Road Cycling · Public discussion

Dumbass Lafferty

Started by Tom Kunich · · Last activity · 5 posts · 398 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
30 January 2005
Last activity
1 February 2005
Original author
Tom Kunich
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
398
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Maybe you ought to check out:

    http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2005/diaries/john/?id=john051

    "A health insurance company sponsors our team, so it is even more crucial
    that we play by the anti-doping rules. Much like my former team Shaklee, a
    positive test would be extremely detrimental to the team's future. It's
    reassuring to know that my teammates feel as strongly as I do about
    competing clean. But just competing clean isn't enough. We also cannot
    condone the spreading of baseless innuendo about competitors. To refrain
    from slander is not equal to "covering up".
    We shouldn't let paranoia and conspiracy theories poison our thinking. How
    easy does it become to rationalize defeat with "oh, the winner was lubed to
    the gills"? It's easy to give up when the throttles are wide open and it
    feels like you can't hang on any longer, and you are thinking, "I'm not on a
    level playing field here."

    As I've said before, in all my years racing in the USA I have seen drugs
    used by a competitor only once. Critics point to high profile positive tests
    of US pro's, but several of those positives were bogus on closer inspection,
    such as Zajicek and Sbeih. Clean racers abound and excel here in the USA!"

    In my opinion Lafferty wouldn't hesitate to slander Jesus.

  2. On 1/30/05 12:20 PM, in article
    [email hidden], "Tom Kunich"

    Quoted message said:

    Maybe you ought to check out:

    http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2005/diaries/john/?id=john051

    "A health insurance company sponsors our team, so it is even more crucial
    that we play by the anti-doping rules. Much like my former team Shaklee, a
    positive test would be extremely detrimental to the team's future. It's
    reassuring to know that my teammates feel as strongly as I do about
    competing clean. But just competing clean isn't enough. We also cannot
    condone the spreading of baseless innuendo about competitors. To refrain
    from slander is not equal to "covering up".
    We shouldn't let paranoia and conspiracy theories poison our thinking. How
    easy does it become to rationalize defeat with "oh, the winner was lubed to
    the gills"? It's easy to give up when the throttles are wide open and it
    feels like you can't hang on any longer, and you are thinking, "I'm not on a
    level playing field here."

    As I've said before, in all my years racing in the USA I have seen drugs
    used by a competitor only once. Critics point to high profile positive tests
    of US pro's, but several of those positives were bogus on closer inspection,
    such as Zajicek and Sbeih. Clean racers abound and excel here in the USA!"

    In my opinion Lafferty wouldn't hesitate to slander Jesus.


    I really do not see how an HMO/PPO as a sponsor would mean the riders are
    clean....

    Would doping be considered a "pre-existing condition"???


  3. Quoted message said:

    Maybe you ought to check out:

    http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2005/diaries/john/?id=john051

    "A health insurance company sponsors our team, so it is even more crucial
    that we play by the anti-doping rules.


    As opposed to the "it's okay to boost performance at least until someone on
    the team gets busted" rules.

    Quoted message said:

    Much like my former team Shaklee, a positive test would be extremely
    detrimental to the team's future.


    Glad to hear they're doing their utmost to avoid any such possibility.

    Quoted message said:

    It's reassuring to know that my teammates feel as strongly as I do about
    competing clean. But just competing clean isn't enough. We also cannot
    condone the spreading of baseless innuendo about competitors. To refrain
    from slander is not equal to "covering up".
    We shouldn't let paranoia and conspiracy theories poison our thinking. How
    easy does it become to rationalize defeat with "oh, the winner was lubed
    to the gills"? It's easy to give up when the throttles are wide open and
    it feels like you can't hang on any longer, and you are thinking, "I'm not
    on a level playing field here."

    As I've said before, in all my years racing in the USA I have seen drugs
    used by a competitor only once. Critics point to high profile positive
    tests of US pro's, but several of those positives were bogus on closer
    inspection, such as Zajicek and Sbeih. Clean racers abound and excel here
    in the USA!"

  4. B Lafferty said:
    Quoted message said:

    Because John hasn't seen more than one doper, there isn't a problem?

    No, John is wrong in that assertion. It isn't a problem simply because it isn't
    important.

    Quoted message said:

    FYI, Jesus and Buddha rock.

    You've been doping again and are now hallucinating. I've seen your type a
    million times and you are a problem.

  5. "B Lafferty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    Because John hasn't seen more than one doper, there isn't a problem? OK.
    So:
    1. Those positives of US cyclists in the past year are mere fantasy.
    2. I've never witness a homicide, therefore, the national homicide rate
    must be very low.

    Decanio said that he was as fast as his doping roommate but in the Lafferty
    racing manual it says that anyone that's fast MUST be doping.

    I find it interesting that you would think that my ex-wife, whose name you
    apparently do not know, would ever say anything like that. You seem to have
    mistaken your mother for someone else's wife.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.