Armstrong - my take on it
Comments
-
it was suggested that a large number of those that gave evidence had been offered 'deals' if they testified - makes American 'justice' seem almost as dodgy as the drug cheats themselves.....0
-
Again, the naivety here is absurd.
Let me reiterate for the umpteenth time that they were not giving evidence against LA- "The 7 time TdF winning athlete", they were giving evidence against LA- "The kingpin of a drug ring that dominated a decade of cyclist from the grassroots all the way to the top".
No one seems to take issue with criminals in an organisation cutting deals to testify against those in charge, and there is nothing different or unique about this case. He was the head of a criminal organisation, and those below him are giving evidence as such.English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0 -
Christ next thing you know there will be a series of films, maybe with Brando playing the lead talking in a daft accent with cotton wool stuffed in his cheeks, and a mellow theme tune sung by the Late Andy Williams.Grill wrote:Again, the naivety here is absurd.
Let me reiterate for the umpteenth time that they were not giving evidence against LA- "The 7 time TdF winning athlete", they were giving evidence against LA- "The kingpin of a drug ring that dominated a decade of cyclist from the grassroots all the way to the top".
No one seems to take issue with criminals in an organisation cutting deals to testify against those in charge, and there is nothing different or unique about this case. He was the head of a criminal organisation, and those below him are giving evidence as such.
FFS who really cares, only a bunch of self appointed idiots, it really doesnt make a blind bit of difference, the mountains wont crumble, the skies wont collapse and the rivers wont dry up, some one cheated at sport BIG DEAL, whats new0 -
And yet another person completely missing the point of the whole LA debacle. Imagine my surprise...English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0
-
The person missing the point is the guy in the Mirror go take a look.Grill wrote:And yet another person completely missing the point of the whole LA debacle. Imagine my surprise...
The point is only small minded people with boring non entities of lifes will worry about it, the rest of us will move on BECAUSE IT DOESNT F**KING MATTER0 -
Grill wrote:stickman wrote:I am not saying he isn't guilty (or innocent) but people do have a 'if we go down we take him with us' attitude in situations.
Except that half of those that gave evidence had just as much to lose, and let's not mention those who's lives he's already ruined.
Although a few 6 month suspensions given to riders that had mostly retired isn't losing a whole lot. I fully applaud Hincapie, CVV, Leipheimer, DZ etc etc, but they didn't do too badly out of the whole situation and I certainly don't feel sorry for them.
As Grill said, it is not to do with LA doping, it's to do with the systemic, institutional cheating, controlled largely by one man (although how deep Brunyeel is buried will be interesting to watch when that comes to arbitration) who lied, bullied and threatened numerous people to ensure that he won.
Sure, lots of riders around that time were doping, but as far as we're aware, none of them were forcing the entire squad to cheat too. Or maybe they were, but as the USADA only has jurisdiction over US riders, they can't pursue them.
As for it not mattering... if you don't give a ^%$ about the sport, that's fine, but if you do, it matters.0 -
NewTTer wrote:
The person missing the point is the guy in the Mirror go take a look.Grill wrote:And yet another person completely missing the point of the whole LA debacle. Imagine my surprise...
The point is only small minded people with boring non entities of lifes will worry about it, the rest of us will move on BECAUSE IT DOESNT F**KING MATTER
Calm down there firecracker, no need to get worked up over something that's so unimportant... :P
Whilst none of this has any real bearing on my life, it's nice for us little guys to see criminals actually being caught no matter how much money or influence they have.English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0 -
meesterbond wrote:verylonglegs wrote:You are 44 and you use yawn as an expression like a teenager. Perhaps forget the blogging and concentrate on your cycling?
Or perhaps actually read some of the findings and then write something meaningful.
There should be enough in the USADA report to keep Armstrong in court for most of the next decade.
So which bit of what I wrote do you actually disagree with? Apart from the use of 'yawn' (which was used facetiously / stylistically!).
Nowhere, do I profess to be an expert, lawyer, authority on these events. As I say in the blog, I'm new to this sport. I was just expressing an opinion and asking the question that doesn't seem to make sense to me...
I should have realised that these forums harbour such hawks, who seem to think that poking the finger at others makes them appear more knowledgeable. Are you an expert? If so, please can you use your superior intellect to enlighten us less fortunate individuals. I have a sneaky suspician that if you had the courage to lay your cards on the table, you may not receive universal agreement from those faceless masses.
Maybe you're right, perhaps, I should forget blogging...?
It certainly doesn't give me any satisfaction getting insults from individuals who can hide behind the forum's anonymity!0 -
Spaniard wrote:
It certainly doesn't give me any satisfaction getting insults from individuals who can hide behind the forum's anonymity!
Then don't post asking for opinions on forums.0 -
ShutUpLegs wrote:Spaniard wrote:
It certainly doesn't give me any satisfaction getting insults from individuals who can hide behind the forum's anonymity!
Then don't post asking for opinions on forums.
Agreed.
@OP- You posted a link to your blog, that was it. It's in your sig too so you clearly want people to view said blog. Opinions are fine, but when you post things without doing ANY research on the topic don't be surprised when it gets picked apart.English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0 -
I agree with what you're saying - and you're right it's an opinion based on what I've heard in the media. However, my (small) gripe is that so far I've received critisism for posting a niave post, but nobody has actually explained why what I say is wrong.0
-
Ok, I'll try and be a little more constructive and less rude than my earlier post. Apologies.
Firstly, the tone of the blog is written as if the case against Armstrong was taken out in order solely to strip him of his TdF wins because he doped.
The fundamental difference between LA and the others you mention (Simpson, Coppi, Indurain etc) is that while they may (or may not, were Indurain / Coppi ever popped?) have doped, there is absolutely no implication that they forced others to do so, threatened other riders who tried to blow the whistle on the situation, intimidated witnesses, had people's businesses ruined when they started saying things a little close to home etc etc etc... I disagree with that for starters.
Secondly, there is also the implication that the whole case is a complete waste of time. Ignoring what Armstrong has shown to have done would be a cycling equivalent of holocaust denial (is that Godwin's Law involked?) It cannot be brushed under the carpet because it's uncomfortable for the sport, however much the UCI would like to have done so.
As for the question of who won those races, personally, I don't think that matters in the slightest. Just write off the decade he competed in and consign it to history as we move to a more enlightened sport (we can only hope).
For what it's worth, I'm glad you reposted as I've just spent the last 15 mins going through some of your other blogs and as someone who's followed professional cycling for god knows how long, but only just starting to think about racing myself there's some interesting stuff in there... thanks!0 -
ShutUpLegs wrote:Spaniard wrote:
It certainly doesn't give me any satisfaction getting insults from individuals who can hide behind the forum's anonymity!
Then don't post asking for opinions on forums.
eh? are mr or mrs spaniard then?
I havnt read all of this LA stuff (including this thread) BUT Pro Sport is primarily about entertainment and LA and the others gave it in spade loads, be it Pantani, Ulrich, Roche or Dalgado, Hinault - haven forbide even LeMond and Fignon!
LA and ALL his turn coat team mates werent the first and certainly wont be the last.
Drugs have been used in cycling since the early 1900s and every champion has raced in an era where they were common place, so make your choice?
All that has happened is that the tech has improved, as has the dope testing and sports/societies attitude to doping has changed.
Get over it and celebrate the great year Britain has had this year instead of focusing on what did or didnt happen 10yrs ago.
Personally, im sick to death about posts on LA etc etc etc etc !0 -
1) It's never been about LA doping. The USADA took that angle to expose the real truth as to LA's involvement. (read my other posts in this thread).
2) It's common knowledge that if the UCI sanctions the stripping of said titles they will not go to anyone else. There will just be no winner for those TdFs.
3) So far the reason the investigation hasn't gone further is due to LA not contesting the charges. Had it gone to court (which is what the USADA was hoping) there would have been so much more revealed and more people caught for criminal offences.
4) LA made loads of money (much of it illegally) and the enemies he made were of his own doing. He blacklisted anyone who stood in his way, and let's face it; I don't care if he overcame cancer, he's a grade-A jerk and a bully.
He's still the best cyclist of his era, but that doesn't make him a hero.English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0 -
Plus I don't know how you can class it as cheating, Ben Johnson cheated because he was the only one of eight, the
Do your homework on other Seoul / LA sprinters, in particular which stimulants they had been previously caught taking (yet not punished due to cold war issues) and which PED's those stimulants are known to mask through liver retention. Then do some research on what growth hormones can do to your teeth. Then do some research on how Mr. J's doctor and training team had a MAJOR fall out 6 months before the 1988 olympics.
Please understand I'm not being critical of your opinion or knowledge, just that there's a bigger picture which only became public knowledge recently. For more information, you might want to watch the documentary about the race which the BBC showed about 2 months ago. It is a properly explosive documentary (yet VERY cleverly avoids the unwanted attention of US attorneys representing ex-sprinters).0 -
Nickolarse74 wrote:Plus I don't know how you can class it as cheating, Ben Johnson cheated because he was the only one of eight, the
Do your homework on other Seoul / LA sprinters, in particular which stimulants they had been previously caught taking (yet not punished due to cold war issues) and which PED's those stimulants are known to mask through liver retention. Then do some research on what growth hormones can do to your teeth. Then do some research on how Mr. J's doctor and training team had a MAJOR fall out 6 months before the 1988 olympics.
Please understand I'm not being critical of your opinion or knowledge, just that there's a bigger picture which only became public knowledge recently. For more information, you might want to watch the documentary about the race which the BBC showed about 2 months ago. It is a properly explosive documentary (yet VERY cleverly avoids the unwanted attention of US attorneys representing ex-sprinters).
It wasn't supposed to be detailed, it could have been any race in any sport where one individual was a doper, the point being that the majority of riders at the top end of the peleton were, not just "the" one. It was just part of the sport at that time and you needed it to compete at the top level.0 -
meesterbond wrote:Ok, I'll try and be a little more constructive and less rude than my earlier post. Apologies.
Firstly, the tone of the blog is written as if the case against Armstrong was taken out in order solely to strip him of his TdF wins because he doped.
The fundamental difference between LA and the others you mention (Simpson, Coppi, Indurain etc) is that while they may (or may not, were Indurain / Coppi ever popped?) have doped, there is absolutely no implication that they forced others to do so, threatened other riders who tried to blow the whistle on the situation, intimidated witnesses, had people's businesses ruined when they started saying things a little close to home etc etc etc... I disagree with that for starters.
Secondly, there is also the implication that the whole case is a complete waste of time. Ignoring what Armstrong has shown to have done would be a cycling equivalent of holocaust denial (is that Godwin's Law involked?) It cannot be brushed under the carpet because it's uncomfortable for the sport, however much the UCI would like to have done so.
As for the question of who won those races, personally, I don't think that matters in the slightest. Just write off the decade he competed in and consign it to history as we move to a more enlightened sport (we can only hope).
For what it's worth, I'm glad you reposted as I've just spent the last 15 mins going through some of your other blogs and as someone who's followed professional cycling for god knows how long, but only just starting to think about racing myself there's some interesting stuff in there... thanks!
Thanks for the reply - and apology.
It was watching LA win the tdf after beating cancer that lead me to start cycling. To see him outed as a bully and a cheat is dissapointing and initially hard to swallow.
Don't take this the wrong way, but I think the world needs heroic stories like his (the miraculous return from almost death to the top of his game), and when it all falls apart, as it now has, it kills some hope.
Unfortunately, I now doubt that the courage that I thought he had will bring him to make amends.0 -
Considering he still denies he doped or did anything else wrong, methinks amends are the last thing on Lance's mind.English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0
-
Grill wrote:1) It's never been about LA doping. The USADA took that angle to expose the real truth as to LA's involvement. (read my other posts in this thread).
2) It's common knowledge that if the UCI sanctions the stripping of said titles they will not go to anyone else. There will just be no winner for those TdFs.
3) So far the reason the investigation hasn't gone further is due to LA not contesting the charges. Had it gone to court (which is what the USADA was hoping) there would have been so much more revealed and more people caught for criminal offences.
4) LA made loads of money (much of it illegally) and the enemies he made were of his own doing. He blacklisted anyone who stood in his way, and let's face it; I don't care if he overcame cancer, he's a grade-A jerk and a bully.
He's still the best cyclist of his era, but that doesn't make him a hero.0 -
People like that – cheats, narcissists, abusers – never apologize. Instead they attempt to compartmentalize the issue by saying they have moved on, or are concerned with other, more important matters now. They are attemting to force closure on a matter they no longer have absolute control over.Grill wrote:Considering he still denies he doped or did anything else wrong, methinks amends are the last thing on Lance's mind.0 -
It's important because using PEDs can kill people. To lead young sportsmen and sportswomen into doing so by persuading them that they will not otherwise be competitive is morally repugnant.- - - - - - - - - -
On Strava.{/url}0 -
Having read all this topic and the Trek one, I'm surprised how little has been discussed about all the protagonists and the detail involved over time. I've also been following a similar topic on "an ice hockey forum" and the level of debate on the subject compared to cycling specific forum as in here is quite remarkable.
I've followed the tour since about 89, but mainly just aware of the odd name here and there but the detail in which is gone in to on the other forum far out weighs what's been discussed in here.0 -
There are a couple of mega-threads in Pro Race that go into wikipedia-like levels of obsessive detail. Maybe "lite" is appropriate for Road General.0
-
Le Commentateur wrote:There are a couple of mega-threads in Pro Race that go into wikipedia-like levels of obsessive detail. Maybe "lite" is appropriate for Road General.
Ah, fair point, I never go in that section.0 -
Nice people don't always get where they should be in a sport, its the nasties that fight to get where they are, maybe LA did it this way.
If everyone else was doping at the same time, yes LA took it to a new level, then he was the best at time on a pretty even playing field with the other abusers!0 -
It's also worth bearing in mind that Armstrong didn't like competition from those in his team - Hamilton's book demonstrates that when he was on the same programme and started beating Armstrong, he was pretty well marginalised and force-out the team, likewise Landis. In that respect, Armstrong wasn't even the strongest rider and it is suspected that this is where Hemassist and synthetic hormones gave him the extra boost he needed to win the Tour.
To say that he was the 'best' rider of that era is wrong, he was only the 'best prepared' probably through priviledged access to certain treatments no-one else could afford.
The sad thing is that there were natural talents of that era who were denied the opportunity because they refused to take the drugs - to say the playing field was 'level' is utterly ridiculous.Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0 -
verylonglegs wrote:You are 44 and you use yawn as an expression like a teenager. Perhaps forget the blogging and concentrate on your cycling?
...and learn to spell.0 -
Its also somewhat ironic that he 'came back from the point of death to win the TdF' which in itself is no mean feat, PEDs or not, but it could have been in fact due to systematic abuse of steroids, testosterone, cortizone and specifically human growth hormone prior to his rise to the peak of professional cycling which gave him cancer in the 1st place.0
-
Monty Dog wrote:The sad thing is that there were natural talents of that era who were denied the opportunity because they refused to take the drugs - to say the playing field was 'level' is utterly ridiculous.
And THIS is why it matters. It doesn't "NOT EFFING MATTER" as someone so kindly put it to all the victims. Not to mention the other ringleaders who are still in positions of significant influence in the worlds' leading pro cycling teams0
