Lance interview in Feb Procycling

liversedge

Greatest rider of his generation. An inspiration for hundreds and thousands of cancer sufferers. Someone who can breath some life back into our beloved sport when it so needs it.

Lets start kicking him in the head. Smart move.

iainf72

liversedge wrote:

Lets start kicking him in the head. Smart move.

Why won't he answer a perfectly reasonable question from some fat loser on the internet then?

He's the last thing the sport needs at this stage.

moray_gub

Kléber wrote:

Iain seems to have asked a reasonable question. Armstrong seems to have ducked it.

Since we're talking about a forum member and the most recognisable name in road cycling, it would be fair for people on this cycling forum to debate it. Or at least I'd like to hope so...

Did i or anyone say it was unfair or shouldnt be debated ? I am merely pointing out Ian's posts are inconsistent with someone who doesnt give shoite ! and they are very inconsistent with someone who clearly stated he was not going to post again ???????????????? . That said i am glad he does post as i find him entertaining in a quaint kinda way.

MG

Justpush

Moomaloid wrote:

What annoys me the most about his disregarding of Iain's question and comments about us on this forum is that what he needs to realize is, we are the true, some might say 'hardcore' fans that really care about our sport enough to discuss it on forums. I certainly don't wanna spend hours on my computer discussing doping etc, but I do expect someone of his stature to answer a question like that. Jeez can u imagine if he'd been asked to answer some of Iain's other questions! LOL

And this is where Lance fails in a major way. His attitude towards the true/hardcore cycling fan, that dares to question, stinks. We are the people that lend our support to the professional side of the sport, at a time when not many people would. We were still here when he left, and we'll still be here when he's gone again, and his comments, for me are hard to swallow. Those rose tinted specs of his must be huge...

Can you define what a 'true' cycling fan is?
If so, can it be without the royal 'we'?

Are all anti Lance fans this sanctimonious?

Sports star doesn't answer every question with a direct straight answer!
Wow.... now that is big news!

moray_gub

Justpush wrote:

Moomaloid wrote:

What annoys me the most about his disregarding of Iain's question and comments about us on this forum is that what he needs to realize is, we are the true, some might say 'hardcore' fans that really care about our sport enough to discuss it on forums. I certainly don't wanna spend hours on my computer discussing doping etc, but I do expect someone of his stature to answer a question like that. Jeez can u imagine if he'd been asked to answer some of Iain's other questions! LOL

And this is where Lance fails in a major way. His attitude towards the true/hardcore cycling fan, that dares to question, stinks. We are the people that lend our support to the professional side of the sport, at a time when not many people would. We were still here when he left, and we'll still be here when he's gone again, and his comments, for me are hard to swallow. Those rose tinted specs of his must be huge...

Can you define what a 'true' cycling fan is?
If so, can it be without the royal 'we'?

Are all anti Lance fans this sanctimonious?

Sports star doesn't answer every question with a direct straight answer!
Wow.... now that is big news!

good post


MG

iainf72

Justpush wrote:

Sports star doesn't answer every question with a direct straight answer!
Wow.... now that is big news!

On announcing his comeback, Lance said

“I mean, these daily or weekly [phone conferences]? Everyone’s invited. From the bitterest of rivals I’ve ever had in the pressroom: Get on call. If you’ve got a question, ask it.… They’ll realize that I’m not messing around…The constituency that I represent is now cancer survivors

A proper cycling journalist asked him a question submitted by a reader of this forum. He wouldn't answer it. And that question was about something that was central to dispelling doubts about how he achieves his performance.

You may not see a problem with that. I do.

iainf72

Moray Gub wrote:

Did i or anyone say it was unfair or shouldnt be debated ? I am merely pointing out Ian's posts are inconsistent with someone who doesnt give shoite ! and they are very inconsistent with someone who clearly stated he was not going to post again ???????????????? . That said i am glad he does post as i find him entertaining in a quaint kinda way.

Cool, I've never been called quaint before.

Yes I did go away but the lure of those positives from the AFLD were too much for me. And I've got no friends in the real world.

Still, if you've got a question, get on the call, I'm offering a new level of transparency. I may not answer it if it's awkward though.

iainf72

Just read the interview.

I'm astounded at the reaction to my question. Must have been a sensitive issue. Made me wonder if Don Catlin had been told to watch what he tells the press.

stagehopper

Blazing Saddles wrote:

I haven't seen another source besides La Marca, on his dodging of Don, either. Yet, if he wants to have good things said about him, here, he knows what he has to do.

To me it was a poor translation of the Marca piece. It was an op-ed article criticising Armstrong for not yet starting the Catlin process, not a factual report of him missing a drug test by doing a runner to Tenerife.

Nevertheless, he should have answered Iain despite him being a fat loser

jimmythecuckoo

I have just finished reading "Bad Blood" before getting into this months PC. Will I be appalled at the nonsense Lance spouts?

Tempestas

I cannot believe some of the answers he gave, or more to the point 'lack of answers'.

The last question asked was taken in the wrong context, I know because I asked it...

My question simply asked how he stayed focused with all the negative press etc.. and he mistook it as drug related, it was a simple question relating to motivation which effects a lot of people in the modern world and a good answer could have helped people.

A missed opportunity Lance.....

Yorkman

liversedge wrote:

Greatest rider of his generation. An inspiration for hundreds and thousands of cancer sufferers. Someone who can breath some life back into our beloved sport when it so needs it.

Lets start kicking him in the head. Smart move.

Is he?

I'd imagine that's a phrase that originated from his PR machine, as opposed to those at the sharp end of that horrible disease.

colint

You honestly think he isn't an inspiration to people with cancer ?

Anonymous

Not read the article as yet.....he was always going to get slated on here no matter how he answered....nothing new.

No he isn't an inspiration to cancer sufferers.....what a cancer sufferer wants to read is how a sports star with massive potential developed testicular cancer and from there it spread to his lungs,lymph nodes & brain....leaving the star with around 10-15% chance of survival....he gets depressed, gives in to the disease, then the treatment fails and the cancer mestates to the Liver where he dwindles helplessly away into a frail 'belsen' like figure who can hardly move or speak before convulting and choking to death with the fluid overcoming the lungs :roll: OR maybe there is a few cancer sufferers out there who maybe want to read about a Sports Star who treated the disease like an opponent, whos treatment was a success, who managed to psycologically and physically come back to the top of his sport and win the top prize on 7 occasions...and beat all his adversories(who were proved to be on drugs), and into the bargain raise millions upon millions for the treatment of the terrible disease.....who knows?

micron

Of course one could ask how he developed testicular cancer - particulalrly as one of his teammates on the apparently ill fated US junior team also fell victim, and Strock and Kaiter developed immune system problems potentially as a result of the actions of the team coach - one Chris Carmichael (who made an out of court settlement with Strock and Kaiter). A somewhat high concentration of serious illness amongst healthy young men wouldn't you say.

Sorry, but I just can't get it up for cheats - fail to find them inspirational in any sense.

blazing_saddles

RICHYBOYcp wrote:

maybe there is a few cancer sufferers out there who maybe want to read about a Sports Star who treated the disease like an opponent, whos treatment was a success, who managed to psycologically and physically come back to the top of his sport and win the top prize on 7 occasions...and beat all his adversories(who were proved to be on drugs), and into the bargain raise millions upon millions for the treatment of the terrible disease.....who knows?

I take it you mean Ullrich, Basso and Beloki?
To coin a very popular phrase in some circles.
None of them have ever failed a dope test, so where is your evidence?
Just applying the same level of burden of proof, for all.
I don't have to believe in the argument.

moray_gub

micron wrote:

Of course one could ask how he developed testicular cancer -.

This is getting ridiculous if it wasnt already.

MG

micron

MG are you suggesting that one should only be allowed to swallow the Myth hook, line and sinker and not ask akward questions? There wouldn't be much integrity in that, would there?

dave_1

micron wrote:

MG are you suggesting that one should only be allowed to swallow the Myth hook, line and sinker and not ask akward questions? There wouldn't be much integrity in that, would there?

awkward questions.?? :roll: ..more like mind numbingly boring rehashed doping allegations-bored to death is what the postings against LA leave me...move on son...he's got away with what he did in this sport and its worth enjoying the 09 season and not being a bore re posting reposted reposted stories

Anonymous

Blazing Saddles wrote:

RICHYBOYcp wrote:

maybe there is a few cancer sufferers out there who maybe want to read about a Sports Star who treated the disease like an opponent, whos treatment was a success, who managed to psycologically and physically come back to the top of his sport and win the top prize on 7 occasions...and beat all his adversories(who were proved to be on drugs), and into the bargain raise millions upon millions for the treatment of the terrible disease.....who knows?

I take it you mean Ullrich, Basso and Beloki?
To coin a very popular phrase in some circles.
None of them have ever failed a dope test, so where is your evidence?
Just applying the same level of burden of proof, for all.
I don't have to believe in the argument.

Ok...fair enough...I admit I don't know all the data surrounding the doping scandals of all his adversories apart from theres more a hanging of guilt over most of them than there is Lance....you guys probably know a hell of a lot more than me about it....Ive started to give up reading of such things now.......but my answer was in relation to the hope that fella has gave to so many...and to dispell this is ridiculous...you ask the whole world who Eddy Merckx is...a lot of the population of developed countries will know...especially cyclists...you ask the world who Lance Armstrong is....a hell of a lot more will tell you hes a guy who survived cancer and won the TDF many times....not just cyclists.....the guys not known merely as a cyclist, hes known equally for surviving cancer and going on to show that a brilliant career can still bestow people who had or have the disease....hope.....and why not speak highly of the millions he has raised aswell?....

Who else in cycling has lived such an inspirational life?...who else in Cycling has raised such awareness of cancer?....who else in cycling has raised funds anywhere near the figures this man has?

The above is true...I live in scotland....a place devout to the Old Firm and other general football...the minute anyone finds out i'm a cyclist they immediately mention LA...90% havent even heard of Coppi,Mercks,Hinault etc....christ 90% havent even heard of Robert MIllar?.....but they all know LA?.. and are amazed at his acheivements..and surely thats good for raising our sport in this fairly 'hostile to cycling attitude' island....No?....

GeorgeShaw

you ask the whole world who Eddy Merckx is...a lot of the population of developed countries will know...especially cyclists...you ask the world who Lance Armstrong is....a hell of a lot more will tell you hes a guy who survived cancer and won the TDF many times....not just cyclists.....the guys not known merely as a cyclist, hes known equally for surviving cancer and going on to show that a brilliant career can still bestow people who had or have the disease....hope.....and why not speak highly of the millions he has raised aswell?....

You know I hate to re-open cans of worms, but ...

What you are saying, which is the philosophical difference between the pro-Lance and anti-Lance camps, is that it is preferable to create a myth and believe in it, rather than believe in reality. BTW, I don't mean that the facts that he survived cancer and won the TdF are myths, but that his life has become some kind of living myth, and is elevated into some kind of living sainthood.

It's the same kind of reasoning that always refers to people's "battle against cancer", when it is usually anything but. The best way to "fight" cancer is to give more resources to cancer research, far above anything that Lance has raised (and I'm unreliably informed that Lance's charity gives a less than ideal percentage to it), but also to give more resources to things like hospices, that give real support to cancer sufferers, those that die, who are not less adequate or deserving because they have lost their "battle".

Belief in myths is just a distraction (usually a convenient distraction for politicians and businessmen) that detracts from the realities of life. I'd sooner put bread in people's mouths than believe in saints or Gods.

Yellow Peril

Richboy is right, love him or loathe him LA is the recognisable face of cycling to the world at large.

I'm also looking forward to an interesting (yet probably highly controversial) race season. Here in Great Britain I think the resurgence of LA will further boost the growing popularity of cycling as the general public tune in to see the handful of our homegrown talent who road race at that level line up against him.

So to one and all I say embrace LA's return either for the adulation of seeing your 7 time TdF hero race again or, if you are not that way inclined, the opportunity of seeing him become the sad loser on the tarmac or the testing cubicle.

Anonymous

GeorgeShaw wrote:

You know I hate to re-open cans of worms, but ...

What you are saying, which is the philosophical difference between the pro-Lance and anti-Lance camps, is that it is preferable to create a myth and believe in it, rather than believe in reality. BTW, I don't mean that the facts that he survived cancer and won the TdF are myths, but that his life has become some kind of living myth, and is elevated into some kind of living sainthood.

It's the same kind of reasoning that always refers to people's "battle against cancer", when it is usually anything but. The best way to "fight" cancer is to give more resources to cancer research, far above anything that Lance has raised (and I'm unreliably informed that Lance's charity gives a less than ideal percentage to it), but also to give more resources to things like hospices, that give real support to cancer sufferers, those that die, who are not less adequate or deserving because they have lost their "battle".

Belief in myths is just a distraction (usually a convenient distraction for politicians and businessmen) that detracts from the realities of life. I'd sooner put bread in people's mouths than believe in saints or Gods.

What?....Lance survived Cancer......Lance won the TDF 7 times.....Lance has raised millions....his life is a myth!...what you talking about?

Where does the MILLIONS that LA has raised goto?....not for cancer research?.....not for equipment?...not for public awareness campaigns?.....and the way you talk then no one should bother donating or raising anything for any cancer charity...sportives like the Polkadot and FWC or the White Rose Challenge shouldn't bother...they can only raise a few thousand...and if the millions LA has raised isnt enough then why bother with anything less :?:

Cannot beleive that anyone could put a negative slant on the money he has raised!!.

This Forum Section is slipping even lower

moray_gub

micron wrote:

MG are you suggesting that one should only be allowed to swallow the Myth hook, line and sinker and not ask akward questions? There wouldn't be much integrity in that, would there?

Not at all if you want to bore everybody to death with rehashed unproven nonsense then go ahead but It was more to do with your ridiculous comment about testicular cancer. Next you will be saying he got it deliberately so he could take EPO.

MG

micron

Now that would be a ridiculous thing to say - however, the Strock/Kaiter issue is very far from unrpoven nonsense and is worth reading up on - if you care to look behind the Myth, of course. Otherwise I guess it's true that 'ignorance is bliss'

moray_gub

micron wrote:

Now that would be a ridiculous thing to say '

No more ridculous that what you have implied already.

MG

blazing_saddles

Yellow Peril wrote:

Richboy is right, love him or loathe him LA is the recognisable face of cycling to the world at large.

Yes, I wouldn't disagree with that. He must have given many cancer suffers heart and he was very helpful towards Ivan Basso and his family.
That's his better half.

As for the man as a whole and whether he rode, clean, whilst all his opponents were apparently doped, is the point, for me, where any legend becomes a myth.

I'm quite happy, just so long as people ( and Richboy does conceed this point) apply the criteria, when wagging the doping finger, regardless of whether they believe all to be innocent or guilty.

blazing_saddles

Moray Gub wrote:

Not at all if you want to bore everybody to death with rehashed unproven nonsense then go ahead.
MG

Does the fact that something is unproven make it nonsense?
I'd have thought Mr Einstein would beg to differ.

micron

I simply noted that, of one team coached by Carmichael and Wenzel - both heavily instrumental in Armstrong's later success - an inordinate number of members subsequently fell quite seriously ill, including 2 cases of testicular cancer. This is all substantiated and a matter of public record rather than 'unproven nonsense'. I simply asked you to consider that Armstrong may not be the squeaky clean 'miracle' he claims he is.

GeorgeShaw

Yeh, I'll withdraw my comments about Livestrong, that was unwarranted, I should engage brain before typing.

And all power to the charity raising sportives, they do a great job. They are the real heroes, who put enormous time and energy into their work, and go comparatively unrecognised.

But I stand by the philosophical/psychological points about hero worship. Saint Lance doesn't exist. Even the Pope goes to the toilet.