated 12.7 million new cancer cases and
7.6 million deaths occurred in 2008.
9.5 million contracted and 6.4 million have died (this year?). (305
days and counting)?
Let me know if you need help with the 28 million backward
extrapolation. Keep doing the things you are good at..... shoveling
fog.
Phil H
Beloved Fred No. 1
>> My state elected a senator that believes that climate change
>> is due to sunspots. So suck that!
William Fred wrote:
> The only reasonable course of action for you is to move to Minnesota so
> you can get Coleman elected. Together, the two would be unstoppable.
Yes but masturbation is more dangerous than global warming so he should
move to Delaware instead.