Live blog: Lance Armstrong's mega-successful Uber investment; another near miss with a cyclist on the same Dutch level crossing; flawed Salbutamol test could be replaced by ‘passport’ + more

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Clearly you're delusional and lacking comprehension. You accused Armstrong of profiteering from doping, so has every other top cyclist in history, you and others target armstrong but ignore other top cyclists who have doped/cheated their way to a fortune.

You're not very good at this are you, go ask an adult to explain it to you!

Please do point out where I've denied that other cyclists have profited from doping?  I'll wait.

You asked a question which was answered.  The subject in this discussion is Armstrong & not the rest of the peloton.  Keeping up yet?  Had the subject matter been the rest of the peloton profitering from doping then that would've been addressed as part of the conversation.  Jesus fucking Christ you're stupid.  

John Smith wrote:

It never ceases to amaze me that people make up their own rules of the road. The twitter feed is full of people claiming you should show “courtesy” and let people pull out in free moving traffic. That’s not a cyclist/car thing, it’s a morons who can’t drive thing. 

Had a few people pull out on me in London like that last night, I was driving a car. The idiots assume you will stop for them if they force a collision situation. Doing it to someone on a bike is a higher order of c*ntery.

ChrisB200SX wrote:

John Smith wrote:

It never ceases to amaze me that people make up their own rules of the road. The twitter feed is full of people claiming you should show “courtesy” and let people pull out in free moving traffic. That’s not a cyclist/car thing, it’s a morons who can’t drive thing. 

Had a few people pull out on me in London like that last night, I was driving a car. The idiots assume you will stop for them if they force a collision situation. Doing it to someone on a bike is a higher order of c*ntery.

Honestly I don’t think they even think it’s a collision situation,they just think “there is plenty of room for them to slow down” and that if you don’t it’s you being rude and not playing by the rules. As evidence of this I was riding my motorbike to down a main road in to Oxford a few years ago. There was a lady in the road waiting to turn right on a bicycle shouting abuse at cars for not stopping to let her cross. Another example, my mother in law pulled out on someone and when they flashed their headlights at her she said “what’s his problem. He had loads of room to see me”.

burtthebike wrote:

I trust Mr Vine has reported that driver.  Couldn't be a clearer case of "it's only a cyclist so I'm gonna pull out".

There's also an element of "That car has stopped to let me out, so I don't need to check for myself that its clear..."

madcarew wrote:

Providing Lance's investment (share holding) hasn't been diluted along the way, that makes his $100k worth nearly $3.5 billion on IPO valuatios of $120 billion for  Uber. That just feels wrong.

Why?

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

madcarew wrote:

Providing Lance's investment (share holding) hasn't been diluted along the way, that makes his $100k worth nearly $3.5 billion on IPO valuatios of $120 billion for  Uber. That just feels wrong.

Why?

Because it shows that doping does indeed pay.

Rapha Nadal wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

madcarew wrote:

Providing Lance's investment (share holding) hasn't been diluted along the way, that makes his $100k worth nearly $3.5 billion on IPO valuatios of $120 billion for  Uber. That just feels wrong.

Why?

Because it shows that doping does indeed pay.

Guess you'll be giving the likes of perennial dope cheat Merckx the same treatment, I think he's done rather well for himself on the back of a dope fuelled cycling career? What about Moser, another self confessed doper, or maybe the Badger who refused to take tests, or any of the other successful riders BITD, or is it that you and like many others have a special reserve of rules and finger pointing when it comes to Armstrong?

he was a bully you say, well get out of bed, so was Merckx (net worth circa $20M btw), as well as a liar too, Hinault wasn't exactly a saint either, in fact a total two faced, lying backstabbing wanker! Oh and Hinault happens to be loaded, he too invested his drug fuelled winnings, just like Armstrong.

So, just stop already with your ridiculous 'doping' bullshit, all the top/most successful pros were on it, you know this already. Yet you'll only ever point the finger/villify one, why is that?

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Rapha Nadal wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

madcarew wrote:

Providing Lance's investment (share holding) hasn't been diluted along the way, that makes his $100k worth nearly $3.5 billion on IPO valuatios of $120 billion for  Uber. That just feels wrong.

Why?

Because it shows that doping does indeed pay.

Guess you'll be giving the likes of perennial dope cheat Merckx the same treatment, I think he's done rather well for himself on the back of a dope fuelled cycling career? What about Moser, another self confessed doper, or maybe the Badger who refused to take tests, or any of the other successful riders BITD, or is it that you and like many others have a special reserve of rules and finger pointing when it comes to Armstrong?

he was a bully you say, well get out of bed, so was Merckx (net worth circa $20M btw), as well as a liar too, Hinault wasn't exactly a saint either, in fact a total two faced, lying backstabbing wanker! Oh and Hinault happens to be loaded, he too invested his drug fuelled winnings, just like Armstrong.

So, just stop already with your ridiculous 'doping' bullshit, all the top/most successful pros were on it, you know this already. Yet you'll only ever point the finger/villify one, why is that?

Roid rage?

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

Rapha Nadal wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

madcarew wrote:

Providing Lance's investment (share holding) hasn't been diluted along the way, that makes his $100k worth nearly $3.5 billion on IPO valuatios of $120 billion for  Uber. That just feels wrong.

Why?

Because it shows that doping does indeed pay.

Guess you'll be giving the likes of perennial dope cheat Merckx the same treatment, I think he's done rather well for himself on the back of a dope fuelled cycling career? What about Moser, another self confessed doper, or maybe the Badger who refused to take tests, or any of the other successful riders BITD, or is it that you and like many others have a special reserve of rules and finger pointing when it comes to Armstrong?

he was a bully you say, well get out of bed, so was Merckx (net worth circa $20M btw), as well as a liar too, Hinault wasn't exactly a saint either, in fact a total two faced, lying backstabbing wanker! Oh and Hinault happens to be loaded, he too invested his drug fuelled winnings, just like Armstrong.

So, just stop already with your ridiculous 'doping' bullshit, all the top/most successful pros were on it, you know this already. Yet you'll only ever point the finger/villify one, why is that?

What the actual fuck are you on about? 

Man makes money from an investment which was funded by a higher salary and/or endorsement money earned due to succesess fuelled by doping.  You asked "why" and there's your answer.  What on earth possessed you to bang on like you did?  Can you read things that haven't even been written down?  Good Lord, man.

madcarew wrote:

Providing Lance's investment (share holding) hasn't been diluted along the way, that makes his $100k worth nearly $3.5 billion on IPO valuatios of $120 billion for  Uber. That just feels wrong.

No.  He invested $100k in a fund that invested in Uber.  I'm sure it would be easy to calculate exactly how much he has returned, but estimating for what % of the fund was in uber, dilution, tax, and any cashing out by the fund over time, he way i think $20-30m is a better estimate.  No mean feat, but once again this is imo Lance being Lance - he didn't have to share this info, but he did.  Consider it a metaphorical middle finger to the haters.

John Smith wrote:

It appears that in both the videos the train is clearly visible before the cyclist started crossing (well, in the first one it was hidden by another train, but if they had waited rather than assuming it would have been visible). 

You can't fix stupid basically. Was the rider drunk/stoned?