Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped

pat1cp

iainf72 wrote:

pat1cp wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

How much money did Mark Zuckerberg make out of the Social Network?

Iain, as I've no doubt you're in contact with him on Twatter, what's the answer? :P

A quick "google" implies he got nothing.

Correct.

So why would Armstrong get 1 red penny out of a film?

It was only my naive, misinformed point of view. :?

Nick Fitt

pat1cp wrote:

http://news.sky.com/story/1040152/lance-armstrong-biopic-planned-by-paramount

Movie deal done. Looks like he'll make a few quid out of this too.

I have started to cast this, any additions?

So

Pat McQuaid; Benny Hill
Robin Williams: Joe Pasquale
Tyler Hamilton: Ben Stiller
Sheryl Crow: Madonna
Bill Stapleton: Peter Andre
Floyd Landis: Shrek
Levi Leipheimer: Robert Duvall
Jim Ochowicz: Robin Williams
Lance Armstrong: Martin Sheen
Motoman: The Stig

rob churchill

I'm thinking Lance Armstrong:



Hein Verbruggen:



Travis Tygart:



Betsy Andreu:

frenchfighter

LOL

mr_poll

RichN95 wrote:

sherer wrote:

what I don't get is how you sell an option on a book that isn't even out yet ! Not even sure is she has finished it yet as it's not due until the summer

It's fairly standard. A film company 'options' the book for a relatively small price which means they have the exclusive opportunity to take up full rights (for more money) for a set period. Some companies have blanket deals. Loads of books get optioned, few actually get made into a film.

This is true especially where the book is written by a non hit writer who is happy to grab a few grand, and the movie company gets an option on something that may go "big".

However I would hazard a guess JK Rowling didn't option Harry Potter for small beans and also had written into her option that she was exec producer giving some creative control and either a pot of cash/slice of the considerable receipts. Unsure how Lance's road to redemption is going in America but if opinion is still with him then surely he could leverage a decent option.

Bo Duke

Some great bargains out there for the few remaining Lance fans!

http://cyclingweekly.ipcshop.co.uk/shop ... ur-dvd-set

Nick Fitt

Bo Duke wrote:

Some great bargains out there for the few remaining Lance fans!

http://cyclingweekly.ipcshop.co.uk/shop ... ur-dvd-set

Snigger, snigger... http://road.cc/content/news/74296-slipp ... trong-dvds

Did you know Armstrong and Liggett invested in Sherwens African goldmine FFS. If true thats another conflict of interest born out explaining why they supported him all the time. (last para if you cant handle the usual drivel from the man).

http://road.cc/content/news/74348-phil- ... d-jealousy

blazing_saddles

Bo Duke wrote:

Some great bargains out there for the few remaining Lance fans!

http://cyclingweekly.ipcshop.co.uk/shop ... ur-dvd-set

Still over priced by about £109.

Richmond Racer

Nick Fitt wrote:

Bo Duke wrote:

Some great bargains out there for the few remaining Lance fans!

http://cyclingweekly.ipcshop.co.uk/shop ... ur-dvd-set

Snigger, snigger... http://road.cc/content/news/74296-slipp ... trong-dvds

Did you know Armstrong and Liggett invested in Sherwens African goldmine FFS. If true thats another conflict of interest born out explaining why they supported him all the time. (last para if you cant handle the usual drivel from the man).

http://road.cc/content/news/74348-phil- ... d-jealousy

Yes - Ned Boulting mentioned it in How I Won the Yellow Jumper

Nick Fitt

Richmond Racer wrote:

Nick Fitt wrote:

Bo Duke wrote:

Some great bargains out there for the few remaining Lance fans!

http://cyclingweekly.ipcshop.co.uk/shop ... ur-dvd-set

Snigger, snigger... http://road.cc/content/news/74296-slipp ... trong-dvds

Did you know Armstrong and Liggett invested in Sherwens African goldmine FFS. If true thats another conflict of interest born out explaining why they supported him all the time. (last para if you cant handle the usual drivel from the man).

http://road.cc/content/news/74348-phil- ... d-jealousy

Yes - Ned Boulting mentioned it in How I Won the Yellow Jumper

Jeez, I dismissed Armstrong and his phonies in about 01/02, I just let it all wash over me. I just assumed Liggett and Sherwen were punch drunk from it all. Thick as thieves all of them. Omerta wasnt about riders protecting each other it was the whole road show to broadcasters the lot. When will it end?

bockers

OK, I have watched the Doprah interview, read all 230 plus pages here and the associated links to other articles and been following professional cycling since the Lemon Hinault tour so I would like to think I am pretty clued up on the scene.

But here is the nub. Why did Armstrong finally confess? I can’t see a single redeeming feature of it. He has not fully confessed and is not fully co-operating with the bigger investigation into doping and the UCI investigation. Therefore he will never get a reduced sentence. So why, what is in it for him?

I dismiss the fact that he wants to compete in Ironman triathlons, it just does not add up for me.
I dismiss the redemption factor, he does not need that as he cares nothing for those around him
Any book/film deal will be far outweighed by litigation from those he has wronged
He does not appear to need forgiveness as he still does not think he did anything wrong.
There is nothing more to come out for him to be afraid of or try and prevent… is there?

So I am baffled. If I were half as arrogant and single minded as appears then I would have stuck to the “I was tested 500 times and never tested positive” and “I am too tired to continue this fight…etc etc”. That way there will still be people who believe him, as there were right up to the 5 interesting mins of the Doprah interview. He could have just faded into the background and lived on his ill gotten gains.

Eddie72

bockers wrote:

But here is the nub. Why did Armstrong finally confess? I can’t see a single redeeming feature of it. He has not fully confessed and is not fully co-operating with the bigger investigation into doping and the UCI investigation. Therefore he will never get a reduced sentence. So why, what is in it for him?

Well he said in the interview a number of times that this is part of a "process" so I don't think we've seen the whole story yet. Probably didn't make sense for him to play all of his cards at once, he's got his own confession of wrongdoing out of the way, now he can choose how he uses what he knows about doctors, team owners and the UCI for maximum benefit.

jawooga

bockers wrote:

Why did Armstrong finally confess? I can’t see a single redeeming feature of it. He has not fully confessed and is not fully co-operating with the bigger investigation into doping and the UCI investigation.

I have only read the D'Oprah transcript, but it is quite clear that he is completely emotionally detached from the whole apology drama. In this sense, I don't think he gives a sh1t about the legacy he has left, and also has reconciled with himself that he cheated no more than anyone else - albeit biological response is difficult to gauge. I can believe however that he wanted to come clean to his kids, now that the truth is out.

I get the impression an awful lot of thought has gone in to weighing up just how much he can admit to now (statute of limitations etc.) - in discussions with his advisors / legal representatives - and also whether it is better to come out now, rather than later. A lot of the American public will decide in x years that he has reconciled his problems, and he can return to an acceptable face of public life.

He can also talk big about cooperating with the UCI, but I'm not sure he has to divulge much.

All thought processes lead to his bank balance.

tremayne

I have read that he absolutely promised and assured his wife that his comeback would be clean - for the sake of his kids etc etc etc. Which is I think why we are seeing a refusal to admit to doping for that latter part of his career.

Bockers - you say you aren't sure why he did it? Simple really. He wants and needs to control the commentary, control the story and in short be the master of the LA dialogue. Floyd and some others opened up the tap a little - what was a drip became a leak. With USADA the whole hoover dam has imploded. Suddenly he is an onlooker - viewing almost everything he's built and worked for going to shoot.

Sponsors? Gone. LIvestrong? Gone too. All of it, gone to shoot.

The only way possible for him to emotionally survive the whole process was to lead from the front. Take a tiny bit of control back. Importantly not spill all the beans, leaving him a huge amount of leverage over some very important people.

I see it as pt1.

bockers

tremayne, I think you may well be right. He is a control freak and nhad lost all control of his own destiny and image. I can't help but think he may have been better off fading away the control urge was probably too strong. I like your theory on not spilling all the beans YET, he could do this later when the focus if off him and then inflict some fatal wounds on the UCI and try and win back some support. As you say, part 2 could be interesting.

feltkuota

bockers wrote:

OK, I have watched the Doprah interview, read all 230 plus pages here and the associated links to other articles and been following professional cycling since the Lemon Hinault tour so I would like to think I am pretty clued up on the scene.

But here is the nub. Why did Armstrong finally confess? I can’t see a single redeeming feature of it. He has not fully confessed and is not fully co-operating with the bigger investigation into doping and the UCI investigation. Therefore he will never get a reduced sentence. So why, what is in it for him?

I dismiss the fact that he wants to compete in Ironman triathlons, it just does not add up for me.
I dismiss the redemption factor, he does not need that as he cares nothing for those around him
Any book/film deal will be far outweighed by litigation from those he has wronged
He does not appear to need forgiveness as he still does not think he did anything wrong.
There is nothing more to come out for him to be afraid of or try and prevent… is there?

So I am baffled. If I were half as arrogant and single minded as appears then I would have stuck to the “I was tested 500 times and never tested positive” and “I am too tired to continue this fight…etc etc”. That way there will still be people who believe him, as there were right up to the 5 interesting mins of the Doprah interview. He could have just faded into the background and lived on his ill gotten gains.

My own view is that children change everything. Whilst he may well have been able to weather the storm could it not be possible that he is simply trying to take control of the situation for the sake of his children. They are now of an age where they no doubt understand a lot more and having daddy as the worst sporting cheat ever is something any father would wish to soften and protect them from.

Trev The Rev

feltkuota wrote:

My own view is that children change everything. Whilst he may well have been able to weather the storm could it not be possible that he is simply trying to take control of the situation for the sake of his children. They are now of an age where they no doubt understand a lot more and having daddy as the worst sporting cheat ever is something any father would wish to soften and protect them from.

That is exactly what he wanted you to think.

There is a good article today in The Times about how he is still lying - it says his blood was doped due to the lack of new red blood cells in samples taken from 2009.

ddraver

Think Trev's just discovered the Bio passport boys....

Richmond Racer

Steady the buffs....

dougzz

He'd have doped to win a 3 legged race at his kids school, competitive doesn't do justice to him. I don't blame him for the seeming lack of contrition, he just doesn't know any different. He's spent his whole life controlling and confronting, he knows nothing else.

feltkuota

Trev The Rev wrote:

feltkuota wrote:

My own view is that children change everything. Whilst he may well have been able to weather the storm could it not be possible that he is simply trying to take control of the situation for the sake of his children. They are now of an age where they no doubt understand a lot more and having daddy as the worst sporting cheat ever is something any father would wish to soften and protect them from.

That is exactly what he wanted you to think.

There is a good article today in The Times about how he is still lying - it says his blood was doped due to the lack of new red blood cells in samples taken from 2009.

Trev, if this is my last post on here then so be it but you really are such a tool. Irrespective of whether he is still lying or not, in my view, children change everything. I am prepared to believe that, as a father, he must have some concern about the negative impact on his children.

Richmond Racer

felkuota, mate, that post aint gonna get you banned. Praised, yes, not banned.

Trev The Rev

feltkuota wrote:

Trev The Rev wrote:

feltkuota wrote:

My own view is that children change everything. Whilst he may well have been able to weather the storm could it not be possible that he is simply trying to take control of the situation for the sake of his children. They are now of an age where they no doubt understand a lot more and having daddy as the worst sporting cheat ever is something any father would wish to soften and protect them from.

That is exactly what he wanted you to think.

There is a good article today in The Times about how he is still lying - it says his blood was doped due to the lack of new red blood cells in samples taken from 2009.

Trev, if this is my last post on here then so be it but you really are such a tool. Irrespective of whether he is still lying or not, in my view, children change everything. I am prepared to believe that, as a father, he must have some concern about the negative impact on his children.

Were you always one of Armstrong's bitches? The whole interview was designed to influence any future jury.

feltkuota

Richmond Racer wrote:

felkuota, mate, that post aint gonna get you banned. Praised, yes, not banned.

Appreciated.

Matchstick Man

feltkuota wrote:

[qIrrespective of whether he is still lying or not, in my view, children change everything. I am prepared to believe that, as a father, he must have some concern about the negative impact on his children.

Didn't stop him storing EPO in the fridge where they kept the family's food and drink and didn't stop him dealing drugs in front of Luke and the twin girls to Floyd and others.
I think the magnitude of what he has done is finally hitting home but far, far too late....

feltkuota

Trev The Rev wrote:

feltkuota wrote:

Trev The Rev wrote:

feltkuota wrote:

My own view is that children change everything. Whilst he may well have been able to weather the storm could it not be possible that he is simply trying to take control of the situation for the sake of his children. They are now of an age where they no doubt understand a lot more and having daddy as the worst sporting cheat ever is something any father would wish to soften and protect them from.

That is exactly what he wanted you to think.

There is a good article today in The Times about how he is still lying - it says his blood was doped due to the lack of new red blood cells in samples taken from 2009.

Trev, if this is my last post on here then so be it but you really are such a tool. Irrespective of whether he is still lying or not, in my view, children change everything. I am prepared to believe that, as a father, he must have some concern about the negative impact on his children.

Were you always one of Armstrong's bitches? The whole interview was designed to influence any future jury.

That's me, a hopeless romantic, believing a father may wish to protect his children from harm.

Richmond Racer

I'll give him credit for having the paternal feeling to feel the guilt as a father in hearing and knowing his 12 year old boy was defending his father at school.

As for what he did when his kids were tinies with the EPO stored in the fridge...for him probably relatively easy not to connect that at all in the same way.

Different scenarios to play on Lance's conscience

Trev The Rev

You must not make the mistake of applying your own emotional feelings to a man like Armstrong. It is possible he does not feel emotion the way most people do. It is possible to understand and mimic emotions but be totally unable to feel them.

Richmond Racer

Yeah, Trev, funnily enough even on this forum we come across someone who shows a level of thought and emotion that the rest of us struggle to understand

ddraver

Flipping Hell boys, Trev's going down fast!