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

blazing_saddles

OK, so to treat the question sensibly now.
Yes, IF Cookson comes in and makes good on his promises, that will be of great benefit.
Rightly or wrongly, the general perception (outside of France and a certain sub-forum) is
that cycling has taken significant steps towards cleaning up it's act.

Now, turn your question on it's head:
Have there been the predicted negative impacts on the sport?
Are sponsors leaving in droves, (outside of the Euro crisis zone, obviously) for instance?
Have the US pro races been floored or do they apparently continue to flourish?

mike6

Bo Duke wrote:

Zero positive doping results in this years Tour.
A clean Froome smashes the myth you 'have to dope to win'.
LA makes a half hearted apology on tv then focuses the rest of the year defending his money.
Pat MacQuaid who turned a blind eye to doping will be kicked out soon.

I'd like to think cycling has entered a new era, however we haven't defined that era yet. For example, both Cadel and Wiggo burned out winning their tours. Is GC sustainable without doping? Not winning, but sustainable for more than one or two years?

But these are modern issues, of a new and exciting era. Do I miss LA? Do I hell.

Thats a very interesting and thought provoking point. Is it because Cadel and Brad won Tours clean that they now struggle for top fittness and motivation. Has the demands of winning a three week race had the detremental efect on them that we all think it should have on the human body and mind?

If you consider the amount of weight Wiggins had to lose, and the masive change in training he had to make to be a Tour contender, have those demands shortened his career by a significant amount?

joelsim

Dave_1 wrote:

so, it's one year ago today since ADA banned Lance Armstrong.

What's been the benefit?

What will the benefits be in coming months?

What do you think of Lance Armstrong now?

Benefit is they know they will be caught at some point.

In coming months they know it is on the agenda, and so need to be careful.

LA is a twat. That opinion hasn't changed. He has been made the scapegoat but he brought much of that on himself. Having said that they were all doing it (and IMO many still are to a lesser degree) and that has to count for something.

Mikey23

Pretty good and the cannondale black and green is pretty cool too ...

sherer

one court case down

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/23830777

Wonder what will happen with the US government case.

top_bhoy

mike6 wrote:

Thats a very interesting and thought provoking point. Is it because Cadel and Brad won Tours clean that they now struggle for top fittness and motivation. Has the demands of winning a three week race had the detremental efect on them that we all think it should have on the human body and mind?

If you consider the amount of weight Wiggins had to lose, and the masive change in training he had to make to be a Tour contender, have those demands shortened his career by a significant amount?

Both Cadel and Wiggo are very similar. In Cadels case, I think its a combination of age catching up with him and dare I say, motivation. I think his head is in another place since winning the TdF, Worlds and then adopting the baby. He has little to prove and no obvious path to move forward, it wouldn't surprise me if he called it a day at the end of this years Worlds. Wiggo is in a similar position with family albeit he is a few years younger than Cadel. In his case he has the future of the track to focus on. Good luck to both. In Cadels case throughout his career I've always believed that he raced clean and lost out on earlier TdFs to cheats; he never deserved his 'choker' reputation.

Bo Duke

Hey, there's a special place out there where Lance would be welcome.......

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lack-of ... an-answers

Bo Duke

Lance Armstrong's Olympic medal in hands of USOC

American confirms his Sydney bronze is on its way to IOC

Lance Armstrong announced on Twitter today that he has returned his 2000 Olympic bronze medal to the United States Olympic Committee. The American was banned and stripped of his results from 1998 onward after the United States Anti-Doping Agency determined that he had used performance enhancing drugs throughout his career.

The International Olympic Committee stripped Armstrong of his medal in January, but it was revealed on Monday that they had yet to receive the medal.

Armstrong stated, "The 2000 Bronze is back in possession of @usolympics and will be in Switzerland asap to @olympics," and included a link to a photo of the medal.

Patrick Sandusky, Chief Communications and Public Affairs Officer for the USOC, confirmed via twitter that the medal had been received; "I can confirm that The United States Olympic Committee has received the bronze medal awarded to Lance Armstrong at the 2000 Olympic Games in Sydney. The International Olympic Committee and the USOC had previously requested that the medal be returned. The USOC has made arrangements to return the medal to the IOC."

Armstrong placed third in the Sydney elite men's time trial to Viachislav Ekimov and Jan Ullrich, but the IOC stated earlier this year that it would not award the medal to fourth-placed Abraham Olano of Spain.

andy_wrx

Eki, Jan, Lance, Olano....I wonder why not ?
:shock:

tailwindhome

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson ... -armstrong

Paul 8v

As much as Lance is a nasty piece of work I do kind of get his point

frenchfighter

Not sure if this has been posted way back. Geraint and Armstrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kTEQm88UKc

thomthom

Cringing stuff.

deejay

.
Feds reject Armstrong's motion to dismiss whistleblower suit

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/feds-re ... lower-suit

sherer

it's a tough one as yes USPS got the exposure but now they are also associated with a drug cheat. Seems he has multiple lawsuits going on so wonder what the final outcome will be for LA.

dennisn

sherer wrote:

it's a tough one as yes USPS got the exposure but now they are also associated with a drug cheat.

Hate to burst your bubble but I doubt that there are many people who have quit using, been ashamed of, feel betrayed by, or even care that, the USPS was associated with LA. Not then and certainly not now. I realize that some people want this to be true but it would appear that no one around here(North America) cares. Probably because they have more pressing issues in their lives. It would also seem that the only people who care are on the other side of the pond. Go figure?

ddraver

Oh my god Dennis still? Really...still???

Richmond Racer

Shouldnt this thread be subject to its own SoL? :shock:

andrewjoseph

dennisn wrote:

sherer wrote:

it's a tough one as yes USPS got the exposure but now they are also associated with a drug cheat.

Hate to burst your bubble but I doubt that there are many people who have quit using, been ashamed of, feel betrayed by, or even care that, the USPS was associated with LA. Not then and certainly not now. I realize that some people want this to be true but it would appear that no one around here(North America) cares. Probably because they have more pressing issues in their lives. It would also seem that the only people who care are on the other side of the pond. Go figure?

USPS, the US gov and law enforcement agencies seem to care, else why sue?

RichN95.

sherer wrote:

it's a tough one as yes USPS got the exposure but now they are also associated with a drug cheat.

They're more commonly associated with their employees going on mass killing sprees with automatic weapons, so I guess this association won't matter much

In the mind of the average American they are more associated with Cliff from Cheers than Armstrong.

salsiccia1

dennisn

andrewjoseph wrote:

dennisn wrote:

sherer wrote:

it's a tough one as yes USPS got the exposure but now they are also associated with a drug cheat.

Hate to burst your bubble but I doubt that there are many people who have quit using, been ashamed of, feel betrayed by, or even care that, the USPS was associated with LA. Not then and certainly not now. I realize that some people want this to be true but it would appear that no one around here(North America) cares. Probably because they have more pressing issues in their lives. It would also seem that the only people who care are on the other side of the pond. Go figure?

USPS, the US gov and law enforcement agencies seem to care, else why sue?

So what if one or two people in the government and law enforcement want to make names for themselves. I'm supposed to care about it because they CLAIM to care? C'mon, it's the government. The government doesn't care. They just claim to care becuase it might mean a votes in their corner or getting their name out there..

FWIW worth I can't remember anyone ever telling me that they cared, one way or another, about LA's problems.
Wait, I sort of retract that. Seems a few BR forumites, over there, do care. Sorry, but I'm with the ignorant masses on this one, and don't give a f*ck. My interest in all this lies with the why's of the people who obsess and follow every detail and scrap of info about Lance. That's where my interest lies.

dennisn

Salsiccia1 wrote:

nic_77

dennisn wrote:

FWIW worth I can't remember anyone ever telling me that they cared, one way or another, about LA's problems.

That's why everyone is still wearing their yellow wristband over here (yes, in the US) isn't it...? Oh no, they all went in the bin post-Oprah.

Whilst I think about it, I've heard several people (with no interest in cycling) make negative remarks with regard to USPS's 'reputation' post-Armstrong... so your earlier comments were also BS.

andrewjoseph

dennisn wrote:

...

So what if one or two people in the government and law enforcement want to make names for themselves. I'm supposed to care about it because they CLAIM to care? C'mon, it's the government. The government doesn't care. They just claim to care becuase it might mean a votes in their corner or getting their name out there..

FWIW worth I can't remember anyone ever telling me that they cared, one way or another, about LA's problems.
Wait, I sort of retract that. Seems a few BR forumites, over there, do care. Sorry, but I'm with the ignorant masses on this one, and don't give a f*ck. My interest in all this lies with the why's of the people who obsess and follow every detail and scrap of info about Lance. That's where my interest lies.

You stated that only people 'over here' care. Now you are saying that you have no recollection of anyone you know 'over there' saying that they care. It is obvious that USPS care, and it's going to be more than a 'few people who want to make a name'.

Just because you don't personally know anyone who claims to care, doesn't mean that most people don't care.

But I keep forgetting you are only interested in people who are interested in lance, and that you are in no way interested in in lance yourself.

dennisn

andrewjoseph wrote:

dennisn wrote:

...

So what if one or two people in the government and law enforcement want to make names for themselves. I'm supposed to care about it because they CLAIM to care? C'mon, it's the government. The government doesn't care. They just claim to care becuase it might mean a votes in their corner or getting their name out there..

FWIW worth I can't remember anyone ever telling me that they cared, one way or another, about LA's problems.
Wait, I sort of retract that. Seems a few BR forumites, over there, do care. Sorry, but I'm with the ignorant masses on this one, and don't give a f*ck. My interest in all this lies with the why's of the people who obsess and follow every detail and scrap of info about Lance. That's where my interest lies.

It is obvious that USPS care, and it's going to be more than a 'few people who want to make a name'.

Just because you don't personally know anyone who claims to care, doesn't mean that most people don't care.

USPS doesn't care. It can't because it's a business and not human. That said, I do believe you're right that "more than a few people..... make a name." They care all right, but it's about themselves and not LA or drugs or USPS's reputation.

Yes, not knowing anyone who cares doesn't prove anything. However, I would be willing to bet a bunch of money that this "most people" you talk about don't exist. Then again I guess it all depends on your definition of "care".

mfin

So it's complete fluke Dennis that you are a CYCLIST who follows CYCLING a bit and you are interested in what people think of a certain CYCLIST. It is completely obvious you are interested in Lance yourself, passing it off that you don't care and you are only interested in what other people think about him is, to use an English phrase, b0llocks. You are also fanatical about keeping on commenting.

The thing with you is you spend ages trying to project personality traits on others when you actually seem convinced that you are not doing so, and that you are in fact observing these traits. You're hardly some 'social observer' Dennis, but you have seemingly got a bit of a problem with compulsive behaviour (no particular bad thing). It's gone on for years. Well done. Bye.

dennisn

mfin wrote:

It is completely obvious you are interested in Lance yourself, passing it off that you don't care and you are only interested in what other people think about him is, to use an English phrase, b0llocks.

........ but you have seemingly got a bit of a problem with compulsive behaviour (no particular bad thing). It's gone on for years. Well done. Bye.

Still got me wrong I see. I'm no more interested in LA than I am in Brad Pitt, Lady Ga Ga, President Obama, Nelson Mandela, or any other celeb / star. My fascination really is with the people who devour everything celeb's do and say.
I simply do not understand why people cheer, swoon, and get their hearts all aflutter at the very sight of the objects of their obsession's.

Who on this thread doesn't have "a bit of a problem with...."? Mines just a little different than most.

PBo

dennisn wrote:

mfin wrote:

It is completely obvious you are interested in Lance yourself, passing it off that you don't care and you are only interested in what other people think about him is, to use an English phrase, b0llocks.

........ but you have seemingly got a bit of a problem with compulsive behaviour (no particular bad thing). It's gone on for years. Well done. Bye.

Still got me wrong I see. I'm no more interested in LA than I am in Brad Pitt, Lady Ga Ga, President Obama, Nelson Mandela, or any other celeb / star. My fascination really is with the people who devour everything celeb's do and say.
I simply do not understand why people cheer, swoon, and get their hearts all aflutter at the very sight of the objects of their obsession's.

Who on this thread doesn't have "a bit of a problem with...."? Mines just a little different than most.

But there is a huge difference why people follow the whole LA debacle. He cheated massively in the sport that made him famous. The sport that people on here love. They are not interested in whether he boned Sheryl/Olsen twin (well maybe a little bit in passing). They are not following his celebrity. Your comparisons don't really work.

I don't care about celebs and when they fart etc. but if brad Pitt was suddenly discovered to have never acted in any of his films but has a body double, I might contribute to a debate about the impact this has on the reputation of the film industry. See the difference?

ddraver

No, he doesnt PBo because this is all a facade (one that he has stuck to almost admirably, except that it has nt worked) to try and make us forget that he was the forum fanboi right up to that fateful USADA Eve...