Doprah - SPOILERS

nic_77

Goodness that was close... two hour powercut just ended!
Spoilers thread is tongue in cheek, but I bet someone wants to watch it in the morning without knowing the result

Macaloon

Precautionary and hilarious thread title. Well played. Going to watch this on Twitter. And a couple of live blogs:

Excellent Matt Seaton & Doc Hutch | http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/ja ... -live-blog

WSJ dude | http://blogs.wsj.com/dailyfix/2013/01/1 ... interview/

Lance is going to say that his cheating was enabled and facilitated by 'the authorities' including the UCI, since he was the source of all the new money coming into the sport. 'How else could he 'pass' 500+ tests?' he will ask. Tune in Friday when Lance will name names, and directly address those he persecuted.

k-dog

Wow. What a fantastic start.

Yes. Yes. Yes...

gmb

Although it's no surprise - it's still a shock to hear those admissions come from his lips. He looks relieved.

deal

Claiming his comeback was clean, and trying to avoid answering question about pressurising riders to get on a program. :roll:

nic_77

Three biggies so far:

1. Yep, I doped in all 7 tours
2. He didn't dope in comeback, or at all after 2005
3. He never forced anyone else to dope

Singled out CVV as a liar, and said he (CVV) continued to dope after leaving team... oh that'll be at Liberty Seguros and the CSC.

nic_77

Admits that 1999 samples did fail the 2005 EPO re-tests.
Denies TdS positive and cover up.
Confirms that E O'R told the truth about the Cortisone coverup, and that he's reached out to apologise.

nic_77

Refused to confirm or deny the Betsy hospital room story... too much legal weight resting on that perhaps?
Was at pains to point out that he didn't call her fat. What a sh*t, doesn't even have the ball to tell the truth on this one.

k-dog

Yeah, that's got to be some sort of perjury avoidance.

nic_77

k-dog wrote:

Yeah, that's got to be some sort of perjury avoidance.

I suspect that horse has already bolted for Lance, I think the reason would be that others have lied in their testimony for him on this one... The Oakley woman?? Oh, and thank-you twitter - Kevin L

nic_77

This guy is probably crazy. He has said plenty without really saying anything.

Turfle

Some good, some bad, and lots of adverts.

He admitted it though, so that's good.

Teddy Westside

Despite the fact Armstong would have been extremely well-prepared for this interview (as always), i still found it a riveting watch if only because I wondered just how much he'd own up to and how much he'd still avoid. So far, I reckon he's actually admitted more than I expected but he's also cleverly (and, at times, not so cleverly) skirted round those questions he didn't want to be open about.

I'm always uncomfortable hearing the use of "we" even allowing for the fact it's a very American thing in sports to talk as a team rather than an individual (it's been appearing this side of the Atlantic too - in motorsports and cycling - in recent years). Yes, "we" in some cases would mean Lance and his legal team but ultimately it would always be Lance who would give the green light to legal action, given his admission of always needing to be in control.

Now is not a time for gloating that all the staunch Lance supporters were wrong (or in denial), just a time for them to finally admit he's a cheat or at least stop defending him. He's admitted it himself - the mistakes were his and he had ample opportunity to both stop making them and admit them. Others have at least had the good grace to do so much sooner (regardless of what each had to lose being less than Armstrong), though some admittedly also did it to save their own bacon. Still more of course will probably always deny their wrong-doing.

This one man has probably got the distinction of doing both more harm and more good for the sport than anyone else during his time in the saddle. Let's hope the legacy he leaves is not one of turning people away from the sport. If he inspired you to ride, then at least let that be a positive (no pun intended) to come out of this ugly tale...

FocusZing

Clean on the come back? How can he have been, he benefited from all the steroid abuse. No blood dopping? I don't think they see that as cheating/PEDs.

Bakunin

He never read Tyler's book.
His refusal to answer the questions about the hospital was the most interesting part of the interview.
The comment on CVV was nasty.
Ferrari was brushed aside.
I loved the one ball excuse for testosterone.
It will be interesting to hear him discuss Lemond.
He is not a fan of the UCI.
Seemed to hide behind the fact that he and his mother are "fighters".

For what it was -- it was more entertaining than informative.

As they said in episode of DEADWOOD -- Advances, None Miraculous.

TMR

As a former D/Sgt, I found his body language extremely interesting; ear tugging as he was sitting down, mouth guard, nose rub etc.

Have a look at here and compare his body language yourself at key moments: http://www.indiabix.com/body-language/h ... -gestures/

My own perception is that he was extremely guarded, while trying to convey the impression that he was relaxed and willing to talk (open collar on shirt etc). He clearly was holding back in a number of areas.

Personally, I've felt he was guilty since 2009, just after I started cycling. His confession changes nothing for me, but if it's the start of a positive change in the sport then that can only be a good thing.

Kimmage must be feeling cock-a-hoop this morning.

rick_chasey

Can't admit to doping in comeback since presumably it's not long ago enough that he can't feel some pain for it.


Should have done the interview when USADA first started sniffing around. Would have saved himself some hassle.

alan_a

All I have seen this morning is the first 1min13secs on The Guardian's website. WOW, what a great start.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/ja ... ah-winfrey


Now, does anyone know if there is catch up or a torrent or vimeo or anything to watch it please?

ben@31

The Mad Rapper wrote:

As a former D/Sgt, I found his body language extremely interesting; ear tugging as he was sitting down, mouth guard, nose rub etc.

Have a look at here and compare his body language yourself at key moments: http://www.indiabix.com/body-language/h ... -gestures/

My own perception is that he was extremely guarded, while trying to convey the impression that he was relaxed and willing to talk (open collar on shirt etc). He clearly was holding back in a number of areas.

Personally, I've felt he was guilty since 2009, just after I started cycling. His confession changes nothing for me, but if it's the start of a positive change in the sport then that can only be a good thing.

Kimmage must be feeling cock-a-hoop this morning.

I hope you are not sending innocent people to prison on the grounds they rob their nose. I would have thought that proof beyond any reasonable doubt such as CCTV footage, is more conclusive.

Yellow Peril

Rick Chasey wrote:

Can't admit to doping in comeback since presumably it's not long ago enough that he can't feel some pain for it.


Should have done the interview when USADA first started sniffing around. Would have saved himself some hassle.

Thanks for the summary guys. Some thoughts and questions

As he is haemorraging results and medals left right and centre (Olympics yesterday) perhaps he is desperate to hang on to some form of TdF "success". Also perhaps he thinks doping on the comeback would appear cynical beyond the pale.

Can anybody enlighten me as to why he singled out CVV?

dsoutar

ben@31 wrote:

I hope you are not sending innocent people to prison on the grounds they rob their nose. I would have thought that proof beyond any reasonable doubt such as CCTV footage, is more conclusive.

If it's their nose I don't see why not, but if it's someone else's nose then that would be stealing

disgruntledgoat

Maybe it was true and he was the only one who's testimony didn't reflect reality?

Also, is it a massive stretch that his 2010 tour was clean? If he doped for that level of performance, I hope he kept the receipt.

@Ben

The police don't send anyone to prison.

alan_a

Nicky Campbell ripping into Tony Doyle on 5Live by replaying Doyle's staunch defence of Armstrong from an interview in August. Gotta feel sorry for people like Doyle today.

disgruntledgoat

Alan A wrote:

Nicky Campbell ripping into Tony Doyle on 5Live by replaying Doyle's staunch defence of Armstrong from an interview in August. Gotta feel sorry for people like Doyle today.

Im quite sure Nicky Campbell has never been wrong about anything. What a bell

tailwindhome

Yellow Peril wrote:

Can anybody enlighten me as to why he singled out CVV?

"I'm not in the business of calling people liars"

LOL

disgruntledgoat

TailWindHome wrote:

Yellow Peril wrote:

Can anybody enlighten me as to why he singled out CVV?

"I'm not in the business of calling people liars"

LOL

Christophe Bassons "un mesange absolute"

Richmond Racer

disgruntledgoat wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Yellow Peril wrote:

Can anybody enlighten me as to why he singled out CVV?

"I'm not in the business of calling people liars"

LOL

Christophe Bassons "un mesange absolute"

hmm...no one yet seems to have any idea why he tried to throw CVV under the bus

In the meantime Lemond's not best pleased that Lance's claim that you had to dope to win at that time, slurs both his and Hampsten's successes. Describes Lance's talent as 'average' (ouch).

And Phil Anderson's popped out of the woodwork to say that he expected Lance to say more in the interview. I would suggest that Aussie Phil keeps his head down, myself.

ddraver

Yellow Peril wrote:

Can anybody enlighten me as to why he singled out CVV?

Think it was he specifically singled out Armstrong as saying that to be on the team you HAVE to dope. IT may have been implied/inferred or otherwise communicated to riders but CVV said specifically that it was Armstrong that said it.

It was a response to a question naming CVV specifically

I found a vid on Youtube but I can't get the link off my phone - it's an 8 min vid from NewsPoliticsNow...

graeme_s-2

Yellow Peril wrote:

Thanks for the summary guys. Some thoughts and questions

As he is haemorraging results and medals left right and centre (Olympics yesterday) perhaps he is desperate to hang on to some form of TdF "success". Also perhaps he thinks doping on the comeback would appear cynical beyond the pale.

If he says he was clean when he came back then it makes him look like a better athlete. He can say he cheated when everyone was at it and he "had to", but when he came back to a clean sport he rode clean and was still good enough for a podium finish even when he was past it and not race fit.

The problem with admitted liars is it's really hard to work out when they're telling the truth.

Richmond Racer

ddraver wrote:

Yellow Peril wrote:

Can anybody enlighten me as to why he singled out CVV?

Think it was he specifically singled out Armstrong as saying that to be on the team you HAVE to dope. IT may have been implied/inferred or otherwise communicated to riders but CVV said specifically that it was Armstrong that said it.

It was a response to a question naming CVV specifically

I found a vid on Youtube but I can't get the link off my phone - it's an 8 min vid from NewsPoliticsNow...

Oh yeah, CVV said that he was called into Lance's room and told to get on the program or else i.e. off the team

On_What

Just watched it in the famous Look Mum No Hands cafe - the guy is in total control and it seems very scripted