Don't know how to say this but...does anyone else..

tailwindhome

feel a bit sorry for Lance?


Bear with me a minute.

At some point in his life he was a promising talented cyclist/triathlete doing well in junior races and with a promising career ahead following a dream of turning pro.

Much like Vaughters and possibly hundreds of other pros the time came to make the decision to race clean and fail or cheat. He chose the 'wrong' path and it's shaped the rest of his life.

Now I've read enough on here to know he's been abullying shit of a human being, I've read about his treatment of Simoni (sp?), Lemond, Betsy Andrieu and anyone who got in the way of his USPostal/Livestrong machine. It's clear that not only did he take the wrong path but coerced others to do the same while maintaining the Omerta which has destroyed 20 years of the sport we love.

However, and maybe it's reading Vaughter recent article, but I can't help thinking that LA must look at the photo of himself lying in a hospital bed, riddled with the cancer which nearly killed him and think how much he has let that person down.

It could have been different.

He could have fought his way back from cancer and gone on to race clean (or lets be honest, relatively clean). Maybe he had the talent to win a couple of decent races or stages. Maybe him and Big George even had a Monument in them....

I guess we'll never know.


All this may be a bit soft and even naive. F*ck it. It is soft and naive.

I kinda wish he could find the courage to admit what he has done. Hand back the Yellow Jerseys and salvage something half decent from the rest of his life.....

Vino'sGhost

in starwars when darth vader took his helmet off to look at his son with his own eyes, that was sad too. like lance hed chosen the dark side, it took over his life and destroyed him and caused suffering for many other people.

Unlike Darth Vader, Lance isnt cool and doesnt have a good theme tune.

There are other sad bits in films. Somersby is sad, bambis mum getting shot was sad and watership down is very sad.

The only thing sad thing with the lance armstrong story is lance armstrong. Loser.

Ave dew eyed calves

ReesA

do these come in yellow?

carl_p

A bit yes, but only in as much that a young and talented athlete took the wrong path in life when probably he didn't need to. It makes me angry that a cancer sufferer surviving such a horrendous disease when many have not been as fortunate still wants to cheat other human beings. Nonetheless I still admire his achievements to a point. Like you I do wish he would at least try to repent.

I can't believe he cheated his way to each of his 7 TDF titles over 7 years and not get caught. Smacks of total corruption at the highest level.

Although in many ways we have learnt nothing new this week about the LA debacle it is such a sad week for the sport generally. I'm yet again in the space where when I sit down and watch pro racing I can't believe what I'm watching is not riddled with cheating and corruption.

mercsport

TailWindHome wrote:

feel a bit sorry for Lance?
.....

Well, I for one don't.

Le Commentateur on the the thread "Armstrong & peeps on t'Internet" posted a link to a fascinating YT vid on narcissism. Worth a listen.

Crankbrother

Well it seems he's p'd off someone either very powerfull or very rich (likely both) ...

What does all this anti-smoking legislation cost the tobacco companies and the govt. in taxes?

Let's be honest, why wre the feds actually bothering with a dodgy cycling team ... hardly crime of the century ...

Also why did USADA feel that they had to do something now, 14 years after all this apparently started ...

I don't care one way or anotner really ... There was some great racing to watch over the years, no-one could deny tnat ...

That's the last I'm saying on this as I can't be ersed with the zealots on here, everyone of whom will have taken a short cut to get ahead at some point in their lives ... It doesn't actually affect our lives, let's save the joy/hate for the real world ...

Vino'sGhost

ReesA wrote:

do these come in yellow?

They did but i think there's been a re-call

Ave pleased with his own joke Calves

BelgianBeerGeek

Nope.

mattshrops

Not sure that LA is capable of any action without some sort of agenda. I dont know if you're aware but he has been doing Ironman recently, but their governing body suspend you immediately just for being under investigation. So really hes screwed -cant bike race anymore(too old-for the very top level) and now cant do Ironman either. This will probably drag on for a couple of years if he fights it. After which hes banned anyway and also too old to be competitive. Do the poor persecuted cancer victim and if he doesnt fight there is no need for a definitive outcome. Its a conspiracy blah blah =some doubts left =some credibility left.(AND no more of his money spent on defence.)

Richmond Racer

I've done some serious soul-searching for, oh, 10 seconds, and the answer is no, not one ounce of sympathy

As mentioned above the video clip that Le Commentateur has posted elsewhere is fascinating on narcissistic personailty traits. Just waiting for Lance to move into psychotic mode..

Turfle

No. He has had ample opportunity to make things right. Instead he chose to continue to harass, bully, lie, threaten, legally threaten, attempt to destroy the reputations of good, innocent people etc etc etc.

luckao

Certainly not. He's a bully, as is now being demonstrated by how he's instigated a full-blown smear campaign against USADA. He doesn't need sympathy, he needs a psychologist.

rdt

Crankbrother wrote:

Let's be honest, why wre the feds actually bothering with a dodgy cycling team ... hardly crime of the century ...

Also why did USADA feel that they had to do something now, 14 years after all this apparently started ...

Cops go after crims, anti-doping agencies go after dopers. That's their job and I wish them every success. You say "14 years after it started", like it's all ancient history, whereas USADA's charges also relate to 2009 and 2010.

Great news that dopers get busted; even better when they're folks who are unrepentant and appeared untouchable. Great message sent out to up-and-coming cyclists that cheats will be caught and taken down, sooner or later, no matter who they are or what position they hold.

What's not to like about that?

luckao

rdt wrote:

Cops go after crims, anti-doping agencies go after dopers. That's their job and I wish them every success.

It's nice to see somebody actually say it. His apologists are revelling in the perceived injustice of an anti-doping agency having the audacity to act on information, as if what they're doing is something novel.

thomthom

No.

Lichtblick

Turfle wrote:

No. He has had ample opportunity to make things right. Instead he chose to continue to harass, bully, lie, threaten, legally threaten, attempt to destroy the reputations of good, innocent people etc etc etc.

I agree with this post and also those of Luckao. How can anyone feel sorry for someone who did not have to do any of those things?

Looking around the internet and the papers this morning, opinion seems divided between a fair degree of Schadenfreude and wringing-hands anxiety about "what this means for Cycling". Since he brought it all upon himself, I'm in the former camp. I'm also glad this end-game ended so abruptly and didn't drag on for another year.

I have some questions, but since there is an opinion that there are too many Armstrong threads here already, I'll have to put them here, in the hope that Rick and/or others will see this post and respond.

1. Has Been.......stripped of his TdF wins. Has he? Are all the newspapers and bloggers getting over-excited at the downfall? Those wins are still up on Wiki.
Blazin' Saddles blog says "News that Lance Armstrong has given up the fight to clear his name and has now been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles..."
The Telegraph: "The reputation of Lance Armstrong, the most successful cyclist in history and a role model to millions for the way he overcame cancer, lay in tatters on Friday night as he was stripped of his seven Tour de France victories by United States anti-doping officials."
The BBC: "Lance Armstrong 'stripped' of Tour de France titles and banned"

Who gave him those wins? Not the USADA who seem to have taken them away. From the BBC: "...The Tour de France organisers said they would wait for an outcome in any stand-off between USADA and the UCI before taking action."

2. Bruyneel. "The 48-year-old said he would continue to fight those charges." and "Bruyneel was also named in the charges raised by USADA, and said earlier that he would go to arbitration over the accusations." WHY?

3. There's a book in the pipeline which I'm fairly keen to read: written by Tyler Hamilton and Daniel Coyle, release date scheduled for Sept. 18. Coyle's earlier book was Very interesting.



4. What's he going to do now? Seriously. Write another book? I don't think so somehow. Work on his nebulously-aimed charity? I suppose many people realise that Livestrong does not raise money for cancer treatment, research, respite, help for sufferers or their families, but on "raising awareness". ? He's only 40 (41 next month), so what do you think he'll do with the next 40-odd years of his life?

I really hope people reply to this post; I've taken some time over it, not dashed it off in a couple of minutes. Thanks.

Turfle

Lichtblick wrote:

Turfle wrote:

No. He has had ample opportunity to make things right. Instead he chose to continue to harass, bully, lie, threaten, legally threaten, attempt to destroy the reputations of good, innocent people etc etc etc.

I agree with this post and also those of Luckao. How can anyone feel sorry for someone who did not have to do any of those things?

Looking around the internet and the papers this morning, opinion seems divided between a fair degree of Schadenfreude and wringing-hands anxiety about "what this means for Cycling". Since he brought it all upon himself, I'm in the former camp. I'm also glad this end-game ended so abruptly and didn't drag on for another year.

I have some questions, but since there is an opinion that there are too many Armstrong threads here already, I'll have to put them here, in the hope that Rick and/or others will see this post and respond.

1. Has Been.......stripped of his TdF wins. Has he? Are all the newspapers and bloggers getting over-excited at the downfall? Those wins are still up on Wiki.
Blazin' Saddles blog says "News that Lance Armstrong has given up the fight to clear his name and has now been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles..."
The Telegraph: "The reputation of Lance Armstrong, the most successful cyclist in history and a role model to millions for the way he overcame cancer, lay in tatters on Friday night as he was stripped of his seven Tour de France victories by United States anti-doping officials."
The BBC: "Lance Armstrong 'stripped' of Tour de France titles and banned"

Who gave him those wins? Not the USADA who seem to have taken them away. From the BBC: "...The Tour de France organisers said they would wait for an outcome in any stand-off between USADA and the UCI before taking action."

2. Bruyneel. "The 48-year-old said he would continue to fight those charges." and "Bruyneel was also named in the charges raised by USADA, and said earlier that he would go to arbitration over the accusations." WHY?

3. There's a book in the pipeline which I'm fairly keen to read: written by Tyler Hamilton and Daniel Coyle, release date scheduled for Sept. 18. Coyle's earlier book was Very interesting.



4. What's he going to do now? Seriously. Write another book? I don't think so somehow. Work on his nebulously-aimed charity? I suppose many people realise that Livestrong does not raise money for cancer treatment, research, respite, help for sufferers or their families, but on "raising awareness". ? He's only 40 (41 next month), so what do you think he'll do with the next 40-odd years of his life?

I really hope people reply to this post; I've taken some time over it, not dashed it off in a couple of minutes. Thanks.

I believe the process goes as follows: USADA acting under WADA rules/authority have the power to strip him of all results. They have to inform the UCI of their decision to do so, and then the UCI follow through with the actual stripping. If they fail to do so there are consequences, which apparently could include the loss of Olympic events such as track cycling.

Bruyneel wants to continue to work in cycling, so he really has no choice but to fight it. USADA have said the evidence will come out one way or another, so he may as well go on fighting.

As for what Armstrong does now, I have no idea. His triathlon goals are certainly out of the window. I would be very surprised if this is even close to the end of the Lance Armstrong doping story though.

Richmond Racer

thoughts:

1 Re the titles and USADA's rights, Inner Ring spells it out pretty well:

'Can he be stripped of his titles?
Yes. USADA is an agency working under the World Anti-Doping Agency rules. If an athlete waives their right to a hearing then here is 8.3 of the WADA Code:

Waiver of Hearing
The right to a hearing may be waived either expressly or by the Athlete’s or other Person’s failure to challenge an Anti-Doping Organization’s assertion that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred within the specific time period provided in the Anti-Doping Organization’s rules. Where no hearing occurs, the Anti-Doping Organization with results management responsibility shall submit to the Persons described in Article 13.2.3 a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.

In short waiving the hearing means USADA can reach a “reasoned decision” based on the evidence at its disposal. If USADA rules there is a doping offence, imposes a lifetime ban and says he should be stripped of his wins then this applies worldwide. It is then for the UCI, as cycling’s governing body, to await the decision and issue the formal notice stripping Armstrong of his wins which it must do to comply with the WADA Code. All prize monies must be repaid too'


Inner Ring and other sources are hearing that WADA are starting to lose patience with the UCI over their stalling and other nonsense (they've also still not issued the formal ban of Ferrari etc who did not request arbitration); and that athe IOC are also paying close attention to what UCI are doing and not doiing...Fundamentally, if WADA deem that the UCI are not complying with their code, cycling could be thrown out of the Olympics, for example.


2. God knows that goes on in Bruyneel's head. I cannot believe that Lance isnt trying to force Bruyneel to drop the arbitration


3. Copies of Hamilton's book must be in the hands of Lance's lawyers right now..

4. I actually think that many people think that Lance is personally fighting the campaign against cancer, sticking it to it himself, the Foundation funding research etc, whereas in fact as you say its directed at raising awareness and providng some level of counselling service - and there are plenty of questions around how the money is actually spent and the budget run. All part of the very deliberate PR.

luckao

The first question is pretty important. The media are definitely getting ahead of themselves. It's not a case of has been stripped, it's a case of will be. As the BBC line states, it's up to the UCI to accept it. Of course, it isn't quite so simple in this instance. The fact that they claimed jurisdiction says it all. It looks like they won't accept a verdict that can have a ripple effect involving them. At the same time, going up against WADA and USADA would be huge. I don't think that's a fight the UCI would relish.

Vino'sGhost

Luckao wrote:

The first question is pretty important. The media are definitely getting ahead of themselves. It's not a case of has been stripped, it's a case of will be. As the BBC line states, it's up to the UCI to accept it. Of course, it isn't quite so simple in this instance. The fact that they claimed jurisdiction says it all. It looks like they won't accept a verdict that can have a ripple effect involving them. At the same time, going up against WADA and USADA would be huge. I don't think that's a fight the UCI would relish.

It would keep things going in here though

Richmond Racer

Vino'sGhost wrote:

Luckao wrote:

The first question is pretty important. The media are definitely getting ahead of themselves. It's not a case of has been stripped, it's a case of will be. As the BBC line states, it's up to the UCI to accept it. Of course, it isn't quite so simple in this instance. The fact that they claimed jurisdiction says it all. It looks like they won't accept a verdict that can have a ripple effect involving them. At the same time, going up against WADA and USADA would be huge. I don't think that's a fight the UCI would relish.

It would keep things going in here though

It would indeed. Fight! Fight! Fight!

On a serious note, I do wonder whether this could be the catalyst that finally brings Fat Pat and HV (as Honourary President, or whatever he is) down...

Turfle

Especially as the USADA evidence apparently includes the corruption allegations against the UCI. It's going to get very, very messy.

rdt

I'd like to see the UCI fall here. Better than a few folks falling on swords would be for cycling to break away from the governing body and establish a new org, such that a clean break occurred and, importantly, was seen to occur.

Dunno on the odds on that, but even if low, they can't ever have been greater than at present.

Lichtblick

Luckao wrote:

The first question is pretty important. The media are definitely getting ahead of themselves. It's not a case of has been stripped, it's a case of will be. As the BBC line states, it's up to the UCI to accept it. Of course, it isn't quite so simple in this instance. The fact that they claimed jurisdiction says it all. It looks like they won't accept a verdict that can have a ripple effect involving them. At the same time, going up against WADA and USADA would be huge. I don't think that's a fight the UCI would relish.

So I've (cliché alert) hit the nail right on the head? He has not been stripped of his titles or anything else, yet. I'd say that was pretty sloppy journalism on the part of all the media sites and blogs and printed newspapers which state that he has been stripped already. (Sometimes you have to read down 20 paragraphs to find the little word "if". :roll: )

No one can tell the future. Sometimes I think that's a good thing; sometimes I think that's a bad thing.

Bottom line is: Lance Armstrong has not been stripped of any titles or prize money. He might be, possibly will be, probably will be, but he has not been, yet.

Regarding Bruyneel, I have for years regarded him as some sort of slippery smarmy slithey tove. He wants to continue in cycling? As Landis famously said "Who would employ me now?"

Regarding Hamilton's book being in the hands of Armstrong's lawyers: Good. Delayed publication will make it an even better must-read (publicity about that would hit the internet in the current slathering fest), and would make LA's lawyers look even more venal (than they already are). But lawyers are paid to do things despite what they may or may not think personally.

Last note: IMHO Armstrong gave up because he had already thrown millions of dollars at this in law suits. To continue would commit to further millions of dollars and having more precise evidence brought to the greedy world gaze. Enough's enough. Even for a millionaire. Methinks the decision to quit is all about money and not honour or titles.

welshmessenger

What happens next regarding the UCI is the most interesting part of the the process. I can't see it collapsing because it runs all the other cycle sports too, but I hope it all ends with a massive "adjustment".

In answer to the original question, no I don't feel sorry for LA. The apparent complicity of people at the top of the sport takes this story out of the realm of a desperate, young pro faced with a stark and uncomfortable choice, into something more sinister. I think he knew what he was getting into and has done everything in his power to conceal it.

ms_tree

I've never liked the man, he was always a bully. What puzzles me is that to survive cancer he had to have some pretty lethal drugs. I read his book ages ago but I seem to remember platinum being mentioned - I'm sure someone medical on here can put me right. Why then would he put more muck in his body just to prove something.

MrT

Going back to the op q i really don't know how I feel. I was at most of the Tours....purely spectating.....that LA won....loved the 2003 battle in the Pyrenees etc. was I fan...yes.....did I think he was clean.....no.....he was great at making you want to believe....but having been in and around cycling for 30+ years I ' m not that naive. For so long doping and cycling have been intertwined.....along with its many heroes/greats/record breakers etc......the fact that most of the top 10 ......some would go further back.....in those tours were implicated in/ allegedly juicing one way or the other......didn't lessen the entertainment.....a word that frequently crops up on here. Personally I think it's great that we are in cleaner times and I am happy that we are perhaps sacrificing some of the "entertainment" because of it. What disappoints is the inevitability of human fragility. LA creates the brand, makes the money, markets the dream, bullies the opposition etc and puts himself in a position where he can't say " yes I doped".....it's the lie he has to live with.....do I hate him for what he's done......no......I enjoyed watching the racing of the nougties......do I feel sorry for him as an individual.......yes......because he either has no conscience which is pretty grim or he is perpetually battling his own demons. As it is.....it's great to move on to a new era.

ratsbeyfus

Ms Tree wrote:

I've never liked the man, he was always a bully. What puzzles me is that to survive cancer he had to have some pretty lethal drugs. I read his book ages ago but I seem to remember platinum being mentioned - I'm sure someone medical on here can put me right. Why then would he put more muck in his body just to prove something.

When 'pretty lethal drugs' do the opposite and actually save your life, perhaps you realise that drugs can do some pretty amazing things... that and seeing Riis haul his fat-arse up the Hautecam.

Yellow Peril

I have no sympathy at all. In fact if anyone has Simeoni's address/contact details they can pass me or PM to me I'd like to write to him and congratulate hinm for his bravery back in the day and send him a replica jersey to sign for my wall. He's a hero to me for that.

TheEnglishman

My understanding (could be wrong) was that just about everyone was doing it. So they've finally got one of the guys who won. But it seems that loads of riders were doing it so who do they award the 'winners' title to? Good luck with that one.

Cycling was in real danger of becoming a joke sport what with so many getting busted for drugs/blood boosting etc. So yes, i feel sorry for the whole situation, including Lance, as it's still dragging the whole sport down. And his endeavours for charitable work.

But did anyone even think 'Jessica Ennis - doper for sure' or 'Rowing - everyone's on drugs, aren't they' No, they didn't. However cycling is *still* dragging itself down and that's what I really feel sorry about.

kentphil

To the OP yes. He gave over 500 blood/urine tests over 10years which didn't show up anything. If he was doping then the testing process counts for nothing.