Lance to Landis

Barney 2

Just finished reading the book by from Lance to Landis, although I haven't read it I think it is an updated version of LA confidential, very well written with a lot of accounts from riders and personnel, well written by David Walsh. It is pretty damning but is also one sided as Armstrong doesn't comment on any accusations.made against him.

I thought I remember readinf thathe did admit blood doping but it was before it was made
ilegal and although guilt by association isn't proof, his work with Michele Ferrari is very
suspect.

Has anyone else read either book and what are your thoughts?

Peakraider

Yeah, I've read it, and LA Confidential.

I respect Walsh a lot. Think it is a very good book, though obviously one-sided.

Don't think anyone can really have too many doubts about Lance (or any of the others), sadly.

dennisn

Barney 2 wrote:

... Armstrong doesn't comment on any accusations.made against him.

Why would anyone comment on that kind of thing. It's not worth the time it takes to
bother with. When you're a "star", so to speak, there must be millions of people
who "know" all about you and another million wanting to make money from your
name by writting things about you that will sell books. To them it doesn't matter if it's true
or not and they don't know the truth anyway. Whatever it is.

Dennis Noward

Peakraider

dennisn wrote:

Barney 2 wrote:

... Armstrong doesn't comment on any accusations.made against him.

Why would anyone comment on that kind of thing. It's not worth the time it takes to
bother with. When you're a "star", so to speak, there must be millions of people
who "know" all about you and another million wanting to make money from your
name by writting things about you that will sell books. To them it doesn't matter if it's true
or not and they don't know the truth anyway. Whatever it is.

Dennis Noward

Dennis, that hasn't stopped celebrities and sports stars going to their lawyers and the libel courts in the past, when they think they have a case.

And Armstrong has frequently used his lawyers like that. LA Confidential couldn't even been published in the UK because of the libel laws.

I recommend the book -- aside from anything else, the details about the lengths the Armstrong machine goes to suppress information is itself quite damning. Though, of course, everything is circumstantial and probably always will be. The authorities surely know how much damage to cycling's renaissance in places like the US any disclosure of the test results that are said to exist would be.

dennisn

Peakraider wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Barney 2 wrote:

... Armstrong doesn't comment on any accusations.made against him.

Why would anyone comment on that kind of thing. It's not worth the time it takes to
bother with. When you're a "star", so to speak, there must be millions of people
who "know" all about you and another million wanting to make money from your
name by writting things about you that will sell books. To them it doesn't matter if it's true
or not and they don't know the truth anyway. Whatever it is.

Dennis Noward

Dennis, that hasn't stopped celebrities and sports stars going to their lawyers and the libel courts in the past, when they think they have a case.

And Armstrong has frequently used his lawyers like that. LA Confidential couldn't even been published in the UK because of the libel laws.

I recommend the book -- aside from anything else, the details about the lengths the Armstrong machine goes to suppress information is itself quite damning. Though, of course, everything is circumstantial and probably always will be. The authorities surely know how much damage to cycling's renaissance in places like the US any disclosure of the test results that are said to exist would be.

So, to you everthing in this book is true?? You trust the author to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth?? Are you a personal friend of Lance's and have helped him inject
all these things he's suppoed to have done?? And this is how you know all about him??
These "details about the lengths..." are something you have personally observed?? Or
just read about?? Would you recognize Lance if you saw him on the street?? To me
it's all about people trying to make money on his name and fame. Just like with movie stars
people are in love with famous athletes and just have to, at least, think they know them.

Dennis Noward

Peakraider

dennisn wrote:

Peakraider wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Barney 2 wrote:

... Armstrong doesn't comment on any accusations.made against him.

Why would anyone comment on that kind of thing. It's not worth the time it takes to
bother with. When you're a "star", so to speak, there must be millions of people
who "know" all about you and another million wanting to make money from your
name by writting things about you that will sell books. To them it doesn't matter if it's true
or not and they don't know the truth anyway. Whatever it is.

Dennis Noward

Dennis, that hasn't stopped celebrities and sports stars going to their lawyers and the libel courts in the past, when they think they have a case.

And Armstrong has frequently used his lawyers like that. LA Confidential couldn't even been published in the UK because of the libel laws.

I recommend the book -- aside from anything else, the details about the lengths the Armstrong machine goes to suppress information is itself quite damning. Though, of course, everything is circumstantial and probably always will be. The authorities surely know how much damage to cycling's renaissance in places like the US any disclosure of the test results that are said to exist would be.

So, to you everthing in this book is true?? You trust the author to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth?? Are you a personal friend of Lance's and have helped him inject
all these things he's suppoed to have done?? And this is how you know all about him??
These "details about the lengths..." are something you have personally observed?? Or
just read about?? Would you recognize Lance if you saw him on the street?? To me
it's all about people trying to make money on his name and fame. Just like with movie stars
people are in love with famous athletes and just have to, at least, think they know them.

Dennis Noward

I don't know how much of the book is true, but it is a compelling read and Walsh builds up a very convincing case. Although, as I said, much of it is circumstantial.

I trust the author to tell the truth, yes. I'm a journalist and so is he; I'm sure he knows the libel laws even better than I, and his lawyers certainly would. So that would prevent him from telling outright lies. As for the rest, I admire the Walsh's persistence: it is far easier to be a sports hack who puffs up athletes and enjoys the gravy train. Walsh is persona non grata at the Tour. I'm not the only one who admires Walsh's reportage.

Of course I haven't injected Armstrong, etc. But the line of argument you make is one that, by extension, would preclude all kinds of investigative journalism. I wasn't privy to Jeffrey Archer's personal life, either; and the journalists who exposed him were hardly personal friends, either. And so on.

Armstrong let the cat out of the bag, in my opinion, when he humiliated Simeoni on stage 18 in 2004. Throw in the various commercial interests that surrounded the Lance brand and you have, in my book, good reason to be cynical about him and his image-making.

Yeah, I probably would recognise Armstrong in the street. He'd be the little sun-tanned fella with all the holes in his arms.

sicrow

I don't know how much of the book is true, but it is a compelling read and Walsh builds up a very convincing case. Although, as I said, much of it is circumstantial.

So was the Da Vinci code.

Even Walsh admits he has an agenda

dennisn

Peakraider wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Peakraider wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Barney 2 wrote:

... Armstrong doesn't comment on any accusations.made against him.

Why would anyone comment on that kind of thing. It's not worth the time it takes to
bother with. When you're a "star", so to speak, there must be millions of people
who "know" all about you and another million wanting to make money from your
name by writting things about you that will sell books. To them it doesn't matter if it's true
or not and they don't know the truth anyway. Whatever it is.

Dennis Noward

Dennis, that hasn't stopped celebrities and sports stars going to their lawyers and the libel courts in the past, when they think they have a case.

And Armstrong has frequently used his lawyers like that. LA Confidential couldn't even been published in the UK because of the libel laws.

I recommend the book -- aside from anything else, the details about the lengths the Armstrong machine goes to suppress information is itself quite damning. Though, of course, everything is circumstantial and probably always will be. The authorities surely know how much damage to cycling's renaissance in places like the US any disclosure of the test results that are said to exist would be.

So, to you everthing in this book is true?? You trust the author to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth?? Are you a personal friend of Lance's and have helped him inject
all these things he's suppoed to have done?? And this is how you know all about him??
These "details about the lengths..." are something you have personally observed?? Or
just read about?? Would you recognize Lance if you saw him on the street?? To me
it's all about people trying to make money on his name and fame. Just like with movie stars
people are in love with famous athletes and just have to, at least, think they know them.

Dennis Noward

I don't know how much of the book is true, but it is a compelling read and Walsh builds up a very convincing case. Although, as I said, much of it is circumstantial.

I trust the author to tell the truth, yes. I'm a journalist and so is he; I'm sure he knows the libel laws even better than I, and his lawyers certainly would. So that would prevent him from telling outright lies. As for the rest, I admire the Walsh's persistence: it is far easier to be a sports hack who puffs up athletes and enjoys the gravy train. Walsh is persona non grata at the Tour. I'm not the only one who admires Walsh's reportage.

Of course I haven't injected Armstrong, etc. But the line of argument you make is one that, by extension, would preclude all kinds of investigative journalism. I wasn't privy to Jeffrey Archer's personal life, either; and the journalists who exposed him were hardly personal friends, either. And so on.

Armstrong let the cat out of the bag, in my opinion, when he humiliated Simeoni on stage 18 in 2004. Throw in the various commercial interests that surrounded the Lance brand and you have, in my book, good reason to be cynical about him and his image-making.

Yeah, I probably would recognise Armstrong in the street. He'd be the little sun-tanned fella with all the holes in his arms.

Are you trying to tell me that he wrote this book because his conscience told him he
needed to expose a cheat??? Give me break, he wrote it for the money, not out of
the goodness of his heart and his desire to see justice done. Or out of a hatred for Lance. This is all about money and how much he can make by hitching a ride on Lances
fame, fortune, and name. If Lance didn't exist he would simply pick the next guy in line.

Dennis Noward

Peakraider

Dennis,

Point taken. But writing books like Lance to Landis isn't the way to fame and fortune. Or, at least not to much fortune. Walsh already has a good job that pays well: he's the chief sports writer at the Sunday Times. Writing about sports is what he does. He's cynical about drugs in sports, as are many others.

Of course he's hitching a ride on Lance. But are the people he interviews? Maybe. But some of them stand to lose a lot more by speaking out.

I don't think he's exploiting the Lance thing any more than Nike, Oakley or whichever other commercial enterprise has over the last decade. And compared with them, Walsh is a David (excuse the pun) against many Goliaths.

Am I right in thinking that you think all reporting about doping in cycling is motivated by the same things you accuse Walsh of? And that it is all a big conspiracy to make money through spurious accusations against innocent riders? That would strike me as a rather naive form of cynicism.

Peakraider

sicrow wrote:

I don't know how much of the book is true, but it is a compelling read and Walsh builds up a very convincing case. Although, as I said, much of it is circumstantial.

So was the Da Vinci code.

Even Walsh admits he has an agenda

I didn't find the Da Vinci code either compelling or convincing. I found it trite, poorly written, unintentionally hilarious at times, and yet more evidence of just how many morons there are among the book-buying public.

But to each his own.

As for Walsh's agenda... Well, thanks Marshal McLuhan. 'Journalist in agenda shock'.

If his agenda is that he doesn't like sports stars to get away with cheating, then I find it a difficult one to fault. Don't you?

dennisn

Peakraider wrote:

Dennis,

Point taken. But writing books like Lance to Landis isn't the way to fame and fortune. Or, at least not to much fortune. Walsh already has a good job that pays well: he's the chief sports writer at the Sunday Times. Writing about sports is what he does. He's cynical about drugs in sports, as are many others.

Of course he's hitching a ride on Lance. But are the people he interviews? Maybe. But some of them stand to lose a lot more by speaking out.

I don't think he's exploiting the Lance thing any more than Nike, Oakley or whichever other commercial enterprise has over the last decade. And compared with them, Walsh is a David (excuse the pun) against many Goliaths.

Am I right in thinking that you think all reporting about doping in cycling is motivated by the same things you accuse Walsh of? And that it is all a big conspiracy to make money through spurious accusations against innocent riders? That would strike me as a rather naive form of cynicism.

I'm not accusing him of anything except writting a book for the money. What he says may or may not be true but if he simply wrote about Lances life that book wouldn't sell anywhere near the copies it does because of the "scandal", for lack of better words.
He knows dull and boring Lance won't sell. And I'm sure Lance is just as dull and boring
as the rest of us can be at times. Telling you how he likes this and that TV show and
this or that food or whatever will not sell books. People love to hear the "dirt" about
famous people.


Dennis Noward

Peakraider

dennisn wrote:

Peakraider wrote:

Dennis,

Point taken. But writing books like Lance to Landis isn't the way to fame and fortune. Or, at least not to much fortune. Walsh already has a good job that pays well: he's the chief sports writer at the Sunday Times. Writing about sports is what he does. He's cynical about drugs in sports, as are many others.

Of course he's hitching a ride on Lance. But are the people he interviews? Maybe. But some of them stand to lose a lot more by speaking out.

I don't think he's exploiting the Lance thing any more than Nike, Oakley or whichever other commercial enterprise has over the last decade. And compared with them, Walsh is a David (excuse the pun) against many Goliaths.

Am I right in thinking that you think all reporting about doping in cycling is motivated by the same things you accuse Walsh of? And that it is all a big conspiracy to make money through spurious accusations against innocent riders? That would strike me as a rather naive form of cynicism.

I'm not accusing him of anything except writting a book for the money. What he says may or may not be true but if he simply wrote about Lances life that book wouldn't sell anywhere near the copies it does because of the "scandal", for lack of better words.
He knows dull and boring Lance won't sell. And I'm sure Lance is just as dull and boring
as the rest of us can be at times. Telling you how he likes this and that TV show and
this or that food or whatever will not sell books. People love to hear the "dirt" about
famous people.


Dennis Noward

True -- guilty (me) as charged. But I also loved Lance's own books, which I imagine have sold by multiples into the hundreds more than Walsh's books.

I think there will eventually be a better and more rounded book about Armstrong than either he or his accusers can write -- an honest appraisal that gets beneath the skin of the champion, puts the cancer story in context, deals with the grittier parts of his character (from Ferrari to Simeoni), and, best of all, goes in depth into the cycling. Something between the fawning Charlie Rose type interviews and the hatchet job.

flattythehurdler

DennisN, Are you giving stalin the benefit of the doubt as you have had no first hand experience?