Anybody not in frothing rage over LA ?

LutherB

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Ok, so the "Frothing rage", title may be a bit misleading, I just wanted to get peoples attention. I was only interested as it seems there are small chinks of, not sympathy, but people saying things are going too far, ie lawsuits over his book from a court in sacramento and peoples reaction to it.

I reckon it will go the way things tend to go in the US and he may come out of this vindicated and another sort of media hero if he and his people put enough spin on it. I don't think he is going away and I think if he gets sympathy from Oprah's viewers then he will have a whole new fanbase starting.

I am unraged but happy he's on the slide. It is amusing that he sued so many people for writing 'lies' about him, and now so many people are suing him for writing lies about him.

Monkeypump

The Mad Rapper wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

The Mad Rapper wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

The Mad Rapper wrote:

Aah. Just what we need. Another thread on LA. FFS.

Don't post on it then. Ignore it.FFS

Shut it n00b. Just keep the LA posts to the LA thread, it's not rocket science.

Almost forgot, you have also posted in other (more than 1 ) LA thread so why you getting all huffy on this one ? Diddums not happy 'cos someone answers back ? Awwwwww, anyway, try not to be soselective in future, one rule for one and all that.......

Not at all. Tailwind is a nice guy and at least had the humility to take the mick out of himself. I love a good row on the Internet, so keep answering back fella - I've got plenty of ammo.

And nothing better to do, obviously...

Monkeypump

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Ok, so the "Frothing rage", title may be a bit misleading, I just wanted to get peoples attention. I was only interested as it seems there are small chinks of, not sympathy, but people saying things are going too far, ie lawsuits over his book from a court in sacramento and peoples reaction to it.

I reckon it will go the way things tend to go in the US and he may come out of this vindicated and another sort of media hero if he and his people put enough spin on it. I don't think he is going away and I think if he gets sympathy from Oprah's viewers then he will have a whole new fanbase starting.

It would be interesting to know how many of the new fans know the history and choose to ignore it, and how many just love the 'celeb' factor.

TMR

Monkeypump wrote:

And nothing better to do, obviously...

Of course I have better things to do, but it's a question of priorities...

Pross

I think the ones mainly frothing with rage are the deluded fanbois who kept trotting out the 'most tested athlete' 'never tested postitive' nonsense even after the USADA reasoned decision (sorry, witch hunt). They now feel humiliated for the support they gave in the face of all the evidence against him so they are lashing out.

mfin

I dont believe anyone's proper annoyed. But I do believe that anyone who doesn't think lowly of him for suing people who told the truth (let alone calling someone a prostitute and a drunk and all the other horrible personal slander) must either be ignoring it, or don't really know about it, or have forgotten those details... and that stuff has got nothing to do with the racing in the slightest.

Bozman

It is all a little over the top, the bloke was one of many but it's his attitude that seems to wind folk up.
Just give him the same length of ban as the rest but let the legal teams deal with the rest, that'll be punishment enough.

dmclite-3.0

Pross wrote:

I think the ones mainly frothing with rage are the deluded fanbois who kept trotting out the 'most tested athlete' 'never tested postitive' nonsense even after the USADA reasoned decision (sorry, witch hunt). They now feel humiliated for the support they gave in the face of all the evidence against him so they are lashing out.

I was a fan, had cancer and read his book and bought a bike when I got better. I am just really dissapointed, I wanted him to be clean which I now know is totally naive, but at the time didn't want to know what everyone pretty much knew about systematic doping. The only thing I still see as unfair or biased is the likes of other riders who have admitted doping and lost no old achievements, the one rider who immediately fits this is George Hincapie, who was on Postal for a long time and would have been heavily involved as were Hamilton and Landis.

dougzz

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Pross wrote:

I think the ones mainly frothing with rage are the deluded fanbois who kept trotting out the 'most tested athlete' 'never tested postitive' nonsense even after the USADA reasoned decision (sorry, witch hunt). They now feel humiliated for the support they gave in the face of all the evidence against him so they are lashing out.

I was a fan, had cancer and read his book and bought a bike when I got better. I am just really dissapointed, I wanted him to be clean which I now know is totally naive, but at the time didn't want to know what everyone pretty much knew about systematic doping. The only thing I still see as unfair or biased is the likes of other riders who have admitted doping and lost no old achievements, the one rider who immediately fits this is George Hincapie, who was on Postal for a long time and would have been heavily involved as were Hamilton and Landis.

But what can you effectively do. GH has finished riding, so no ban is meaningful, and removing his wins does what? He didn't win a great deal, more of a reflected glory from Armstrong. He had all the victory parades and the parties, all the fame and the money, but I don't see how that can really be undone. Even if you could undo it you'd just be rewarding the next doper in line.
Did I misunderstand, was the mention of George just another salvo with Mad Rapper?

dmclite-3.0

dougzz wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Pross wrote:

I think the ones mainly frothing with rage are the deluded fanbois who kept trotting out the 'most tested athlete' 'never tested postitive' nonsense even after the USADA reasoned decision (sorry, witch hunt). They now feel humiliated for the support they gave in the face of all the evidence against him so they are lashing out.

I was a fan, had cancer and read his book and bought a bike when I got better. I am just really dissapointed, I wanted him to be clean which I now know is totally naive, but at the time didn't want to know what everyone pretty much knew about systematic doping. The only thing I still see as unfair or biased is the likes of other riders who have admitted doping and lost no old achievements, the one rider who immediately fits this is George Hincapie, who was on Postal for a long time and would have been heavily involved as were Hamilton and Landis.

But what can you effectively do. GH has finished riding, so no ban is meaningful, and removing his wins does what? He didn't win a great deal, more of a reflected glory from Armstrong. He had all the victory parades and the parties, all the fame and the money, but I don't see how that can really be undone. Even if you could undo it you'd just be rewarding the next doper in line.
Did I misunderstand, was the mention of George just another salvo with Mad Rapper?

No salvo with The Mad rapper at all, genuine point on my behalf. Wasn't George Hincapie an American national champion ? If so and he doped shouldn't USADA be looking at taking that off him ? Just seems a selective rule they are using on certain athletes. Im not defending LA on this but the USADA method does seem biased in this regard.

tailwindhome

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

dougzz wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Pross wrote:

I think the ones mainly frothing with rage are the deluded fanbois who kept trotting out the 'most tested athlete' 'never tested postitive' nonsense even after the USADA reasoned decision (sorry, witch hunt). They now feel humiliated for the support they gave in the face of all the evidence against him so they are lashing out.

I was a fan, had cancer and read his book and bought a bike when I got better. I am just really dissapointed, I wanted him to be clean which I now know is totally naive, but at the time didn't want to know what everyone pretty much knew about systematic doping. The only thing I still see as unfair or biased is the likes of other riders who have admitted doping and lost no old achievements, the one rider who immediately fits this is George Hincapie, who was on Postal for a long time and would have been heavily involved as were Hamilton and Landis.

But what can you effectively do. GH has finished riding, so no ban is meaningful, and removing his wins does what? He didn't win a great deal, more of a reflected glory from Armstrong. He had all the victory parades and the parties, all the fame and the money, but I don't see how that can really be undone. Even if you could undo it you'd just be rewarding the next doper in line.
Did I misunderstand, was the mention of George just another salvo with Mad Rapper?

No salvo with The Mad rapper at all, genuine point on my behalf. Wasn't George Hincapie an American national champion ? If so and he doped shouldn't USADA be looking at taking that off him ? Just seems a selective rule they are using on certain athletes. Im not defending LA on this but the USADA method does seem biased in this regard.

LA knew the consequences when he determined his strategy.

Richmond Racer

The others went and talked to the nice people at USADA. They co-operated, and provided witness statements and testimonies. This was taken into account when their bans and results to be forfeit, were decided by USADA.

Lance was given the same opportunity. He refused it. According to Tygart, he could have kept his 04 and 05 Tour wins if he'd co-operated as the others did. But no co-operation/no admissions/no information = no leniency.

That's why he's been treated differently from the others.

Monkeypump

Richmond Racer wrote:

The others went and talked to the nice people at USADA. They co-operated, and provided witness statements and testimonies. This was taken into account when their bans and results to be forfeit, were decided by USADA.

Lance was given the same opportunity. He refused it. According to Tygart, he could have kept his 04 and 05 Tour wins if he'd co-operated as the others did. But no co-operation/no admissions/no information = no leniency.

That's why he's been treated differently from the others.

So USADA is zero-tolerance, but there are deals to be done?

Rhetorical question, of course. I know it's naive to think otherwise, but that stinks.

Richmond Racer

Monkeypump wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

The others went and talked to the nice people at USADA. They co-operated, and provided witness statements and testimonies. This was taken into account when their bans and results to be forfeit, were decided by USADA.

Lance was given the same opportunity. He refused it. According to Tygart, he could have kept his 04 and 05 Tour wins if he'd co-operated as the others did. But no co-operation/no admissions/no information = no leniency.

That's why he's been treated differently from the others.

So USADA is zero-tolerance, but there are deals to be done?

Rhetorical question, of course. I know it's naive to think otherwise, but that stinks.

Of course there are deals. It's standard practice. Offering a carrrot to someone to provide evidence (here we call it turning Queen's evidence, in criminal cases) is standard stuff. In the US, 90% of legal cases involve plea bargaining.

It's called incentivising.


Feeling Lance has been hard done-by?

EPO Delivery Man

Im fuming, business has dropped right off.

TMR

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

No salvo with The Mad rapper at all, genuine point on my behalf. Wasn't George Hincapie an American national champion ? If so and he doped shouldn't USADA be looking at taking that off him ? Just seems a selective rule they are using on certain athletes. Im not defending LA on this but the USADA method does seem biased in this regard.

I'm not sure if the replies above this fully answered your question, but simply put he was allowed to turn witness and provided information in exchange for immunity from prosecution. Think of a Mafia type trial where the lower ranked mobsters give evidence against the Don and it's pretty much the same scenario.

Pross

EPO Delivery Man wrote:

Im fuming, business has dropped right off.

Plenty of business still if you are prepared to move to Spain or Eastern Europe.

thomthom

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Seems there is a lot of vitriol over LA and doping which I fully understand. What I don't get is that if you have a slightly different views or opinion from the majority, seems people get caned for it. Now I know posting on a public forum you are asking for the subject to be opened completely, just saying that when people on the forum say LA bullied and intimidated other people through his careerand that one of the reasons we hate him, are they themselves bullying and intimidating posters who offer a different take on LA.

Only asking through my experience on here, I know people will post on this and show me where I am wrong, but I am genuinely interested in a bit of retrospective viewing of the posting trends on this subject.

Is this thread based on this?

ThomThom wrote:

Incredible that some people still have to be enlighted why exactly this guy is a tiny bit worse than everyone else. At least on a forum about pro cycling.

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

No not incredible, just a different viewpoint, that is all. People are allowed to have differing opinions y'know.

ThomThom wrote:

So basically your viewpoint is that bullying and threatening isn't relevant?
Yes, it's incredible.
Incredibly ignorant.

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Nope, Ive read a lot about the LA doping affair, follwed the web and news about it and come to my conclusions. He isn't some despot or tyrant responsible for massive crimes. He just took drugs to make him cycle faster and covered it up, not the crime of the century, dissapointing and pointless in the long run, yes.

Thing is, I really, really wanted him not to have doped and was gutted when I realised he had and on such a massive scale. Placing some perspective on it though, he won't compete again, he has been outed and I doubt after this he will mean much to anyone. Such a shame all round really. Not good when your heroes are flawed, but getting angry and malicious is not going to change what has gone down. Lighten up and move on please.

ThomThom wrote:

No one really cares that he doped. We can live with that. That's not the real issue (which you seem to ignore yet again.)

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

No one cares that he doped. That's not the issue (which you seem to ignore yet again.)

Not getting you on this one. Please stop with all the anger at me, I know he doped and I hate it and so do plenty of other people. You seem like a bitter little man, hating a person you do not know personally, hasn't really affected your life and you seem to be hell bent on foisting your opinion on others no matter their opinion, viewpoint and own conclusions. Get some perspective and leave it.

So somehow I ended up as a bitter (btw - who was it that used that word over and over again... hmm.. 'bitter'.. hmm.. Was is a masseuse..? No..no, can't think of anyone...) bullying, intimidating poster against people with different viewpoints on the subject. The ironic thing is.. bullying and intimidating are the exact words you kept ignoring when describring Lance and why he wasn't 'that bad' of a guy...

And you talk about 'perspective'?

Okay, then...

EKIMIKE

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

The only thing I still see as unfair or biased is the likes of other riders who have admitted doping and lost no old achievements, the one rider who immediately fits this is George Hincapie...

Wrong. All results voided from May 31st 2004 to July 31st 2006, including probably his greatest achievement - that Tour mountain stage:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hin ... mar.C3.A8s

I just don't understand why people are aggrieved that LA got a bigger ban than his team mates. Plea bargains are standard practice across the world. He chose to refuse the plea bargain. What did you expect the result to be?

I think i agree with the sentiment that nobody cares he doped or any of the other for that matter. We know it was a tainted generation. These are just the biggest names and last people to get caught or admit it. What people care about is the rest of it, inter alia:

-The law suits;
-The lying under oath;
-The abuse of other riders;
-And most of all the continued disregard for others in the Oprah interview.

deejay

Bozman wrote:

It is all a little over the top, the bloke was one of many but it's his attitude that seems to wind folk up.
Just give him the same length of ban as the rest but let the legal teams deal with the rest, that'll be punishment enough.

What again, so hear goes. :!:
Heard the Texan in 1994 whinging to his mechanics that "Nobody recognised him".
Now you say the bloke was one of many and I say he wanted to be the No 1 "Celebrity racing cyclist and he went farther than any other to achieve the Worldwide No 1 status. (pretty good on 7/8 weeks in Europe cherry picking)

Read the USADA verdict in that they say he ran the greatest systematised doping culture ever known and I (who the hell am I) agree with their complete Ban. :twisted:

dmclite-3.0

ThomThom wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Seems there is a lot of vitriol over LA and doping which I fully understand. What I don't get is that if you have a slightly different views or opinion from the majority, seems people get caned for it. Now I know posting on a public forum you are asking for the subject to be opened completely, just saying that when people on the forum say LA bullied and intimidated other people through his careerand that one of the reasons we hate him, are they themselves bullying and intimidating posters who offer a different take on LA.

Only asking through my experience on here, I know people will post on this and show me where I am wrong, but I am genuinely interested in a bit of retrospective viewing of the posting trends on this subject.

Is this thread based on this?

ThomThom wrote:

Incredible that some people still have to be enlighted why exactly this guy is a tiny bit worse than everyone else. At least on a forum about pro cycling.

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

No not incredible, just a different viewpoint, that is all. People are allowed to have differing opinions y'know.

ThomThom wrote:

So basically your viewpoint is that bullying and threatening isn't relevant?
Yes, it's incredible.
Incredibly ignorant.

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

Nope, Ive read a lot about the LA doping affair, follwed the web and news about it and come to my conclusions. He isn't some despot or tyrant responsible for massive crimes. He just took drugs to make him cycle faster and covered it up, not the crime of the century, dissapointing and pointless in the long run, yes.

Thing is, I really, really wanted him not to have doped and was gutted when I realised he had and on such a massive scale. Placing some perspective on it though, he won't compete again, he has been outed and I doubt after this he will mean much to anyone. Such a shame all round really. Not good when your heroes are flawed, but getting angry and malicious is not going to change what has gone down. Lighten up and move on please.

ThomThom wrote:

No one really cares that he doped. We can live with that. That's not the real issue (which you seem to ignore yet again.)

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

No one cares that he doped. That's not the issue (which you seem to ignore yet again.)

Not getting you on this one. Please stop with all the anger at me, I know he doped and I hate it and so do plenty of other people. You seem like a bitter little man, hating a person you do not know personally, hasn't really affected your life and you seem to be hell bent on foisting your opinion on others no matter their opinion, viewpoint and own conclusions. Get some perspective and leave it.

So somehow I ended up as a bitter (btw - who was it that used that word over and over again... hmm.. 'bitter'.. hmm.. Was is a masseuse..? No..no, can't think of anyone...) bullying, intimidating poster against people with different viewpoints on the subject. The ironic thing is.. bullying and intimidating are the exact words you kept ignoring when describring Lance and why he wasn't 'that bad' of a guy...

And you talk about 'perspective'?

Okay, then...

And still you keep on.........meh. I give up because you and I seem to be diametrically opposed on this subject. can we please be done here ? sincerely I'm not taking the mick.

thomthom

I keep on?

You are the one making a thread about it when there are already like 20 Lance-threads this month alone!?

Richmond Racer

We need something like a doping confession to come along and break this up

Shouldnt have to wait too long, they're like buses at the moment

EKIMIKE

ThomThom wrote:

I keep on?

You are the one making a thread about it when there are already like 20 Lance-threads this months alone!?

Hate to say it. On the money.

pat1cp

Is systematised a word???

rob churchill

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

I just wanted to get peoples attention.

Sums up this thread nicely. Someone just wants attention.

Eddie72

Well, I'm not in a frothing rage, like most others on here I think it was clear what the truth was a long time ago.

I think there's a really positive message to be taken from recent events, which is that bad guys get caught and good guys can win in the end. It' s a sad truth that there are lots of Armstrongs in the world who bully their way to the top, so it's a really good message when someone like Emma O'Reilly, who has told the truth at great personal cost, finally gets recognition for doing the right thing.

Mikey23

Who?

Monkeypump

Richmond Racer wrote:

Feeling Lance has been hard done-by?

No - he made his bed, he has to lay in it. I do think Tygart's witch-hunt was ridiculous though. TBH, I think it's too early to say whether Lance has been hard done by - the story is far from over.

Sad to see that this thread has, however, inevitably spiralled into pointless squabling.

dmclite-3.0

rob churchill wrote:

dmclite-3.0 wrote:

I just wanted to get peoples attention.

Sums up this thread nicely. Someone just wants attention.

Cut and paste quotation on a frivolous thread title taken out of context.
I'm fed up, just trying to have a discussion on a different slant on here and like other posters have pointed out it has turned to squabbling, myself being very guilty of it straight away. Seems such an emotional and expolsive subject, i'm sorry i ventured on here and hacked so many of you off, didn't mean to it just turned out this way.

Bottom line for me, is I am really dissappointed he doped, lied and cheated everyone for so long on such a massive scale. hope it doesn't happen again but i feel cycling is endemic to doping and that may never change.
I'll leave you all alone now,