I read the book, thank you. we can come up with thousands of excuses. but he still cheated. this whole deal is a direct result of the actions he took willingly.
and one more thing. they say once a liar always a liar. maybe he's still lying about some things. just maybe, but the precedent exists. we all need to realize that he has an army of lawyers and the interview is not exactly the result of a tortured conscience but a very rational and likely carefully planned decision.
Last edited:
Pro cycling is big business. All pro sports is big business. Bullying in pro hockey is encouraged . Let's review all the teams that won a series or games that used bullying and strip them of their wins because bullying is not right.
We should not hold up pro sports as a model of ethics and sportsmanship because we will be sorely disappointed. This Armstrong thing is just the tip of the iceberg in all pro sports.
pro sports are for placating the masses like what the roman emperors did with gladiators. It is there for societal and economic reasons. These guys live with a different set of standards just like a successful gladiator would have. Second place in that sport is highly overrated.
We should not hold up pro sports as a model of ethics and sportsmanship because we will be sorely disappointed. This Armstrong thing is just the tip of the iceberg in all pro sports.
pro sports are for placating the masses like what the roman emperors did with gladiators. It is there for societal and economic reasons. These guys live with a different set of standards just like a successful gladiator would have. Second place in that sport is highly overrated.
I agree, but you said the cancer was a non-issue and I disagree about that (specifically, you said "what does it have to do with all this?"). More importantly, while I DO agree about the cheating and am disappointed in LA, I think all the hand-wringing unfairly singles him out.
I agree with Mikett and others. Unfortunately, I'm much more impressed with what the human body is capable of without chemical additives. Sadly, I am unlikely to ever witness that given the level of cheating now.
Maybe it's time for a "modest proposal." Have 2 leagues for each sport; a doping league and a "clean" league, then vigorously enforce the "clean" league. Let the athletes choose. I'm sure it'd be a mess at first, but my hopeful side thinks eventually most people would watch the "clean" league and the other would fade into obscurity.
sadly, like I said in a previous reply, regular people need heroes (read supermen). I personally know a lot of people who watch pro sports because they want to see a guy kick major @ss, all the time. they want to see enhanced reality and at the same time make believe it is untouched reality. this is why I think the Hollywood analogy stands.
\
Please take your time and name the ones who struggled without taking drugs in the tour, err, I will give you 10 yrs to respond, so take your time and you can go back as far as Merckx ...
well, you seem to forget that the Tour is actually a reaaaaaalllly old competition that goes back a while before the drugs hysteria..
Anybody that did a really long bike ride knows how tough a sport it can be.
They are guilty, HE is guilty, but we also are, we expect too much from them.. Why not climbing the Himalaya, hey?! Whilst we watch with a beer in the sofa..
One summer I did Amsterdam - Warsaw on a bicycle. A Dutch bicycle without gears. It wasn't planned, I just felt like going for a ride but ended up in Warsaw. Average was 60km daily. I had some LSD with me but I didn't feel like taking it. I was just feeling trippy with the excellent weather and the exercise, no need to overdose. One day I was close to Hamburg but not close enough, 40 km left and was feeling pretty tired so I thought no way to get there before dark. That's when I remembered my LSD stash. Well, it was a terrible mistake because I got there alright on time but couldn't stop and did an extra 150 km....yeah it was all dark by then but didn't matter....I just had to keep going, glorious pedaling rhythm.....my internal chemistry was on a roll.....I even thought of getting to Berlin without stopping. That's what drugs can do for you.
dats some funny shhhite .....
Guess which would be the most popular ...
Body building does just that and the clean contest is not as popular, all of pro sports are full of dopers, I bet Serena Williams as well as many others could not pass the same Armstrong sniff test ..
Sad but true .....
I was joking with a friend, let's just make them cyborgs and it will be XQF527 2.0 closely followed by MXK214 with 2 miles to go to to Col du Tourmalet.
one thing I don't get... did he not commit perjury by publicly confessing all this? I thought that was a serious offense in the US. just asking.
one thing I don't get... did he not commit perjury by publicly confessing all this? I thought that was a serious offense in the US. just asking.
well, you seem to forget that the Tour is actually a reaaaaaalllly old competition that goes back a while before the drugs hysteria..
Anybody that did a really long bike ride knows how tough a sport it can be.
They are guilty, HE is guilty, but we also are, we expect too much from them.. Why not climbing the Himalaya, hey?! Whilst we watch with a beer in the sofa..
Not sure , i know the statute of limitation is 5 yrs on this and supposedly the last time he used drugs was in 05....
There is sure a lot of hypocrisy and double standards thrown around and I need to vent, so here it is.
I believe the corporations are in the wrong about the sponsorship fees. Whether they knew or not; he made them a lot of money and is therefore entitled to his cut. The sponsors are looking for back-coverage to come out looking good. Whether they knew or not is irrelevant, they should have checked. Let´s just hope they expect more from athletes in the future and require tests to sign athletes.
As to Lances role in this. I´m pretty sure he wasn´t the mastermind the authorities make him out to be. It´s just he´s easier to go after than a big team, and the Discovery/US Postal use him as a scapegoat. The teams have a definitive, and maybe the ultimate responsibility.
To me the guy seems like nothing but a big coward. He probably started doping after a team doctor said he had to. After a while he became their poster-child and enforcer. Clearly in the wrong the entire time, but using scare-tactics and terrorizing anyone who tried to oppose him or the regime he represented. The sad thing isn´t the doping but that he f-ed up the careers of clean guys or turned them onto doping. THAT is inexcusible.
I have never been so disappointed by any athlete in my entire life (ashamed to say I was a fan). He is nothing more than a disgrace and a poor excuse of an athlete. As far as I´m concerned he may keep his earnings and his tour wins, I don´t care anymore. But I´d like to see him get ONE solid kick in whatever nut he has left for every one of those dishonest wins.
To me nothing justifies the use of doping in any pro sport. Even the notion of accepting it is preposterous. Why not use non-humans (animals/robots/whatever) then? What´s left of the athletic spirit?
And to anyone playing the Cancer-card: Who can say that there isn´t a chance that it was self-inflicted? God knows what all those substances and transfusions do to the human body? But then again, maybe he was just predisposed...
</rant>
I believe the corporations are in the wrong about the sponsorship fees. Whether they knew or not; he made them a lot of money and is therefore entitled to his cut. The sponsors are looking for back-coverage to come out looking good. Whether they knew or not is irrelevant, they should have checked. Let´s just hope they expect more from athletes in the future and require tests to sign athletes.
As to Lances role in this. I´m pretty sure he wasn´t the mastermind the authorities make him out to be. It´s just he´s easier to go after than a big team, and the Discovery/US Postal use him as a scapegoat. The teams have a definitive, and maybe the ultimate responsibility.
To me the guy seems like nothing but a big coward. He probably started doping after a team doctor said he had to. After a while he became their poster-child and enforcer. Clearly in the wrong the entire time, but using scare-tactics and terrorizing anyone who tried to oppose him or the regime he represented. The sad thing isn´t the doping but that he f-ed up the careers of clean guys or turned them onto doping. THAT is inexcusible.
I have never been so disappointed by any athlete in my entire life (ashamed to say I was a fan). He is nothing more than a disgrace and a poor excuse of an athlete. As far as I´m concerned he may keep his earnings and his tour wins, I don´t care anymore. But I´d like to see him get ONE solid kick in whatever nut he has left for every one of those dishonest wins.
To me nothing justifies the use of doping in any pro sport. Even the notion of accepting it is preposterous. Why not use non-humans (animals/robots/whatever) then? What´s left of the athletic spirit?
And to anyone playing the Cancer-card: Who can say that there isn´t a chance that it was self-inflicted? God knows what all those substances and transfusions do to the human body? But then again, maybe he was just predisposed...
</rant>
The point isn't that he had it (self-inflicted or not), but that he was able to overcome the disease and treatment and STILL rise to the level he did - the level apparently being one of doped-up cyclists. Under the circumstances, doped or not that's a pretty impressive achievement. To me the doping is serious, but is separate from the achievement since the playing field was evidently level.
Oh, and he did get that kick to the nut - those titles were stripped from him, as they should.
First he says you can't compete in TDF without doping, then he says he was clean in
his comeback. How stupid does he think we are? He is backpedaling to save his money.
He definitely isn't doing this so he can compete in seven years, so forgot about his line
that he just wants to do his thing. Oprah should have thrown him out on his skinny ***
for his treatment of the Betsy Andreau segment. She would have been (even more of) a hero to women for that.
his comeback. How stupid does he think we are? He is backpedaling to save his money.
He definitely isn't doing this so he can compete in seven years, so forgot about his line
that he just wants to do his thing. Oprah should have thrown him out on his skinny ***
for his treatment of the Betsy Andreau segment. She would have been (even more of) a hero to women for that.
With regard to the sponsors, the situation can only be the same as that which applied when the Tiger Woods fiasco occurred. Anyway the whole product endorsement business makes me cringe !
We seem to forget that virtually every cyclist was using illegal dopes. There was no way any 'credible' performance could be produced by non users......the underlying skill was in how individual dope strategies were formulated and applied....different users must have had different needs, and it does NOT necessarily follow that the boost to performance wrought by drug regimes would be the same for same dose to all users.
We seem to forget that virtually every cyclist was using illegal dopes. There was no way any 'credible' performance could be produced by non users......the underlying skill was in how individual dope strategies were formulated and applied....different users must have had different needs, and it does NOT necessarily follow that the boost to performance wrought by drug regimes would be the same for same dose to all users.
Don't forget as well that a really honest politician probably doesn't have a long career as well. Society "wants" to believe in superstars as they can do the impossible. Why do we not go back and recant the ill truths of politicians and repeat what was promised over and over again like what they are doing to Armstrong? Why do nations swallow and believe the politicians and their lies and then let them off the hook afterwards? Is there not a double standard going on with the media?
Armstrong is just hollywood and the news reporters and commentators are actually at the same level because they have found prey and won't come clean to what is really going on.
The key question is did "we" that is society, create Armstrong. Second place means nothing and we only want winners not losers. This creates a situation to always win at any cost. Nobody wants to be a "loser". Do you? I have not once heard this question posed in the media but I think it is true and is so embarrassing that no one wants to mention it.
Did the media ever interview the loser who was so gentlemanly and place them on a pedestal? or do we hold the winner up high and choose to forget what it took to win. I think the latter...history shows it over and over. This idea can make many feel uneasy as it could be a reflection of our society in general.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.