Floyd -- he wrote us a letter...

1…2930323435…64

Comments

  • rapid_uphill
    rapid_uphill Posts: 841
    Im sure his kids would prefare to know the truth.
    SpaceJunk wrote:
    Not that I am saying he should be excused for doping because he has kids, just the impact it would have.
  • samb01
    samb01 Posts: 130
    SpaceJunk wrote:
    Not that I am saying he should be excused for doping because he has kids, just the impact it would have.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo
  • Cumulonimbus
    Cumulonimbus Posts: 1,730
    rapid_uphill wrote:
    Im sure his kids would prefare to know the truth.
    SpaceJunk wrote:
    Not that I am saying he should be excused for doping because he has kids, just the impact it would have.

    But would they want everyone else to know too?
  • IanLD
    IanLD Posts: 423
    Not just Lance and his family though. This may have a far bigger impact, but look at how riders such as Erik Zabel dealt with it. Can be done even though it is painful at the time.
  • skavanagh.bikeradar
    skavanagh.bikeradar Posts: 1,097
    The thing is we don't know what Floyd really has got. If it will stand up - assuming what we have seen is the tip of the iceberg - then an ex-wife and 2 former team mates backed by another in JV might put some balls in a vice. If it is a federal investigation and they start calling in the helicopter pilot, the bus driver, those that have previously spoken out but been silenced, ex team mates, former girlfriends, the woman who cleaned the apartment...................
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Which wife is that one....

    WSJ reporting that Landis has been cooperating with the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) criminal investigations unit, and has met with FDA special agent Jeff Novitzky. Big dog that guy.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • top_bhoy
    top_bhoy Posts: 1,424
    skavanagh.bikeradar wrote:
    The thing is we don't know what Floyd really has got. If it will stand up - assuming what we have seen is the tip of the iceberg - then an ex-wife and 2 former team mates backed by another in JV might put some balls in a vice. If it is a federal investigation and they start calling in the helicopter pilot, the bus driver, those that have previously spoken out but been silenced, ex team mates, former girlfriends, the woman who cleaned the apartment...................

    The US authorities need to either hope these people give statements willingly or they will find they need to go through several european legal systems to get what they want. This case, if it grows into a full investigation, has the capacity to rumble on for many, many years before a conclusion is reached.
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys Pedal Force:
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys RC2:
  • samiam
    samiam Posts: 227
    People aren't going to lie to a federal investigator to protect Lance Armstrong (among others). I truly believe that everything is going to come out.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    "I did have a conversation with Floyd and he did apologize for his treatment of me before and after the 2007 hearings," LeMond told ESPN in an email.

    "I accepted his apology, but that isn't really what's important. Sincere apologies are for those that make them, not for those to whom they are made. I hope that as a result Floyd can begin rebuilding his life.

    "I also accepted his apology because his treatment of me challenged me to further confront my own issues and the pain that they were causing me. That challenge has made me a better, healthier, stronger person today than I might have otherwise been. Certainly, my 1 in 6 Foundation has been an outgrowth of that situation and has helped and will continue to help many survivors. For that I'm grateful."

    LeMond founded the 1 in 6 Foundation after his own abuse was made public. Its was set up to support men who have experienced sexual abuse as a child.

    "More people should apologize, and more people should accept apologies when sincerely made," LeMond said.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • seemunkee
    seemunkee Posts: 206
    IanLD wrote:
    Any updates on what the US media and the Phil and Paul show are saying?

    The print edition of the WaPo has been silent. For the last week there has been maybe 3 paragraphs about cycling in the sports section, and those were only who won stages at the Giro and ToC.
    Haven't watched the Versus channel to see any of the ToC w/ Phil and Paul.
  • SpaceJunk
    SpaceJunk Posts: 1,157
    Daniel Friebe's (DF) thoughts on Landis from CN live feed:

    The big issue here is the UCI. If Landis's allegations are true, there is no future for the people currently in charge of that organization, or indeed the organization itself. Armstrong's relevance at this point, I fear, is not all that great. The battle lines are drawn in that debate: there is probably a majority who don't believe his Tour wins were doping-free, and a still large minority whose belief that they were can never be shaken.

    Daniel Benson: It was interesting that WADA and the UCI both released statements on the same day but one organisation said they would investigate while the other seemed to bash the allegation back. I guess the question is whether we need the UCI in it's current format

    DF: I don't think the discrepancy between WADA's statement and Pat McQuaid's requires any comment...The readers aren't stupid. All I'd add on that is that a number of people involved in this saga are being poorly advised: McQuaid (had he been properly briefed by the UCI's communications office?), Landis, Armstrong... Publishing those e-mails on the RadioShack website was, to my mind, a huge mistake. That move fanned the flames and opened Armstrong's actions to yet more scrutiny.

    DF: The whole thing is becoming very undignified. Like or loathe Armstrong, you always felt that he had an aura, an authority, a certain gravitas, in the same way that Tiger Woods did until last November. This lurid trail of e-mails and accusations is doing a good job of yanking Armstrong down off whatever pedestal he occupied.
  • SpaceJunk
    SpaceJunk Posts: 1,157
    Lionel Birnie' stake on if LA should donate money to UCI, how much did he donate, and what did the UCI do with it:

    http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/470339/confusion-over-payment-armstrong-made-to-uci-for-a-sysmex-machine.html
  • turkeytickler
    turkeytickler Posts: 640
    BikingBernie wrote:
    pitchshifter wrote:
    I really hope this goes away. Quickly.
    I don't, and nor should anyone who is genuinely interested in the future credibility of the sport.

    Let's hope that this sees the truth about Pharmstrong, which is in any case largely public knowledge already, come out in an incontestable way.

    If we are dreaming it might even lead to all the corruption in the UCI being exposed as well...
    +1 I hope it gets bigger and uglier until the whole damn thing implodes and we get a clean start. The amount of evidence against Armstrong and his sycophants is just too compelling. Never liked the guy, always thought and tbh hoped he was a doper. Not saying the rest of them aren't either, he just has a particularly unpleasant way of deceiving his fans.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    turkeytickler wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    pitchshifter wrote:
    I really hope this goes away. Quickly.
    I don't, and nor should anyone who is genuinely interested in the future credibility of the sport.

    Let's hope that this sees the truth about Pharmstrong, which is in any case largely public knowledge already, come out in an incontestable way.

    If we are dreaming it might even lead to all the corruption in the UCI being exposed as well...
    +1 I hope it gets bigger and uglier until the whole damn thing implodes and we get a clean start. The amount of evidence against Armstrong and his sycophants is just too compelling. Never liked the guy, always thought and tbh hoped he was a doper. Not saying the rest of them aren't either, he just has a particularly unpleasant way of deceiving his fans.

    Please explain to me what Lance's "particularly unpleasant way of deceiving his fans"
    actually consists of. How does it work? Is it brainwashing on a scale not seen in this world? You have my curiosity up. Explain this grand theory of yours, please, and be particular.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    There has been plenty of talk about who's going down and good riddance to all of them. That sort of thing, but what's the worst case scenario? Other than bad publicity, other than loss of income, other than loss of fame? Is anyone going to jail? Is anyone going to serve more than a 2 year ban? I know that most of you want to see these guys spend the rest of their lives in the electic chair, but ain't gonna happen(sorry 'bout your luck).
    So, what is worst case? Anyone going to jail, etc., etc.?
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    dennisn wrote:
    So, what is worst case? Anyone going to jail, etc., etc.?

    Maybe if you'd read a bit about it you'd know.

    Yes, jail. If what's being said happened, the federal government will not be happy. USPS are a government agency so it's basically misuse of government money.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • micron
    micron Posts: 1,843
    That's a must read - thanks - many, many questions about all the money LA has 'donated' - close to a million dollars - hope the audit trail is solid
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    dennisn wrote:
    There has been plenty of talk about who's going down and good riddance to all of them. That sort of thing, but what's the worst case scenario? Other than bad publicity, other than loss of income, other than loss of fame? Is anyone going to jail? Is anyone going to serve more than a 2 year ban? I know that most of you want to see these guys spend the rest of their lives in the electic chair, but ain't gonna happen(sorry 'bout your luck).
    So, what is worst case? Anyone going to jail, etc., etc.?


    Tailwind sports misappropriated funds from a public body (USPS) and spent it to perpetuate sporting fraud. Is that not serious enough for jail time?

    Also if there is proof of bribery to influence a positive test and thus a sporting result, that is most likely criminal too.

    Then there is the small matter of perjury by Armstrong, Bruyneel and others when under oath on the suit filed by SCA.

    I think this is far more serious than you appreciate.
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • rapid_uphill
    rapid_uphill Posts: 841
    edited May 2010
    Sporting fraud is serious sh!t.
    dennisn wrote:
    So, what is worst case? Anyone going to jail, etc., etc.?
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    edited May 2010
    dennisn wrote:
    Please explain to me what Lance's "particularly unpleasant way of deceiving his fans" actually consists of.
    For me the most distasteful thing about the whole 'Armstrong myth' has always been the way he cynically manipulated his survival from cancer in order to place himself beyond criticism and investigation. Even now many are prepared to collude in this deceit. For example, from today's Times:

    Sports Watch: hard luck, Floyd Landis, Lance Armstrong is bigger than mere sport

    6) Floyd Landis (down): ...his attempted fingering of Lance Armstrong fails to appreciate that the public will always choose to believe in the Texan because of his cancer-defying, Crow-marrying, crowd-pleasing turns. He’s bigger than mere sport.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... 132666.ece

    Armstrong was supposedly the man who through his sheer Nietzschean will 'beat cancer'. However, the medical evidence shows that a patient's attitude toward their illness or 'will to live' has absolutely no impact on whether they live or not. Also, if it is argued that sheer Armstrong-like willpower is the way to 'beat' cancer, what does that say about all those who succumb to it? That they didn't want to live enough and as such are at least partly to blame for their own demise?

    On top of all this it is clear that the 'inspiration to cancer sufferers' provided by Armstrong was a built on, as Lemond pointed out many years ago, the biggest fraud in the history of cycling.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    dennisn wrote:
    Please explain to me what Lance's "particularly unpleasant way of deceiving his fans" actually consists of.
    P.s this sort of 'unpleasantness' doesn't help either...

    L'EQUIPE
    October 6, 2005, page 12.
    English translation of "Ce qui s'est passe sur le Tour 2005".

    After the publication of his testimony about Jemison and Hamilton in an article in the Sunday Times of London in 2001 when he expressed his certainty that US Postal had begun doping, Dr. Steffen received a phone call from Armstrong in which he threatened him in the following terms (the same that he used against Greg LeMond and Mike Anderson, his former personal assistant): "I have a lot of money, good lawyers, and if you continue to talk, I'll destroy you."
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    BikingBernie wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Please explain to me what Lance's "particularly unpleasant way of deceiving his fans" actually consists of.
    For me the most distasteful thing about the whole 'Armstrong myth' has always been the way he cynically manipulated his survival from cancer in order to place himself beyond criticism and investigation. Even today many are prepared to collude in this deceit. For example, from Today's Times:

    Sports Watch: hard luck, Floyd Landis, Lance Armstrong is bigger than mere sport

    6) Floyd Landis (down): ...his attempted fingering of Lance Armstrong fails to appreciate that the public will always choose to believe in the Texan because of his cancer-defying, Crow-marrying, crowd-pleasing turns. He’s bigger than mere sport.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/ ... 132666.ece

    Armstrong was supposedly the man who through his sheer Nietzschean will 'beat cancer'. However, the medical evidence shows that a patient's attitude toward their illness or 'will to live' has absolutely no impact on whether they live or not. Also, if it is argued that sheer Armstrong-like willpower is the way to 'beat' cancer, what does that say about all those who succumb to it? That they didn't want to live enough and as such are at least partly to blame for their own demise?

    On top of all this it is clear that the 'inspiration to cancer sufferers' provided by Armstrong was a built on, as Lemond pointed out many years ago, the biggest fraud in the history of cycling.

    Sounds like you're saying all Lance fans are idiots?? Could be, but I have my doubts.
    There is an old saying about "fame is a fleeting thing" and Armstrong, like many others, will be pushed aside sooner than later. His fans will die out just like evey other "sporting hero". Don't worry, you guys are going to have your wishes granted. Sooner or later, in one way or another. I doubt it will be in the way you think or wish, but he, like everyone else will eventually be gone. Then you can all find some new distraction to obcess about.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    dennisn wrote:
    There is an old saying about "fame is a fleeting thing" and Armstrong, like many others, will be pushed aside sooner than later. His fans will die out just like evey other "sporting hero". Don't worry, you guys are going to have your wishes granted. Sooner or later, in one way or another. I doubt it will be in the way you think or wish, but he, like everyone else will eventually be gone. Then you can all find some new distraction to obcess about.
    Dennis, I posted this a couple of weeks ago:
    ...the 'pleasure' I get from watching pro cycling these days is very muted. I rode out to watch the 4th stage of the Tour de Romandie the other day (and got very wet in the process). I stood there and tried to feel the way I did when I was a youth and it did have a certain glory. I had forgotten just how savage bike racing can be, the speed, the gritted teeth, the dreadful weather, the climbs, the pain and all that was still 'real' and somehow very moving. However, when it comes to the results, modern-era doping has robbed the sport of any authenticity.
    The only real 'wish' I have is for me to be able to believe in the sport again...
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    BikingBernie wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    There is an old saying about "fame is a fleeting thing" and Armstrong, like many others, will be pushed aside sooner than later. His fans will die out just like evey other "sporting hero". Don't worry, you guys are going to have your wishes granted. Sooner or later, in one way or another. I doubt it will be in the way you think or wish, but he, like everyone else will eventually be gone. Then you can all find some new distraction to obcess about.
    Dennis, I posted this a couple of weeks ago:
    ...the 'pleasure' I get from watching pro cycling these days is very muted. I rode out to watch the 4th stage of the Tour de Romandie the other day (and got very wet in the process). I stood there and tried to feel the way I did when I was a youth and it did have a certain glory. I had forgotten just how savage bike racing can be, the speed, the gritted teeth, the dreadful weather, the climbs, the pain and all that was still 'real' and somehow very moving. However, when it comes to the results, modern-era doping has robbed the sport of any authenticity.
    The only real 'wish' I have is for me to be able to believe in the sport again...

    So you believed there was no doping / cheating before Lance, or someone else?
    Cycling was pure just exactly WHEN? I've never believed it was pure in my lifetime. I don't buy your reason or wish. I don't believe you believed the sport was ever clean.
  • rapid_uphill
    rapid_uphill Posts: 841
    Shut up dennisn ffs
  • afx237vi
    afx237vi Posts: 12,630
    dennisn wrote:
    Sounds like you're saying all Lance fans are idiots?? Could be, but I have my doubts.
    There is an old saying about "fame is a fleeting thing" and Armstrong, like many others, will be pushed aside sooner than later. His fans will die out just like evey other "sporting hero". Don't worry, you guys are going to have your wishes granted. Sooner or later, in one way or another. I doubt it will be in the way you think or wish, but he, like everyone else will eventually be gone. Then you can all find some new distraction to obcess about.

    We'll probably all go back to watching pro cycling. How about you?
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    dennisn wrote:
    So you believed there was no doping / cheating before Lance, or someone else?Cycling was pure just exactly WHEN? I've never believed it was pure in my lifetime. I don't buy your reason or wish. I don't believe you believed the sport was ever clean.
    Sigh.... As I have explained to you many times I am quite well aware that cycling has never been clean. However until the Epo / medically managed blood doping era the racing was pretty 'authentic' as the dope couldn't transform also-rans into multiple 'winners', as modern doping methods can.
  • Av it
    Av it Posts: 105
    Cumulonimbus wrote:
    rapid_uphill wrote:
    Im sure his kids would prefare to know the truth.
    SpaceJunk wrote:
    Not that I am saying he should be excused for doping because he has kids, just the impact it would have.

    But would they want everyone else to know too?

    Thats wgat i like about the forum, people are making what i assume to be genuine belief that they know what children at the other side of the world that theyve never met are thinking ad a re likely to think in years to come.


    that you guys know whats best for these children too is even better.

    Dont you just love the internet :lol::lol::lol::lol:
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    BikingBernie wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    So you believed there was no doping / cheating before Lance, or someone else?Cycling was pure just exactly WHEN? I've never believed it was pure in my lifetime. I don't buy your reason or wish. I don't believe you believed the sport was ever clean.
    Sigh.... As I have explained to you many times I am quite well aware that cycling has never been clean. However until the Epo / medically managed blood doping era the racing was pretty 'authentic' as the dope couldn't transform also-rans into multiple 'winners', as modern doping methods can.

    I see. It's the riders and drugs that YOU think are bad. The past was clean by todays standards? Or should I say your standards. So if I follow you, the past was A - OK. It's only in the Lance era that it turned bad?
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    afx237vi wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Sounds like you're saying all Lance fans are idiots?? Could be, but I have my doubts.
    There is an old saying about "fame is a fleeting thing" and Armstrong, like many others, will be pushed aside sooner than later. His fans will die out just like evey other "sporting hero". Don't worry, you guys are going to have your wishes granted. Sooner or later, in one way or another. I doubt it will be in the way you think or wish, but he, like everyone else will eventually be gone. Then you can all find some new distraction to obcess about.

    We'll probably all go back to watching pro cycling. How about you?

    So I have your assurance that cycling in the post Lance era will be pure as the driven snow? You guys are simply setting yourselves up for another let down. Good luck in you belief in the purity of "our sport".

Categories