![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=2154059
[ QUOTE ] Armstrong, who announced his engagement Monday to rock singer Sheryl Crow, issued a statement Tuesday confirming that he's considering a comeback in part to rankle French media. [/ QUOTE ] Classic, why spend 1.5 mil in court, when you can make a return and dominate their sport for the 8th consecutive time |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
him coming back, and winning, would rule
(and I'm normally anti-comeback) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() why is it that most americans believe that lance armstrong has never used steroids, while at the same time most americans believe that barry bonds has? i'm much more inclined to think that a guy who had to recover from a life-theatening illness needed performance-enhancing drugs. bonds is just a great hitter, it makes more sense that armstrong would have doped. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
because a lot of people close to bonds have been associated with steroids - and he has admitted that he "may have taken them unknowingly"
Oh yeah, and bonds tripled in size. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() bonds may very well have used steroids, i certainly don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. my point is that armstrong is just as likely, perhaps more so, to have done it as well. i believe a former friend/employee/training partner of his has accused him of juicing, and now there's the positive epo test. this "evidence" is at least as damning as whatever "associations" bonds has had to steroids. so why do ppl want to think of bonds as a bad guy and armstrong as some sort of saint? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
so why do ppl want to think of bonds as a bad guy and armstrong as some sort of saint? [/ QUOTE ] is it really that hard for you to differentiate these 2 guys? ill make it simple. bonds has always been percieved a dick bc he acts like one. armstrong come back from death and donates immeasurable resources to saving lifes and inspiring otherrs. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] so why do ppl want to think of bonds as a bad guy and armstrong as some sort of saint? [/ QUOTE ] is it really that hard for you to differentiate these 2 guys? ill make it simple. bonds has always been percieved a dick bc he acts like one. armstrong come back from death and donates immeasurable resources to saving lifes and inspiring otherrs. [/ QUOTE ] i realize that ppl basically make excuses for armstrong cuz he's a feel-good story, i just think that's silly. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
bonds may very well have used steroids, i certainly don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. my point is that armstrong is just as likely, perhaps more so, to have done it as well. i believe a former friend/employee/training partner of his has accused him of juicing, and now there's the positive epo test. this "evidence" is at least as damning as whatever "associations" bonds has had to steroids. so why do ppl want to think of bonds as a bad guy and armstrong as some sort of saint? [/ QUOTE ] you do know that there is no proof that the EPO test was his, correct? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
why is it that most americans believe that lance armstrong has never used steroids, while at the same time most americans believe that barry bonds has? i'm much more inclined to think that a guy who had to recover from a life-theatening illness needed performance-enhancing drugs. bonds is just a great hitter, it makes more sense that armstrong would have doped. [/ QUOTE ] Maybe because Lance Armstrong is the most tested athlete in the world and has passed every single time, while Barry Bonds has been shown to have connections to Balco and has admitted to (unintentionally) using steroids. Or maybe it's because Bonds put on 2979476460979 pounds of muscle and head-mass. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Probably because cyclists don't take steroids. Steroids would make them bigger and they certainly don't want that.
|
![]() |
|
|