Lance Armstrong

[anon96870661]

Armstrong was also in bed with the UCI and , don’t forget his doping was described as the most extensive and sophisticated in the history of sport.

That’s a pretty impressive mantle.

As Gman highlighted above.

[anon61956325]

How did he come out of everything financially ? Is he still worth millions ?

[Sidney]

Is it OK to still call him “1993 World Champion Lance Armstrong”?

[flattythehurdler]

@Sidney. No. He’s a cheat. I have little doubt he was cheating then. Google Chris Carmichael.
The other elephant in the room, and well worth a little online research, is the relationship between Livestrong.com , and Livestrong.org.

[flattythehurdler]

@ChocolateMice

How did he come out of everything financially ? Is he still worth millions ?

He is indeed, though landis and a branch of the US govt have taken a case against him for sporting fraud, based, I think, around the selling of US postal bikes to fund the drugs, which, if completely successful may leave him a mere millionaire.
It would certainly soften his cough.
Rich or poor, he just ain’t wired up happy.

[Rocko]

@Gman

would that be due to a few things though?

Firstly, Armstrong was massively successful from his cheating, so it rankles more that he got this success how he did. The others were only relatively successful, so people dont really give a shit about them.

Then, the manor in which Armstrong took his defence. He not only was abrasive and lied so forcefully for so long, but he sued people and actively and horribly bullied them. He was such an unbelievable hypocrite in how he dealt with the drug taking, so the fact he ended up being guilty meant that it was more noteworthy. Most of the others admitted their guilt and didnt fight it that hard or if they did, for not long. Armstrong has been forcefully fighting his innocence since the 90s, so that would have gained momentum since then.

I agree, he was far from unique in doping, but he was massively unique in the levels he took it too, and the levels he took to cover it up.

Yeah, I don’t dispute that it was more noteworthy. He was far more famous than any other cyclist so it stands to reason that his fall should be far more spectacular.

I don’t think the concocted stories were any more outlandish than Tyler Hamilton though for example, or Landis for a while. He was probably more aggressive in his responses to allegations but his excuses were less inventive.

But as a sport cycling seems to struggle with its image and therefore it feels the need to slam Armstrong as irredeemable. Yet Jonathan Vaughters gets to be lauded as a pioneer of clean cycling even though he doped. Now there are differences between their repentance but I don’t think Vaughters is as outspoken as he could be - he was fairly quiet on much of the Lance stuff for example.

Baseball has a similar issue with its “legends” and how to deal with the obviously tainted ones, the ones that were caught doping but weren’t as famous, the ones that weren’t caught but seem to have been doping in all probability. And then they get all high and mighty about Pete Rose.

Cycling have made no effort to get rid of Roche or Kelly. Riis is only now getting some comeuppance and even then it’s a curious mix of confession, redemption and blame. Bruyneel (who is evil incarnate) was belatedly banned but only after being so tainted by Armstrong that his position was destroyed. And yet he was the common hand in so many previous cases.

I don’t have any time for Lance, I’m delighted he got taken down and I’m delighted for the likes of Kimmage who pursused him vigorously.

But it’s easy to wrap the problem up as Lance and then move swiftly on and not address the wider issues. David Walsh has quickly turned into a Sky cheerleader. Ex-dopers are writing about the Tour, managing teams on the Tour, commentating on the Tour. And Lance can’t ride a charity race beside the Tour. I don’t think the sport needs any more association with Lance so I understand their reasons, but it’s still an unholy mess that they can only partly resolve by flogging him as publically and vengefully as possible.

[balbec]

The righteous majority are so down on Lance you would nearly start rooting for him. The angry mob.

[anon96870661]

I’ll tell ya what’s unseemly and wrong, fucking Virenque in a constantly shown ad on Eurosport hawking Festina watches.

Richard tried to throw everyone under the bus while releasing a book (a fucking book!) about how he had never doped.

He’s not far behind Armstrong for me. I’d like to email Festina’s advertising section and ask them what is it about a doper like him that they admire so much.

[flattythehurdler]

@balbec

The righteous majority are so down on Lance you would nearly start rooting for him. The angry mob.

No, lance made himself the poster boy. You root away. I think he’s a prick.

[RaymondCrotty]

A really interesting video on Armstrong’s body language. Fascinating character.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c96qIK5uwNg

[Watch_The_Break]

Lance Armstrong’s live on the Joe Rogan podcast right now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InnRJIGfLFU

[corner_back]

Lance is some chancer. He’s coming to Dublin. €175 for the cheapest ticket!

[Tim_Riggins]

Why would you pay that much to see the guy? Unless they’re planning a one on one with Paul Kimmage then what’s the fucking point?

[Spidey]

Twitter have a Head of Sport

[artfoley]

@Tim_Riggins

Why would you pay that much to see the guy? Unless they’re planning a one on one with Paul Kimmage then what’s the fucking point?

Maybe tfk users can club together to buy a ticket for kimmage so he can present lance with a special tfk award for outstanding cuntishness

[Spidey]

He should use some of the money from the Kimmage Defence Fund.

[Sidney]

@corner_back

Lance is some chancer.

He puts the cancer in chancer.

[caoimhaoin]

You’d want a serious set of balls to be asking for that kind of money

[Sidney]

@caoimhaoin

You’d want a serious set of balls to be asking for that kind of money

A cancer-surviving set of balls, to be precise.

[corner_back]

Ball at this stage I presume