Weight Weenies

ultimobici wrote:

bricky21 wrote:Lot's of over analyzing going on here.

By 9/11/2001 Lance had already come back from cancer and won 3 Tours. The environment for him to do as he pleased was already well established.

America didn't need Lance to make us feel better after 9/11. We had a different Texan for that

Yeah, and look what a flaming mess he left behind too!

Thinking the was a joke.. at least I hope so..

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

Tongue in cheek.

However their is truth in it. I remember broad support for an invasion of Afghanistan I.E. retribution. It wasn't till later on that the Afghan war became unpopular.

The point is that no meaningful number of people were looking to Lance to make them feel better for 9/11.

Oakley anyone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dps1TpWfv54

What is the deal with that fat, crazy bitch Stephanie McIlvain? O.k., she's not fat, but she is a crazy bitch.

So how DOES cycling replace the corrupt UCI? Simply discharging McQuaid & Co.? Or a wholesale cleaning of the house?

Same way the people discharge corrupt governments and corrupt corporate masters. Iow's it's not that simple.

Well UCI was first formed in early 1900's I think to represent pro riders being abused.
Just another form of unionism, but like the AAU has long outlived it's usefullness.
Back in the late 60's runners like Steve Prefontaine were very outspoken against AAU
and by the mid to late 70's the US government abolished it.Situation is slightly different
with UCI, but esentially the same, power hungry.

If for a start all pro riders would stop paying dues to UCI, and then follwed by national cycling
federations. Their source of funding would dry up, and they would dissapear.
If Pro riders got together and organized themselves and formed their own association, sort of
a non union type of union, and people of the different countries lobbied their respective
federations to opt out of UCI, it might be possible to do.

Just think... if the UCI had of been busy with bigger issues such as doping, instead of witch hunts
to people like Graeme Obre and the like, we might not be in this mess.
And maybe we wouldn't have rules like 6.8 and 3-1 etc.

[OT]Maybe Pre should have stuck with blasting the AAU and not driving blasted out of his skull. He was idolized by a generation of high school distance runners in the early 70s, and in a different way than LA, let them down severely, although his could have been a single mistake, as opposed to LA's life of lies and vicious retribution against people calling him on it.[/OT]

Another casuality from the Armstrong cheating http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2265822/You-plonker-Del-Boy-style-entrepreneur-set-lose-30-000-buying-thousands-DVDs-disgraced-cyclist-Lance-Armstrong.html

wally318 wrote:for a start all pro riders would stop paying dues to UCI, and then follwed by national cycling
federations.

Thats a pretty big ask just to get things started.

So far, are there any active UCI pro riders ready to put their careers on hold in order to get things moving in a positive direction?

After the riders liberate themselves from governance would there be a newly established leadership, or would they go for the Occupy Wall St. model?

9 pages of an armstrong/doping thread without a single comment from artray.

strange times indeed.

I have to say Emma O still looks quite fetching.. ok .. yes I have had a couple but still..

jsinclair wrote:9 pages of an armstrong/doping thread without a single comment from artray.

strange times indeed.

Maybe he learned what nemesis means.

jsinclair wrote:9 pages of an armstrong/doping thread without a single comment from artray.

strange times indeed.

was thinking the same thing, poor ashtray i hope hes ok

Hope he wasn't banned just because he supported Lance!

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com