Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 28, 2017, 01:52:00 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Subscribe! | Shop: Amazon

***DONATION DRIVE 2 HAS BEGUN:
CLICK HERE TO BURN MONEY***
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Sports / Fantasy Sports  |  Topic: The case against Lance Armstrong 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The case against Lance Armstrong  (Read 26796 times)
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #350 on: January 18, 2013, 07:16:42 AM

Lance is grasping at straws.   The funniest thing about all this is dopers being pissed at a doper for being caught doping and then lying about doping.  I'm assuming he's got attorneys involved because he's going to be sued about a million times.  I'm not really sure why he chose to do this.  He has really opened himself up for a lot of legal difficulty.  Unless he's got some sort of deal in place that if he helps bring down the UCI (which he should) that he will get some leniency.  

Addendum-  in looking at some of the commentary from other riders, you would think that they thought Lance invented doping.  Now he's going to turn into a huge scapegoat for a problem that existed long before he came around, was prevalent when he rode across the peloton and will be present long after he is gone. 
« Last Edit: January 18, 2013, 08:29:32 AM by ghost »
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 37525

Prevent all damage that would be dealt to you and other troops you control.


WWW
Reply #351 on: January 18, 2013, 09:14:33 AM

I saw bits of this, heard the commentary on it this morning, then I checked with myself.

...

...

Nope, still don't give two shits about cycling.

Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #352 on: January 18, 2013, 08:57:52 PM

I really hate this thing. They hype the shit out of his reveal. At first I thought it was on his road to becoming a force against doping. But then I realized, nope, just rebranding. And that was before this:

JJ Abrams picks up write for as yet unreleased book on this stupid bullshit.

This right here is why a) this is my first ever post in Sports/Fantasy after 8 years; and, b) I don't follow organized sports. I hear too much about how every sport is really just a metagame of brinkmanship to see who can dodge rules better. That's coupled with this stupid trait in society where we elevate someone whose singularly good at a sport into some paragon of virtue until, shockingly, that really good player in that really aggressive sport does something typical of little-brain-thinking macho narcissism.

My real problem isn't the sports. I'm sure the vast majority of it is legit players in legit games who are merely really good.

It's how the media covers it and how society just loves the shit out of it through the mother of rose colored lenses.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2013, 09:02:38 PM by Darniaq »
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #353 on: January 18, 2013, 09:03:47 PM

JJ Abrams and Lance Armstrong are a match made in heaven.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 26579

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #354 on: January 18, 2013, 09:04:00 PM

Yeah, he ruined people's lives and now wants our forgiveness? Nah. I didn't watch the interview, I won't buy anything he does, and I will do everything I can to advise any clients against his charity in favor of other cancer organizations.

CPA, Sports blogger, Mount and Blade enthusiast
Braves by the Numbers, my sports blog
Xuri
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1194

몇살이세욬ㅋ 몇살이 몇살 몇살이세욬ㅋ!!!!!1!


WWW
Reply #355 on: January 18, 2013, 09:14:58 PM

He's not after forgiveness. He's not sorry he doped himself, he's sorry he got caught.

-= Ho Eyo He Hum =-
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10205


Reply #356 on: January 18, 2013, 09:34:27 PM

He revealed a measure of the man that he is and this much is certain: If you never met this jerk, well, count your blessings.

Quote
Fellow riders say they wish they'd never hooked on with him. Support staff claim they wish they'd never taken a job. Sponsors are lining up to sue. Journalists who carried his water for years are writing they wish they'd never bought the lie.

The more Armstrong talked Thursday, the more it became obvious: This seems like the last and least likable individual you'd want to hang around.

He was, and likely remains, nothing but a machine of personal glorification, no concept of his real place in the world. Now that the truth is out, it's not about the cheating so much as it's about the way he fought dirty to protect the cheating.

"I was a bully," he acknowledged. "In the sense that I tried to control the narrative, and if I didn't like what somebody said, I tried to control that and say that's a lie."

Except he didn't stop at saying "that's a lie." He'd start there, then go on the attack, often trying to ruin his accusers professionally and, perhaps, personally, maybe legally and certainly financially.

Consider Emma O'Reilly, an Irish massage therapist who began working for his team while in her 20s. She later told the truth about Lance and drugs. For that she's testified Team Armstrong responded by calling her a whore and a drunk. But Armstrong didn't stop there. No, he tried to sue into oblivion this woman of limited financial means.

What did Armstrong say of Emma? He couldn't remember if he even attempted legal action against her.

"To be honest Oprah," he chuckled lightly, "we sued so many people, I'm sure we did."

You sure?

"She's one of those people I have to apologize to," Armstrong said.

You think?

"She got run over, got bullied," he continued. He was in the wrong tense then. She got run over, got bullied. Not, "I ran her over. I bullied her." Because make no mistake, it was him. It was only him.

How the hell did this guy ever get so popular anyway. I took one look at him years ago and he had asshole written all over him.

Be principled, but not too principled.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10530


Reply #357 on: January 18, 2013, 09:38:35 PM


How the hell did this guy ever get so popular anyway. I took one look at him years ago and he had asshole written all over him.

Cancer. 
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #358 on: January 19, 2013, 09:11:05 AM

Yeah, he ruined people's lives and now wants our forgiveness? Nah. I didn't watch the interview, I won't buy anything he does, and I will do everything I can to advise any clients against his charity in favor of other cancer organizations.

He's sleaze, but it's silly to think that anyone in cycling is clean.  I find it laughable when they interview other cyclists that have been implicated in doping and they act like Armstrong is the antichrist.  Shit, people, they all dope.  It's the dirtiest sport in the world. 
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 26579

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #359 on: January 19, 2013, 10:42:04 AM

Exactly. All the more reason not to bankrupt other people when they try to tell the truth about you.

CPA, Sports blogger, Mount and Blade enthusiast
Braves by the Numbers, my sports blog
Ginaz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3052


Reply #360 on: January 19, 2013, 01:36:31 PM

Well, at least he didn't call her fat! why so serious?

Yeah.  What a douche bag.  That whole interview was a farce.  Instead of going to a real, seasoned journalist he went with Oprah, knowing he'd get soft ball questions and let off easy.

I'm betting sometime in the near future we'll hear Lance has "found God" becomes a born again Christian, which of course, will somehow mean he can't be held accountable for anything he did before that and we should all just leave him alone. Ohhhhh, I see.

I'll pre order you SWTOR if you let me put my lightsaber in your sarlaac cave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWb3cxA4g_U&feature=related
Shame Is a component of the Discount - k3b2h3g46c0a
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things. - Schild
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10205


Reply #361 on: January 19, 2013, 04:49:26 PM

I wonder how soon we will get the "well he must have been better than everyone else anyway 'cause everyone is on drugs" comments?

Be principled, but not too principled.
lamaros
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7370


Reply #362 on: January 19, 2013, 06:13:40 PM

There is no doubt he was an incredibly driven athlete who was also a great cyclist. There is also no doubt that most of the other cyclists were also doping. Many got caught and many have admitted it.

He's always been an unlikeable jerk, this wild public outcry is mostly driven by a) people who only every engaged with his 'story' feeling stupid and duped, and b) people who have known he's a cheating jerk relishing the opportunity to cry it from the rooftops.

Expect poison from the standing water.
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #363 on: January 19, 2013, 09:21:22 PM

There is no doubt he was an incredibly driven athlete who was also a great cyclist. There is also no doubt that most of the other cyclists were also doping. Many got caught and many have admitted it.

He's always been an unlikeable jerk, this wild public outcry is mostly driven by a) people who only every engaged with his 'story' feeling stupid and duped, and b) people who have known he's a cheating jerk relishing the opportunity to cry it from the rooftops.

It's very likely that he has a personality disorder.  He's extremely charismatic, good at making the right comment at the right time and extremely self centered.   People either love him or hate him. 

Personally, I still think he's more entertaining as a failure than many athletes.  His interview with Oprah was riveting.  I can't wait to see how many lies he gets caught in from that.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #364 on: January 19, 2013, 10:47:08 PM

Quote
I wonder how soon we will get the "well he must have been better than everyone else anyway 'cause everyone is on drugs" comments?

There is no doubt he was an incredibly driven athlete who was also a great cyclist.

Cycling is a very low skill sport. If you have more strength and endurance than other people you will win. In baseball you still need hand-eye coordination and reflexes, in football you still need field vision, good decision-making with the ball, etc. Being great at cycling is 99% raw physical ability, which is what doping improves - and he was the best at doping. There's no way of knowing how good a cyclist Armstrong was without that help. (And even in skill sports people vastly underestimate how much of a help performance enhancers are)

If a dude wins a holding your breath underwater competition using an air tank, beating other people using inferior air tanks, who is the best at holding their breath underwater? It's pointless to even discuss. Armstrong was the best at cheating in a field of mostly (but not all) cheaters. There's no way to separate his performance from his cheating.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2013, 10:53:46 PM by Margalis »

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
satael
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2128


Reply #365 on: January 20, 2013, 03:58:47 AM

Quote
I wonder how soon we will get the "well he must have been better than everyone else anyway 'cause everyone is on drugs" comments?

There is no doubt he was an incredibly driven athlete who was also a great cyclist.

Cycling is a very low skill sport. If you have more strength and endurance than other people you will win. In baseball you still need hand-eye coordination and reflexes, in football you still need field vision, good decision-making with the ball, etc. Being great at cycling is 99% raw physical ability, which is what doping improves - and he was the best at doping. There's no way of knowing how good a cyclist Armstrong was without that help. (And even in skill sports people vastly underestimate how much of a help performance enhancers are)

If a dude wins a holding your breath underwater competition using an air tank, beating other people using inferior air tanks, who is the best at holding their breath underwater? It's pointless to even discuss. Armstrong was the best at cheating in a field of mostly (but not all) cheaters. There's no way to separate his performance from his cheating.

While I have no love for cycling, I'm pretty sure your remark just made most track'n'field sports trivial  (110m hurdles is just about physical and no skill or technique needed either right?) Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?
I really doubt it's 99% physical with technique and strategy being just 1% of it (I mean there are teams and things like climb specialists for a reason?)
rk47
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6171

The Patron Saint of Radicalthons


Reply #366 on: January 20, 2013, 04:31:09 AM

cycling is like sex. do it wrong and you get sick.

Colonel Sanders is back in my wallet
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #367 on: January 20, 2013, 06:20:26 AM

Quote
I wonder how soon we will get the "well he must have been better than everyone else anyway 'cause everyone is on drugs" comments?

There is no doubt he was an incredibly driven athlete who was also a great cyclist.

Cycling is a very low skill sport. If you have more strength and endurance than other people you will win. In baseball you still need hand-eye coordination and reflexes, in football you still need field vision, good decision-making with the ball, etc. Being great at cycling is 99% raw physical ability, which is what doping improves - and he was the best at doping. There's no way of knowing how good a cyclist Armstrong was without that help. (And even in skill sports people vastly underestimate how much of a help performance enhancers are)

If a dude wins a holding your breath underwater competition using an air tank, beating other people using inferior air tanks, who is the best at holding their breath underwater? It's pointless to even discuss. Armstrong was the best at cheating in a field of mostly (but not all) cheaters. There's no way to separate his performance from his cheating.

While I have no love for cycling, I'm pretty sure your remark just made most track'n'field sports trivial  (110m hurdles is just about physical and no skill or technique needed either right?) Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?
I really doubt it's 99% physical with technique and strategy being just 1% of it (I mean there are teams and things like climb specialists for a reason?)

Spot on. Endurance sport is as much - if not more - about the mental approach and the will to push through pain barriers as it is about strength and endurance. Technique and strategy also come into it, especially at elite levels where other physiological factors like VO2Max matter less.

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #368 on: January 20, 2013, 06:31:56 AM

How the hell did this guy ever get so popular anyway. I took one look at him years ago and he had asshole written all over him.

He won. There are lots of people out there with asshole written all over them but they win / sing popular songs, earn lots of money and people love them for it.

Armstrong was a winner in a sport dominated by Europeans and had a great story behind him. The US loves winners with personal narratives like his.

ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #369 on: January 20, 2013, 07:06:55 AM

Cycling is a very low skill sport. If you have more strength and endurance than other people you will win. In baseball you still need hand-eye coordination and reflexes, in football you still need field vision, good decision-making with the ball, etc. Being great at cycling is 99% raw physical ability, which is what doping improves - and he was the best at doping. There's no way of knowing how good a cyclist Armstrong was without that help. (And even in skill sports people vastly underestimate how much of a help performance enhancers are)

You should try heading down some of the mountains in the Alps or Pyrinees at 60 miles per hour and see how little skill it takes.  Or try a sprint at full speed in a pack full of bikes because it's super easy and requires no skill at all.   Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?
slog
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5433


Reply #370 on: January 20, 2013, 07:37:43 AM

Cycling is a very low skill sport. If you have more strength and endurance than other people you will win. In baseball you still need hand-eye coordination and reflexes, in football you still need field vision, good decision-making with the ball, etc. Being great at cycling is 99% raw physical ability, which is what doping improves - and he was the best at doping. There's no way of knowing how good a cyclist Armstrong was without that help. (And even in skill sports people vastly underestimate how much of a help performance enhancers are)

You should try heading down some of the mountains in the Alps or Pyrinees at 60 miles per hour and see how little skill it takes.  Or try a sprint at full speed in a pack full of bikes because it's super easy and requires no skill at all.   Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?

It's still 99% (maybe 98%) raw physical ability. 

Anyway, Lance is an ass.  I hope the people that he sued all sue him back for lying under oath and he ends up homeless.

"Die of flaming ass cancer you schmuck. No really, die."

.
satael
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2128


Reply #371 on: January 20, 2013, 07:59:42 AM

Cycling is a very low skill sport. If you have more strength and endurance than other people you will win. In baseball you still need hand-eye coordination and reflexes, in football you still need field vision, good decision-making with the ball, etc. Being great at cycling is 99% raw physical ability, which is what doping improves - and he was the best at doping. There's no way of knowing how good a cyclist Armstrong was without that help. (And even in skill sports people vastly underestimate how much of a help performance enhancers are)

You should try heading down some of the mountains in the Alps or Pyrinees at 60 miles per hour and see how little skill it takes.  Or try a sprint at full speed in a pack full of bikes because it's super easy and requires no skill at all.   Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?

It's still 99% (maybe 98%) raw physical ability. 

Anyway, Lance is an ass.  I hope the people that he sued all sue him back for lying under oath and he ends up homeless.

And somehow being able to hit a ball (or a player in the opposing team) is not about physical ability but some incredible skills that no cyclist can ever even imagine?  ACK!
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #372 on: January 20, 2013, 08:37:57 AM

It's still 99% (maybe 98%) raw physical ability. 


Umm, no.  It's tough to make a real assessment of "skill" in sport when your frame of reference is baseball or golf which are 98% skill and 2% physical ability.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #373 on: January 20, 2013, 07:16:37 PM

People are taking the low-skill comment about cycling as a pejorative when it wasn't intended as such. Being able to pump your legs fast for a long time is a skill in itself, if you consider basic physical mechanics a skill. My point is that the range of things you have to do in cycling is narrow and very closely related to raw physical ability and performance enhancing drugs give you a big boost that translate very directly into overall performance.

Having a lot of oxygen in your blood is going to help a football player a lot, a baseball player a bit, and a cyclist a huge amount, because converting oxygenated blood into physical motion is the basis of cycling.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #374 on: January 20, 2013, 08:07:02 PM

Well certainly endurance is a key factor in any kind of road race, however I don't think that to say it is a "very low skill sport" does it justice.  The comment makes me think that you don't understand cycling.  It's a team sport.  There are fine nuances with the teamwork in both the sprints and in the mountain stages.  And it's not just about endurance.  The sprints are not really endurance based at all.  It's more about pure power and timing.  Usually those guys finish in the back of the stage races overall.  The only part of the Tour de France that would be close to what you're describing as cycling would be the time trials, and even those have a bit of skill involved regarding technique, position on the bike, etc. 
Tale
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6479

sıɥʇ ǝʞıן sʞןɐʇ


Reply #375 on: January 21, 2013, 09:45:38 PM

Of all the things I've read on this, I liked best this analysis of how Armstrong is still lying.

"The more we talk about less important things, the less we talk about more important things."
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #376 on: January 22, 2013, 04:49:38 AM

David Walsh wrote a fascinating article in this weekends Sunday Times about his impressions of the interview with added tidbits like the fact that Armstrong had called Betsy Andreu and Emma O'Reilly to "apologise" but suggested it was nothing more than a token PR exercise so that he could genuinely say "I reached out to them to make amends". (David Walsh's Twitter here)


A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
Korachia
Terracotta Army
Posts: 305


Reply #377 on: November 06, 2013, 03:53:05 AM

Arise necrothread!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview-part-1#null

Cyclingnews have interviewed Armstrong, and despite him not answering all questions, there are some interesting titbits such as the the whole High octane vs low octane doping . He also confirms that low octane doping (like using cortizone) is practically the established practice among even low ranking riders.
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #378 on: November 06, 2013, 07:16:15 AM

God he's such a dick.   awesome, for real

It's silly to think that the whole peloton wasn't doping back then and it's silly to think that the big players aren't still doping now. 
Korachia
Terracotta Army
Posts: 305


Reply #379 on: November 06, 2013, 09:52:46 AM

He is not exactly graceful in defeat, that's for sure. Some day I hope he gets financially ruined by lawsuits, so he is forced to publish his memoir with all the juicy revelations. This might just force a much needed break in the sick culture of bicycling. One day maybe..
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #380 on: November 06, 2013, 09:54:21 AM

It will definitely happen in our lifetimes.  You note that in the article that he is living in "temporary suburban housing", whatever that means.  I guess he sold his mansion?
Korachia
Terracotta Army
Posts: 305


Reply #381 on: November 06, 2013, 09:57:10 AM

It will definitely happen in our lifetimes.  You note that in the article that he is living in "temporary suburban housing", whatever that means.  I guess he sold his mansion?

Did he not get divorced recently? I just thought that was the reason. But I soo hope you are right  Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #382 on: November 06, 2013, 09:58:14 AM

He got divorced several years ago.  

Edit-  I don't think he married Anna Hansen, but I could be wrong.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2013, 10:03:59 AM by ghost »
Korachia
Terracotta Army
Posts: 305


Reply #383 on: November 06, 2013, 10:07:11 AM

Ahh yeah that was Crow he was married too. Lucky guy.

Well even if he publishes the truth at some point, many might not believe him at all. Just look at Michael Rasmussen(almost won TDC but was thrown out because of the where-abouts scandal) who has a book out very soon, which already got leaked. Because he lied about doping in the past, many commentators and media people is questioning everything to a degree which I find specious. He might still be lying for profit/revenge seems to be their main counterargument. Furthermore they are saying that it's not relevant anymore. Mainly because the bicycling sport have changed, and the riders who used to dope and are now managers, directors, trainers, and commentators have seen the light and changed their way.

Absolute bullshit.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2013, 10:09:06 AM by Korachia »
ghost
The Dentist
Posts: 10476


Reply #384 on: November 06, 2013, 10:14:45 AM

Actually, they called off their marriage 3 months prior to getting hitched, IIRC.  I don't think he's been married but once.

I actually believe everything that comes out of his mouth right now.  He's a "flipped switch" kindof guy.  Once he's off of lying he's the type that will get all sanctimonious and proselytize about doping.  

And yeah, all you need to know about doping and cycling is that it is estimated that doping gives a 15-20% boos in performance for cyclists.  If it were "clean", as they claim, we'd see significant reductions in the times.  There's just no way that Team Sky, or any of these motherfuckers, aren't doping.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2013, 10:18:53 AM by ghost »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Sports / Fantasy Sports  |  Topic: The case against Lance Armstrong  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC