Lance,not about the team ?
Comments
-
oh dear another lance groupierockmount wrote:
Have you tried this ?st68 wrote:as far as the media is concerned lance is the only cyclist gettin sick off seeing his face on everything its getting boring as for his attitude towards contador it stinks an sums up what a bad loser he is like a spoiled kid sulking its never pretty in an adult its sad & pathetic
cheesy quaver0 -
rockmount wrote:
WTF does that make the other 177 riders in the tour Einstein ?? :roll:emadden wrote:droppedstrong ??
I dont know... ask those who painted it around 50 times up the Ventoux...
**************************************************
www.dotcycling.com
***************************************************0 -
emadden wrote:
So you happily saw it ... but you didn't understand it ?? I see ..... who said that, internet forum people ?0 -
BikingBernie wrote:What makes me uneasy is the way 'charitable goodwill' is used by companies to further their strictly commercial ends. Sure, there is a charitable aspect to the livestrong.org / livestrong.com brand but there is also a very big commercial one. Often in such set ups it seems that what really matters, the bottom line as they say, is the way the brand is able to generate corporate profits and keep the board in fat pay checks. A good example of this is Nike’s exploitation of Armstrong’s image. Similarly, Coca-Cola is one of the biggest donators to charitable causes in the world, but that giving represents a tiny percentage of the gross profits and is doubtlessly regarded as being a commercially justifiable part of their marketing / advertising / PR budget.
Perhaps such integration of charity into commerce (or as the cynic might have it, the exploitation of charitable goodwill for commercial ends) fits naturally into US way of doing things where 'business' dominates all. However to me it is akin to schools accepting 'branded' learning materials and Coke machines into class.
+1. Glad to see you back!0 -
st68 wrote:as far as the media is concerned lance is the only cyclist gettin sick off seeing his face on everything its getting boring as for his attitude towards contador it stinks an sums up what a bad loser he is like a spoiled kid sulking its never pretty in an adult its sad & pathetic
Actually if you look into it, Geldof harassed people like Bono to get involved at the time. Remember that we're talking about the early days of what Smashy and Nicey (wow that's gonna be lost on a lot of people) called Charidy.
Band Aid was the start of it so please don't try to compare Geldof to Armstrong (wait, maybe it's me that's doing that).Scottish and British...and a bit French0 -
I understand where you're coming from, but as far as I’ve heard, Livestrong mainly doesn’t dedicate ‘time and effort to help defeat this terrible disease’, rather it provides support for those with cancer, if those concerned fulfill certain requirements. So it’s not really much involved in research and there’s a sort of ‘means test’ to get support.DB100 wrote:Well I'll say only this, my mum died of cancer in March this year. Anyone who dedicates time and effort to help defeat this terrible disease is ok by me.
I think what a lot of people forget is that in Europe there are already lots of cancer charities and foundations, and a greater awareness of the lethality of cancer than in the USA, as well as how getting the disease might be avoided, and how it might be detected early on and then perhaps successfully treated. Most Western European countries offer free screening, then free treatment if the first signs are found.
Apparently this awareness and these examinations don’t automtically exist in the US because their whole health and social set-up is so different from the typical one in Europe. On the other hand, the chances of surviving cancer in the US, once detected and if you can pay, are higher than in Europe because the care and treatment there is more professional.
Livestrong is probably a very worthy cause in the US, but it’s not so relevant in Europe. It would be more valuable to those in Europe incl. the UK, if everyone who considered buying an armband instead gave to a European/UK cancer charity, especially since (although this might sound very nationalistic) nearly all the Livestrong income from armbands is spent in the USA.
Livestrong occasionally makes contributions to clinics elsewhere which are involved with cancer (they did recently to a clinic in Monaco) but these outside-USA contributions are few and far between and dictated by somewhat arbitary reasons. (The contribution to the Monaco clinic was because the Tour started there - although I would imagine Monaco is the last place short of money)0 -
My impression from one of the main German cycling forums is that there isn’t that much argument about Ullrich, everyone believes he doped. However, he isn’t condemned that much because it’s generally felt that everyone else did the same in one form or fashion during his era, so in a sense they were all on a level playing field, even if a few used more powerful or advanced doping methods or substances, or doped more regularly, than Ullrich. As a personality, unlike some we could name, he also isn’t that objectionable, if at all, which clearly influences things.afx237vi wrote:Maybe on German cycling forums there are arguments about Ullrich, I don't know.
I’ve never had the impression Ullrich was as popular in Germany as often believed in the UK. He was well regarded in some cycling circles, and well reported in the media, but that’s different from popular. It was riders like Zabel, Voigt and Wüst who were popular, because they were good talkers and (from left-to-right above) with increasing amounts of brain cells. Ullrich answered questions but overall was fairly word-shy and non-committal in comparison.
Zabel took a bigger fall than Ullrich in the public eye when he admitted to just one day’s doping because he’d achieved a higher public rating and because he was considered more in charge of his own life. Everyone knew Ullrich was under Pevenage’s wing.
Some other recent stuff on the German forum:
The same two opposing sides exist about LA as found here, one simple, congratulatory and optimistic for next year, the other sober, mistrusting and sometimes cynical. The same differences in opinion exist as here about certain aspects of Livestrong too. And like here, some posters there, who previously liked LA, have been disappointed by the ‘mobbing’ of AC in the Astana camp and particularly LA's involvement.
One poster comments that during the whole Tour, domestique Armstrong only once provided a bottle to AC, and only for 10 secs actually let AC follow his slipstream (anyone here notice this?)
Another poster says the reason LA tried is to get Andy Schleck to join Radio Shack was so that LA and JB would then cleverly not nominate A. Schleck for the 2010 Tour (how come no one here thought of that trick!)
One poster also includes this quote from George Orwell, which quite impresses me, I mean that he knows English language and English authors well enough to be able to do so.
“Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard for all rules and sadistic pleasure in witnessing violence: in other words sport is war minus the shooting."0 -
The agent of the Schleck brothers, Frank and Andy, stated that there has been no contact regarding the Schleck brothers joining the Radio Shack team to be launched by Lance Armstrong, and attributed the rumors to an Armstrong strategy to discomfit Alberto Contador.
"There is no possibility of this happening. I have had no contact with Bruyneel. It is only a strategy to cause Contador to lose next year" said Giovanni Lombardi, personal agent of the two brothers to L'Equipe. . . . "Andy has seen clearly everything that Alberto Contador lived through in this year's Tour and nobody can imagine that he would willingly embroil himself in all that with the ambitions he has for next year, " said Lombardi.interview.cyclingfever.com0 -
I am in no way a supporter of corporate America. I only say this, if Livestrong do something to aid those with cancer in any way then that is no bad thing. Put it this way; governments wont do it. I think it stinks the way massive companies big up their charitable donations and agree that it's a tiny fraction of what they make.
TRUST ME IF YOU EVER FIND YOURSELF IN NEED OF SOME EXTRA SERVICES, when fighting cancer, wherever you are in the world; for example a wheelchiar, adapted toilet or bath; things you might think you're entitled to but can't get till next week/month/year, you wont really care who helps you get them. It p**s easy to wax lyrical about the pro's and con's till it slaps you square in the face. Then perspective tends to get modified.
End of my thoughts
Happy cycling, Lance or no Lance 0 -
Do you know that out of the many paint schemes you can choose for a Trek, the most expensive by a long way is the Livestrong theme. It costs nearly $2k!?!?!?!?!?!Contador is the Greatest0
-
frenchfighter wrote:When people talk about Lance's 'family' I have to say it does confuse me.
Are we talking about Kristin Richard? Sheryl Crow? Tory Burch? Kate Hudson? Anna Hansen?
A good role model for relationships and family life...
AP Photo
You are far worse than the man you hate. I'm sure he'd say insinuatios about your family are out of bounds. There is being a fan, and then there is behing an asshole. You are a despicable lowbrow person, one who assults from a safely hidden position. Clearly, you won't have even one ball to say that within earshot of Lance, lest you end up missing teeth. You are just another internet coward and credible cycling fans here should make it clear that you don't represent the values of the sport. It gives me the creeps that you and I are even of the same species.
Clearly, the if the moderators here had any values you'd be hearing from them about the limits of civil discourse.0 -
frenchfighter wrote:When people talk about Lance's 'family' I have to say it does confuse me.
Are we talking about Kristin Richard? Sheryl Crow? Tory Burch? Kate Hudson? Anna Hansen?
A good role model for relationships and family life...
AP Photo
you are really a great person and i thank you for pointing out the moral hypocrisy of Lance.
I don't know where we'd be without people like you to show us the way and protect is from the low and unworthy.
I'm happy you work so tirelessly to protect the golden image of cycling and can't wait until you show us more about why this man who just beat 177 of the best 180 cyclist in the world is and always has been a fraud and a morally bankrupt unredeemable sinner worthy of eternal damnation.
I'm certain you are just thinking of his children.
Hallelujah.. praise jezzus..0 -
As for the live aid analogy - Freddie Mercury admitted that Queen did it for the charity but also, he said, don't let anyone kid around - they did it for themselves as well. It relaunched Queen's career. Same at Live 8 - everyone who appeared - their back catalogue sales went through the roof (apart from pete Docherty )
And if Sir Bob was doing it for the 'Charidee' then why did he get up on stage at Live 8 and rattle out some Boomtown rats? Not as though they were exactly current at the time was it? Self promotion, no?
Not saying it's not a noble cause but how much of a difference has it made? Possibly a little, possibly a lot? No-one knows because a few days after the gig everyone goes back to their lives and doesn't really give a shit about millions of kids starving in Africa if we're honest.0 -
CarbonCranky wrote:frenchfighter wrote:When people talk about Lance's 'family' I have to say it does confuse me.
Are we talking about Kristin Richard? Sheryl Crow? Tory Burch? Kate Hudson? Anna Hansen?
A good role model for relationships and family life...
AP Photo
you are really a great person and i thank you for pointing out the moral hypocrisy of Lance.
I don't know where we'd be without people like you to show us the way and protect is from the low and unworthy.
I'm happy you work so tirelessly to protect the golden image of cycling and can't wait until you show us more about why this man who just beat 177 of the best 180 cyclist in the world is and always has been a fraud and a morally bankrupt unredeemable sinner worthy of eternal damnation.
I'm certain you are just thinking of his children.
Hallelujah.. praise jezzus..
YOU Sir, are a complete and utter moron.Cannondale Supersix 105 2013- summer bike - love it!
Cannondale CAAD12 - racing fun!
Trek Crockett 5 - CX bike, muddy fun!
Scott Scale 940 MTB XC racer.
__@
_`\<,_
---- (*)/ (*)0 -
The spec says it includes a $500 donation to the LAF, given the UK cost of the option is £1500 I assume the donation is actually £500frenchfighter wrote:Do you know that out of the many paint schemes you can choose for a Trek, the most expensive by a long way is the Livestrong theme. It costs nearly $2k!?!?!?!?!?!0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Oh yes, I forgot to mention that in that stage, another reason why he bonked was because he had to cover numerous attacks as he had no teammates to do that for him.
Also, I watched the final stage where Contador attacked. That takes class after the previous stage, and in his own words, 'he gained more fans that day then if he had won the overall'. He got many notes of congratulation.
sorry if im late with this reply but 2 words spring to mind, `Floyd Landis`who cares?0
