RE: Mr. lemond [spoiler alert!]

Peter Murphy

2004-07-20





And his lactate levels during exertion, from what I understand, are

non-humanly low.



Pete Murphy



"It's never really what you own but what you threw away

And how much did you pay?" Bad Religion











 From: Dangc-@cs.com

Reply-To: Dangc-@cs.com

To: ob-@topica.com

Subject: Fwd: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond [spoiler alert!]

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 13:34:27 EDT



In a message dated 7/20/2004 9:08:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

mad-@huttig.com writes:

 

 It will be a sad day for American cycling if this doping is

accurate. I

think Lemond's observations are logical. Armstrong doesn't

possess any

super human characteristics such as an off-the-charts lung capacity,

however, he continues to dominate, superhuman. Additionally,

his recovery

from cancer was remarkable beyond reason. If memory serves,

LA's recovery

went from his inability to ride out of his driveway to

winning the tour in

less than 18 months. I guess the question is, superhuman or

great drugs?

I BEG TO DIFFER.....I BELIEVE LANCE'S VO2 MAX AND HIS ABILITY TO METABOLIZE

BUILDING LACTIC ACID HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE EXTREMELY AMAZING OR ALMOST

"SUPER

HUMAN"....HEY, HE'S A CHAMPION.



DC



To respond to the whole group send to ob-@topica.com.

To respond to the list manager send to cmur-@obra.org

To unsubscribe send to obra-uns-@topica.com



<< message5.txt >>



Dangc-@cs.com

2004-07-20





--part1_54.2eb5387c.2e2eb1a3_boundary

Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

boundary="part1_54.2eb5387c.2e2eb1a3_alt_boundary"





--part1_54.2eb5387c.2e2eb1a3_alt_boundary

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



In a message dated 7/20/2004 9:08:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

mad-@huttig.com writes:

 

 It will be a sad day for American cycling if this doping is

accurate. I

think Lemond's observations are logical. Armstrong doesn't

possess any

super human characteristics such as an off-the-charts lung capacity,

however, he continues to dominate, superhuman. Additionally,

his recovery

from cancer was remarkable beyond reason. If memory serves,

LA's recovery

went from his inability to ride out of his driveway to

winning the tour in

less than 18 months. I guess the question is, superhuman or

great drugs?

I BEG TO DIFFER.....I BELIEVE LANCE'S VO2 MAX AND HIS ABILITY TO METABOLIZE

BUILDING LACTIC ACID HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE EXTREMELY AMAZING OR ALMOST "SUPER

HUMAN"....HEY, HE'S A CHAMPION.



DC



--part1_54.2eb5387c.2e2eb1a3_alt_boundary

Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 7/20/2004 9:08:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time, mad-@huttig.com writes: <BR>

<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>

 It will be a sad day for American cycling if this doping is <BR>

accurate.  I<BR>

think Lemond's observations are logical.  Armstrong doesn't <BR>

possess any<BR>

super human characteristics such as an off-the-charts lung capacity,<BR>

however, he continues to dominate, superhuman.  Additionally, <BR>

his recovery<BR>

from cancer was remarkable beyond reason.  If memory serves, <BR>

LA's recovery<BR>

went from his inability to ride out of his driveway to <BR>

winning the tour in<BR>

less than 18 months.  I guess the question is, superhuman or <BR>

great drugs?</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>

I BEG TO DIFFER.....I BELIEVE LANCE'S VO2 MAX AND HIS ABILITY TO METABOLIZE BUILDING LACTIC ACID HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE EXTREMELY AMAZING OR ALMOST "SUPER HUMAN"....HEY, HE'S A CHAMPION.<BR>

<BR>

DC </FONT></HTML>



--part1_54.2eb5387c.2e2eb1a3_alt_boundary--



--part1_54.2eb5387c.2e2eb1a3_boundary

Content-Type: message/rfc822

Content-Disposition: inline



Return-Path: <QmOLuAEJATBBNXY-@boing.topica.com>

Received: from rly-xi02.mx.aol.com (rly-xi02.mail.aol.com [172.20.116.7]) by air-xi02.mail.aol.com (v100.26) with ESMTP id MAILINXI22-4c640fd434f25d; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:08:09 -0400

Received: from out008.topica-platinum-w.com (out008.topica-platinum-w.com [65.77.104.28]) by rly-xi02.mx.aol.com (v100.23) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXI22-4c640fd434f25d; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:08:04 -0400

Received: (qmail 4800 invoked by uid 0); 20 Jul 2004 16:07:47 -0000

Received: from unknown (HELO HBP-MAILHUB01.huttig.com) (67.128.244.254)

by 0 with SMTP; 20 Jul 2004 16:07:47 -0000

Received: from HBP-MAIL05.huttig.com ([192.168.1.41]) by HBP-MAILHUB01.huttig.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713);

Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:07:47 -0500

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain;

charset="iso-8859-1"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

content-class: urn:content-classes:message

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1

X-MS-Has-Attach:

X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:

Thread-Topic: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond [spoiler alert!]

Thread-Index: AcRr/h3beyEr53hVRcuEwe+/6PlvVQAEURxQAJjqlSA=

X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jul 2004 16:07:47.0096 (UTC) FILETIME=[B2A97180:01C46E73]

To: PBar-@Barila.Net, ob-@topica.com

From: "Adams, Mike" <mad-@huttig.com>

Subject: RE: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond [spoiler alert!]

Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:07:37 -0500

Message-ID: <755410309-1463792382-1090339674@boing.topica.com>

Errors-To: <QmOLuAEJATBBNXY-@boing.topica.com>

Reply-To: mad-@huttig.com

X-Topica-Id: <1090339670.inmta002.3598.1299790>

List-Help: <http://topica.com/lists/obra@topica.com/>

List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:obra-uns-@topica.com>

X-AOL-IP: 65.77.104.28

X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)



Until ya'll do your research on what it takes to successfully pass every test for doping, in and out of competition for five years, with the scrutiny that Mr. Armstrong is and has been under, and have everyone involved with his training and nutrition i.e. Mr. Carmichael, state he is a clean rider, shut up and go ride.





-----Original Message-----

From: Phil Barila [mailto:PBar-@Barila.Net]

Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 11:17 AM

To: ob-@topica.com

Subject: RE: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond [spoiler alert!]





FACT: LA has been a very vocal proponent of blood tests, instead of peeing

in the bottle.

Do you really think anyone who is systematically doping on the scale

necessary to create a "superhuman" is that confident in the masking

technology he'd be using?



FACT: LA has passed at least one of same blood tests, and a huge number of

urine tests, and had dopes with (and without) press passes going through the

team's garbage, without any credible evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever

having been found.



Anyone can say anything, but so far, it's only words. Surely, with the huge

bounty Le Monde and other organizations have offered for credible evidence

of LA doping, someone who works for the team would gotten greedy by now,

don't you think?



While you are advocating skepticism, advocate skepticism both ways.

Currently, your tone suggests that your skepticism is unidirectional.



 -----Original Message-----

From: snjr [mailto:sn-@charter.net]

Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 7:01 AM

To: ob-@topica.com

Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond



There was an interesting segment on ESPN yesterday 7/16/04. I

cannot find it

on the net, however, a previous staff member of the USPS team was

interviewed and he stated that LA was very threatening, telling him

something to the effect "I will spend a lot of money to make your life

miserable" when referring to his discussion about the team's apparent

doping. Greg Lemond made similar references to threats

during the segement.



There were also insinuations that Armstrong pressured other

team members to

use drugs. I have heard in the past that may be part of the

reason riders

like Julich and Hamilton left USPS.



It will be a sad day for American cycling if this doping is

accurate. I

think Lemond's observations are logical. Armstrong doesn't

possess any

super human characteristics such as an off-the-charts lung capacity,

however, he continues to dominate, superhuman. Additionally,

his recovery

from cancer was remarkable beyond reason. If memory serves,

LA's recovery

went from his inability to ride out of his driveway to

winning the tour in

less than 18 months. I guess the question is, superhuman or

great drugs?



DISCLAIMER FOR ALL YOU HOT HEADS:

I am not stating that LA is doping, so don't start with the

innocent until

proven guilty crap. I AM SAYING THE SKEPTICISM IS REASONABLE.



To respond to the whole group send to ob-@topica.com.

To respond to the list manager send to cmur-@obra.org

To unsubscribe send to obra-uns-@topica.com



To respond to the whole group send to ob-@topica.com.

To respond to the list manager send to cmur-@obra.org

To unsubscribe send to obra-uns-@topica.com









--part1_54.2eb5387c.2e2eb1a3_boundary--



Adams, Mike

2004-07-20



Until ya'll do your research on what it takes to successfully pass every test for doping, in and out of competition for five years, with the scrutiny that Mr. Armstrong is and has been under, and have everyone involved with his training and nutrition i.e. Mr. Carmichael, state he is a clean rider, shut up and go ride.





-----Original Message-----

From: Phil Barila [mailto:PBar-@Barila.Net]

Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 11:17 AM

To: ob-@topica.com

Subject: RE: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond [spoiler alert!]





FACT: LA has been a very vocal proponent of blood tests, instead of peeing

in the bottle.

Do you really think anyone who is systematically doping on the scale

necessary to create a "superhuman" is that confident in the masking

technology he'd be using?



FACT: LA has passed at least one of same blood tests, and a huge number of

urine tests, and had dopes with (and without) press passes going through the

team's garbage, without any credible evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever

having been found.



Anyone can say anything, but so far, it's only words. Surely, with the huge

bounty Le Monde and other organizations have offered for credible evidence

of LA doping, someone who works for the team would gotten greedy by now,

don't you think?



While you are advocating skepticism, advocate skepticism both ways.

Currently, your tone suggests that your skepticism is unidirectional.



 -----Original Message-----

From: snjr [mailto:sn-@charter.net]

Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 7:01 AM

To: ob-@topica.com

Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond



There was an interesting segment on ESPN yesterday 7/16/04. I

cannot find it

on the net, however, a previous staff member of the USPS team was

interviewed and he stated that LA was very threatening, telling him

something to the effect "I will spend a lot of money to make your life

miserable" when referring to his discussion about the team's apparent

doping. Greg Lemond made similar references to threats

during the segement.



There were also insinuations that Armstrong pressured other

team members to

use drugs. I have heard in the past that may be part of the

reason riders

like Julich and Hamilton left USPS.



It will be a sad day for American cycling if this doping is

accurate. I

think Lemond's observations are logical. Armstrong doesn't

possess any

super human characteristics such as an off-the-charts lung capacity,

however, he continues to dominate, superhuman. Additionally,

his recovery

from cancer was remarkable beyond reason. If memory serves,

LA's recovery

went from his inability to ride out of his driveway to

winning the tour in

less than 18 months. I guess the question is, superhuman or

great drugs?



DISCLAIMER FOR ALL YOU HOT HEADS:

I am not stating that LA is doping, so don't start with the

innocent until

proven guilty crap. I AM SAYING THE SKEPTICISM IS REASONABLE.



To respond to the whole group send to ob-@topica.com.

To respond to the list manager send to cmur-@obra.org

To unsubscribe send to obra-uns-@topica.com



Philip D Barila

2004-07-17



FACT: LA has been a very vocal proponent of blood tests, instead of peeing

in the bottle.

Do you really think anyone who is systematically doping on the scale

necessary to create a "superhuman" is that confident in the masking

technology he'd be using?



FACT: LA has passed at least one of same blood tests, and a huge number of

urine tests, and had dopes with (and without) press passes going through the

team's garbage, without any credible evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever

having been found.



Anyone can say anything, but so far, it's only words. Surely, with the huge

bounty Le Monde and other organizations have offered for credible evidence

of LA doping, someone who works for the team would gotten greedy by now,

don't you think?



While you are advocating skepticism, advocate skepticism both ways.

Currently, your tone suggests that your skepticism is unidirectional.



 -----Original Message-----

From: snjr [mailto:sn-@charter.net]

Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 7:01 AM

To: ob-@topica.com

Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Mr. lemond



There was an interesting segment on ESPN yesterday 7/16/04. I

cannot find it

on the net, however, a previous staff member of the USPS team was

interviewed and he stated that LA was very threatening, telling him

something to the effect "I will spend a lot of money to make your life

miserable" when referring to his discussion about the team's apparent

doping. Greg Lemond made similar references to threats

during the segement.



There were also insinuations that Armstrong pressured other

team members to

use drugs. I have heard in the past that may be part of the

reason riders

like Julich and Hamilton left USPS.



It will be a sad day for American cycling if this doping is

accurate. I

think Lemond's observations are logical. Armstrong doesn't

possess any

super human characteristics such as an off-the-charts lung capacity,

however, he continues to dominate, superhuman. Additionally,

his recovery

from cancer was remarkable beyond reason. If memory serves,

LA's recovery

went from his inability to ride out of his driveway to

winning the tour in

less than 18 months. I guess the question is, superhuman or

great drugs?



DISCLAIMER FOR ALL YOU HOT HEADS:

I am not stating that LA is doping, so don't start with the

innocent until

proven guilty crap. I AM SAYING THE SKEPTICISM IS REASONABLE.