Lance Armstrong - anyone following the drama ?
- Thread starter papawoody
- Start date
- Status
using drugs dont mean automatic win. drugs + good genetics = win.
if you dont have the genetics for it. drugs can only do so much. those top athletes that wins year after year all dope along with good genetics. its not all about drugs. so legalizing drugs is consider fair. cuz in the end its still comes down to genetics and who works the hardest. and in the end its about money. being a top athlete gives you big bucks. they do what they gotta do to stay the best and make money.
if you dont have the genetics for it. drugs can only do so much. those top athletes that wins year after year all dope along with good genetics. its not all about drugs. so legalizing drugs is consider fair. cuz in the end its still comes down to genetics and who works the hardest. and in the end its about money. being a top athlete gives you big bucks. they do what they gotta do to stay the best and make money.
Players? Are you a professional cyclists? Pro at anything? I'm talking from a spectators point of view. Not to mention the respective hall of fame and governing body of each sport. Good luck trying to convince me they don't care
Who gives a rip about the cheaters who don't care that they're cheating
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
All I'm trying to say is from a spectator's point of view all you are doing is labeling him as a cheater and suming his whole life as such. As the public we only see what we are presented. Yeah cheating is bad but these guys aren't playing the game for fun. It's their jobs. And with the amount of money and endorsements and attention they get there has to be a ton of pressure. With that pressure comes the pressure to perform. If you ain't performing than you're kicking rocks and out of a job. I'm not trying to swing from lance's nut and can care less that he cheated. I guess I just don't care as much about athletes doin roids and such. I mean how many people followed and I mean really followed the Roger Clemens case? Definitely not the majority. Now from a non spectator view point, say a fellow competitor cyclist, I'd probably be cryin like a beech. " but mom lance is kicking my chair and blood doping." Guess I'd rather not here the crap and just get to the end results.
its is amazing to me the number of people on this thread who torture reason to justify cheating.
It amazes me how strong they feel about it and how emotional they are with their responds. most have never watched a cycling event but feel sorry that they have to cheat lmao.
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Yeah people get emotionally invested in their heros . And since this one came with such an amazing comeback story , plus theres the patriotic element thrown in , ya get a reluctance to abandon your investment . I was a supporter even when I realized he was a doper a couple years ago . I used some of the same logic we've seen here , but it eventually took a much more detailed look at the situation to realize the depth of the wrongness . You know Nike would't drop the guy unless this case was legit . They stuck with Tiger when he was going cray ... and didn't they stick with Vick when he was killing dogs ?
My point was about how many people watched him cycle vs how many people are willing to defend him. Weird disconnect
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
I think thats more about him being an "american celebrity/hero " than being a cycling star . The cycling community is divided . Casual hobbyists are most likely to support/buy into him ... While you go higher up the ladder of serious athletes there seems to be more contempt . With the exception of the top level pros who are scared to say anything at all for fear of breaking the code of silence . (they call it "omerta ") of course many of them have doped or are still doping so no point in them making any stand ....
- Status
