Armstrong to blame for his cancer?

13

Comments

  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    edited August 2010
    Monty Dog wrote:
    Hook, line and sinker!

    Monty Dog wrote:


    MG, demonstrating your warmth and compassion for others as usual :roll:

    :roll:
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Monty Dog wrote:
    Not as bored by the repetitive, baseless cr@p that get's regurgitated in defence of his 'holiness' - what makes it worse is that they don't even have the nounce to present a co-herent argument, just spewing out vitriol, adopting the same mindless tactics of attacking the individual, undermining their characters - in fact, much like what they tried to do with Greg Lemond...the irony is that they can't even see that it's not working!

    This is actually a bit of a smokescreen to hide the bitter personal attacks often made by the ALB, much like yourself a few weeks back in fact. If you say it often and loud enough as you do people actually begin to beleive it and think it has some merit when it is generally the other way round.

    Not sure that's fair really. The ALB generally argue based on the 1999 tests, Simeoni, Ferrari links, Bassons, UCI donation(s) and now Landis and Feds etc. None of that is exactly ad hominem.

    Whereas the 'fanboys' can't prove a negative (I know he never doped co he never failed a test being the best one could do)) so kinda have to attack the credibility of accusers, naturally more personal. perhaps.

    PS - I leave out of this BB who may have valid things to say about socio-economic and cultural mores in the US but runs a horse and cart through these arguments by appearing to suggest LA doped because he was a Texan; just like all the Italians and Spanish and Brits.
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    calvjones wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Monty Dog wrote:
    Not as bored by the repetitive, baseless cr@p that get's regurgitated in defence of his 'holiness' - what makes it worse is that they don't even have the nounce to present a co-herent argument, just spewing out vitriol, adopting the same mindless tactics of attacking the individual, undermining their characters - in fact, much like what they tried to do with Greg Lemond...the irony is that they can't even see that it's not working!

    This is actually a bit of a smokescreen to hide the bitter personal attacks often made by the ALB, much like yourself a few weeks back in fact. If you say it often and loud enough as you do people actually begin to beleive it and think it has some merit when it is generally the other way round.

    Not sure that's fair really. The ALB generally argue based on the 1999 tests, Simeoni, Ferrari links, Bassons, UCI donation(s) and now Landis and Feds etc. None of that is exactly ad hominem.

    Whereas the 'fanboys' can't prove a negative (I know he never doped co he never failed a test being the best one could do)) so kinda have to attack the credibility of accusers, naturally more personal. perhaps.

    PS - I leave out of this BB who may have valid things to say about socio-economic and cultural mores in the US but runs a horse and cart through these arguments by appearing to suggest LA doped because he was a Texan; just like all the Italians and Spanish and Brits.

    Actually thats not accurate either i am not denying the ALB do use sources at times(woefully innacurate or otherwise) to make their case but when an alternative view or thought is put forward at times its usually here that these same people quite often use resort to personal attacks as way of trying to get their viewpoint accepted . Fine if thats their modus operandi but its quite wrong to claim its mainly the other way round.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    edited August 2010
    paulcuthbert wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    paulcuthbert wrote:
    Just out of interest, since you seem to know everything about the man (as worrying as that is) - when exactly did he "team up" with Ferarri?
    November 1995, in a meeting arranged by Eddy Merckx. (Axel Merckx was also a client of Ferrari). Of course this relationship hardy benefited him in 1996 as that was the year his form fell to pieces and he was diagnosed with cancer, but Ferrari took full control of the 'preparation' for Armstrong's comeback
    Because he'd retired...
    Er, do you know anything about Armstrong? He raced much of 1996, including winning the La Flèche Wallonne and starting the Tour, only to abandon after 5 days. he was diagnosed with cancer in the October of 1996.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Er, do you know anything about Armstrong? He raced much of 2006, including winning the La Flèche Wallonne and starting the Tour, only to abandon after 5 days. he was diagnosed with cancer in the October of 2006.

    I think you're about ten years out there.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    RichN95 wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Er, do you know anything about Armstrong? He raced much of 2006, including winning the La Flèche Wallonne and starting the Tour, only to abandon after 5 days. he was diagnosed with cancer in the October of 2006.

    I think you're about ten years out there.

    Spoilsport !
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    Moray Gub wrote:
    BB who may have valid things to say about socio-economic and cultural mores in the US but runs a horse and cart through these arguments by appearing to suggest LA doped because he was a Texan...
    I have never argued any such thing. :roll:
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    edited August 2010
    Yes, of course, Armstrong was diagnosed with cancer in 1996, not 2006. That is what can happen when you post without reading through it first. :oops:
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    BB who may have valid things to say about socio-economic and cultural mores in the US but runs a horse and cart through these arguments by appearing to suggest LA doped because he was a Texan...
    I have never argued any such thing. :roll:

    So why have you ever brought up his nationality then?
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    calvjones wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    BB who may have valid things to say about socio-economic and cultural mores in the US but runs a horse and cart through these arguments by appearing to suggest LA doped because he was a Texan...
    I have never argued any such thing. :roll:

    So why have you ever brought up his nationality then?

    Oh, and your highlighting shows I said you 'appear' to argue this - at least to partially interested observers like myself. If you don't actually believe his nationality/statehood is relevant, you might want to revisit your communications strategy.
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Yes, of course, Armstrong was diagnosed with cancer in 1996, not 2006. That is what can happen when you post without reading through the post first. :oops:

    Eveyone makes mistakes. Going back and editing you posts to make Paul Cuthbert look like a fool rather than yourself is the action of a monumental tw@t though. The internet equivalent of a backdated TUE.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • sampras38
    sampras38 Posts: 1,917
    BikingBernie wrote:
    dmclite wrote:
    BTW, Lance was a world champion before cancer.
    And completely hopeless as Tour rider, packing the first two times he rode the Tour, losing up to 30 minutes on a big mountain stage and over 6 minutes in a flat TT, and when he did mange to finish the Tour on his third attempt coming in one and half hours behind the winner. Then he teamed up with Ferrari...

    But Indurain wasn't that great when he started riding in the Tour either. I appreciate he's a different rider to Armstrong but it wasn't like he turned up and blew people away straight away.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    sampras38 wrote:
    But Indurain wasn't that great when he started riding in the Tour either. I appreciate he's a different rider to Armstrong but it wasn't like he turned up and blew people away straight away.
    No, Indurain was another one who was transformed by Epo. Look at my earlier post...
  • sampras38
    sampras38 Posts: 1,917
    BikingBernie wrote:
    sampras38 wrote:
    But Indurain wasn't that great when he started riding in the Tour either. I appreciate he's a different rider to Armstrong but it wasn't like he turned up and blew people away straight away.
    No, Indurain was another one who was transformed by Epo. Look at my earlier post...

    :roll:
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    edited August 2010
    calvjones wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    BB who may have valid things to say about socio-economic and cultural mores in the US but runs a horse and cart through these arguments by appearing to suggest LA doped because he was a Texan...
    I have never argued any such thing. :roll:
    So why have you ever brought up his nationality then?
    For one, because it is hard not to do this when trying to understand why he has so often fed and exploited anti-French sentiments in the US in order to bolster his own position.

    I have also pointed out that Armstrong exemplifies certain characteristics that underpin 'The American Dream': the dog-eat dog individualism, the attitude that 'the victor deserves the spoils', the belief that all anyone needs to succeed is hard work and so on. These characteristics are a major reason why he is so fanatically supported by so many people, often because they see him as vindicating the 'American values' they have been conditioned to believe. That this is the case is also reinforced by the way so many of his supporters also resort to French-bashing, at heart because France represents a set of values they have been conditioned to be hostile to (collectivism, egalitarianism, a belief in the importance of the protective state and so on).

    Of course, as an individual Armstrong would have been a egotistical, driven 'killing machine' wherever he was born. But that doesn't mean his background can be ignored when evaluating the 'Armstrong phenomena', especially when considering his significance to others.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    RichN95 wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Yes, of course, Armstrong was diagnosed with cancer in 1996, not 2006. That is what can happen when you post without reading through the post first. :oops:
    Eveyone makes mistakes. Going back and editing you posts to make Paul Cuthbert look like a fool rather than yourself is the action of a monumental tw@t though. The internet equivalent of a backdated TUE.
    Er, correcting a mistake and then acknowledging that this has been done in a separate post hardly amounts to trying to rewrite history, does it?
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    BikingBernie wrote:
    because France represents a set of values they are hostile to (collectivism, egalitarianism, a belief in the importance of the protective state and so on).

    Is that the egalitarianism that applies to everyone except swarthy foreigners? And the protective state that bans the wearing of the burkha, and sold weapons and nuclear technology to Iraq?
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • Matchstick Man
    Matchstick Man Posts: 565
    BikingBernie wrote:
    [Of course, as an individual Armstrong would have been a egotistical, driven 'killing machine' wherever he was born. But that doesn't mean his background can be ignored when evaluating the 'Armstrong phenomena', especially when considering his significance to others.

    BB, I'll take it as a given you've read Dan Coyle's Tour De Force? In it, he puts forward the argument that the reason why TdF winners are egotistical, selfish and driven is because they share the lack of a father figure in their early years. Would this not be of as much relevance as LA's birthplace? Admittedly, you can prove this as much as disprove it with the TdF winners of the last 30 years but it is a similar, recurring theme isn't it? Disturbed childhood leads to needing to win big sporting event to gain affection
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    edited August 2010
    DaveyL wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    because France represents a set of values they are hostile to (collectivism, egalitarianism, a belief in the importance of the protective state and so on).
    Is that the egalitarianism that applies to everyone except swarthy foreigners? And the protective state that bans the wearing of the burkha, and sold weapons and nuclear technology to Iraq?
    No, it's the sort of egalitarianism that ensures that less than 6% of the French population live in poverty, as opposed to the 25% who live in poverty in the USA. The sort of egalitarianism that oversees a state health-care system, open to all and which has been rated as the best in the world, as opposed to the American system that for decades has seen tens of millions of Americans without access to health care, at times even after years of paying exorbitant premiums to health insurance companies. The sort of egalitarianism that supports the largest Muslim population in Europe. The sort of 'egalitarianism' (?) that opposed the illegal invasion of Iraq by the USA and UK. The sort of egalitarianism that saw the publication of the 'Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen' at a time when people in Britain asking for parliamentary representation were likely to be transported or cut down with sabres. That sort of thing...
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    edited August 2010
    Matchstick Man wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Of course, as an individual Armstrong would have been a egotistical, driven 'killing machine' wherever he was born. But that doesn't mean his background can be ignored when evaluating the 'Armstrong phenomena', especially when considering his significance to others.
    BB, I'll take it as a given you've read Dan Coyle's Tour De Force? In it, he puts forward the argument that the reason why TdF winners are egotistical, selfish and driven is because they share the lack of a father figure in their early years. Would this not be of as much relevance as LA's birthplace? Admittedly, you can prove this as much as disprove it with the TdF winners of the last 30 years but it is a similar, recurring theme isn't it? Disturbed childhood leads to needing to win big sporting event to gain affection
    That may well be a factor, but the way he has so often resorted to feeding and exploiting anti-French sentiments in the US, plus how others, especially Americans, view his success, can hardly be understood without considering his place of birth.

    In fact it is clear that for many his being a 'Texan' is almost as significant as him being an American, as with that story I linked to about his fan base in Austin where T-shirts reading 'USA 6 France 0 on the front and 'Don't mess with Texas' on the back were number one bestsellers.
    Lance Armstrong: living the American dream. Cycle Sport front cover, January 2004.
    We now have a new team to represent the American dream. Once again we’re aiming high for the prize and one thing is for sure, Lance is back and he ridin’ with The Shack. Team Radioshack Cycling news.
    "Lance Armstrong has lived the real American dream". Robbie McEwen
    The Texan came out of a trailer park and pursued the American dream, doing everything he thought necessary to achieve his unbridled success.
    It would seem as though the whole world knows the story of Lance Armstrong. An American dream, Lance came back from a battle with cancer to win the Tour de France.
  • Matchstick Man
    Matchstick Man Posts: 565
    BB - have you heard the story about LA from his Motorola, neo-pro days? Each team member was asked to get up on stage at the corporate shindig in the winter and say who they were and what country they came from (hello, my name's Phil Anderson and I'm from Australia etc) . IIRC, LA gets up and says "Lance Armstrong, Texas" to guffaws from his team-mates and sponsors in the audience.
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    BikingBernie wrote:
    calvjones wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    BB who may have valid things to say about socio-economic and cultural mores in the US but runs a horse and cart through these arguments by appearing to suggest LA doped because he was a Texan...
    I have never argued any such thing. :roll:
    So why have you ever brought up his nationality then?
    For one, because it is hard not to do this when trying to understand why he has so often fed and exploited anti-French sentiments in the US in order to bolster his own position.

    ...

    But that doesn't mean his background can be ignored when evaluating the 'Armstrong phenomena', especially when considering his significance to others.

    I would argue that analysing the Armstrong 'phenomenon' has no place in Pro Race. Get along to Cake Stop.

    I feel its quite sad that I 100% share your liberal convictions and detestation of elitist political structures dressed up as 'democracy', especially compared to the (albeit far from perfect) Euro social democratic model, but you still get on my wick.
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    edited August 2010
    calvjones wrote:
    I would argue that analysing the Armstrong 'phenomenon' has no place in Pro Race. Get along to Cake Stop.
    That might be hard to do when so many people (DaveyL, MorayGub, er, you) seem so intent on twisting every other thread around to discussing some 'political' point I made elsewhere!
    calvjones wrote:
    I feel its quite sad that I 100% share your liberal convictions and detestation of elitist political structures dressed up as 'democracy', especially compared to the (albeit far from perfect) Euro social democratic model, but you still get on my wick.
    Sorry! :lol:
  • Monty Dog
    Monty Dog Posts: 20,614
    I think the best anecdote allegedly comes from a resident in Austin :

    Q: "What do the residents of Austin think about Lance?"
    A: "Half and half"
    Q: "What do you mean by half-and-half?"
    A: "Yeah, half think he's an a$$hole and the other half not"
    Q: "How do you know it's half?"
    A: "The other half haven't met him yet!"
    Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Monty Dog wrote:
    I think the best anecdote allegedly comes from a resident in Austin :

    Q: "What do the residents of Austin think about Lance?"
    A: "Half and half"
    Q: "What do you mean by half-and-half?"
    A: "Yeah, half think he's an a$$hole and the other half not"
    Q: "How do you know it's half?"
    A: "The other half haven't met him yet!"
    Monty Dog wrote:
    Not as bored by the repetitive, baseless cr@p that get's regurgitated in defence of his 'holiness' - what makes it worse is that they don't even have the nounce to present a co-herent argument, just spewing out vitriol, adopting the same mindless tactics of attacking the individual, undermining their characters - in fact, much like what they tried to do with Greg Lemond...the irony is that they can't even see that it's not working!
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    DaveyL wrote:
    Monty Dog wrote:
    I think the best anecdote allegedly comes from a resident in Austin :

    Q: "What do the residents of Austin think about Lance?"
    A: "Half and half"
    Q: "What do you mean by half-and-half?"
    A: "Yeah, half think he's an a$$hole and the other half not"
    Q: "How do you know it's half?"
    A: "The other half haven't met him yet!"
    Monty Dog wrote:
    Not as bored by the repetitive, baseless cr@p that get's regurgitated in defence of his 'holiness' - what makes it worse is that they don't even have the nounce to present a co-herent argument, just spewing out vitriol, adopting the same mindless tactics of attacking the individual, undermining their characters - in fact, much like what they tried to do with Greg Lemond...the irony is that they can't even see that it's not working!

    +1

    For someone who complains about it he does rather to seem to indulge in a bit of character bashing.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    BikingBernie wrote:
    calvjones wrote:
    I would argue that analysing the Armstrong 'phenomenon' has no place in Pro Race. Get along to Cake Stop.
    That might be hard to do when so many people (DaveyL, MorayGub, er, you) seem so intent on twisting every other thread around to discussing some 'political' point I made elsewhere!

    We all know who the poster is who tunrs almost every other thread into an opportunity to bash LA. Witness your ridiculous accusations regarding LA reacting to Sheryl Crowe and breast cancer on the unusual facts thread.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • deejay
    deejay Posts: 3,138
    Monty Dog wrote:
    I think the best anecdote allegedly comes from a resident in Austin :

    Q: "What do the residents of Austin think about Lance?"
    A: "Half and half"
    Q: "What do you mean by half-and-half?"
    A: "Yeah, half think he's an a$$hole and the other half not"
    Q: "How do you know it's half?"
    A: "The other half haven't met him yet!"
    Funny you should post that but I was in a bar a few years ago in Greenwich Village late one night and the interest starts with my London accent.
    On hearing the reason I'm in NYC alone and that my summer sport is Bicycling a guy decides to sit next to me and buy me a pint.
    "Had I heard of LA" he says and "sure I have but why do you ask".?
    Well this guy is a resident of Austin (I tell him I've never been to Texas) and it seems with this guy LA, there is a lot of local hype and that he and the locals feel there is a lot of bull sh*t about LA and they think it is all mouth.
    No I didn't go OTT (well it was Xmas and cycling was a long time away) and I just had LA as another Freak Bjarne Riis that had trod in something.
    I said they think the same in Europe and yes he has won a couple of TDF's but we want to know when he might ride or win some other race that he couldn't do before his cancer.
    That he spends most of his time in the States/Texas/Colorado and only comes to Europe for a couple of months to ride the race with the biggest prize list.
    We are amazed at the new found form he has suddenly acquired.
    At that time most of U.S o A. had never heard of him except as a sportsman who had overcome cancer. quote "Sport, well I think it has something to do with a Bicycle, is that right".

    This guy was so pleased that someone from outside Texas had knowledge of LA and had a similar viewpoint to him and his locals.

    Yes OK the greedy bastard went on for seven and the whole world now know about him.
    This word is in the Oxford English Dictionary. (you know the one I mean)
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • Deegs
    Deegs Posts: 74
    Bloody hell... the flogging continues... poor dead horse's body almost beyond recognition now...
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    Whooo ees theess Arrmstrong ? He eeesss Astronaut, no ?

Categories