Armstrong Lie

kleinstroker

Richmond Racer wrote:

kleinstroker wrote:

Ferrari is a genius, a naughty naughty genius, he revolutionized modern cycling. I would like to see a film about him.

the man helped to grossly mutate an entire generation of bike racing

I'm not sure that 'naughty' is the adjective I'd use

He's not evil though is he, though that was my first thought... misguided certainly. But he also brought about a revolution in cycling, his advice to LA in the 2009 season to up his cadence to shift the work from his muscles to his lungs was sheer genius and has allowed those that followed to benefit from that.

ddraver

Rick Chasey wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Anyone in London fancy watching this? On at the odean by Piccadilly Circus on Sat night - 8:30

Guess that is a no?

Sorry buddy.

The Odeon on Panton Street is quite a nice place to see it though, proper old skool

TMR

I'm just watching the last few minutes of this now. My initial thoughts are quite mixed. I feel really disappointed. When I started to become really interested in Pro Cycling, Lance was at the top of his game and I completely bought into the story. I bought the books, watched the interviews like the man was a God. How gullible was I?

I think the thing that makes me feel the most 'sad' about the whole affair is that I feel my innocence (is that the right word? I hope you'll understand what I mean) has been brutally ripped away. I am unable to watch an amazing attack now and not wonder. I take everything with a pinch of salt and am just so cynical towards the sport, which is a real challenge for me because I still love it so much.

I guess the mental tide started to turn when you start watching guys that Lance used to beat getting spanked for failed controls and you logically think 'How can Lance beat convicted dopers if he's clean?' I know Paul Kimmage has a mixed reputation, but I bought Rough Ride and read that and it changed my perception of life inside the Peleton.

It was interesting watching the documentary, because I really struggled to reconcile the Lance that visited the children's Cancer hospital with Lance the racer. I think the former was as honest and unmanufactured as I have ever seen him. Genuine, nice and caring. I found myself thinking 'Oh FFS Lance you arse, why did you have to dope?'.

As others have alluded, my beloved George didn't come out of it well either. I didn't expect him to, but still

When the investigation broke I did want him to go down in a ball of fire, but the documentary has softened that view now. What he did was wrong, there are no excuses. The way he tried to cover it up and the way he hurt former friends and colleagues to do that is shameful. Was he the only one? No he wasn't. Was he the best at it? Yes he was. I'm still trying to settle how I feel about him and what he did now, because my position has changed, but I don't feel comfortable now pinning him to the cross alone. I'd like to see someone get to the bottom of Verbruggen's complicity as well.

dish_dash

TMR wrote:

I'm just watching the last few minutes of this now. My initial thoughts are quite mixed. I feel really disappointed. When I started to become really interested in Pro Cycling, Lance was at the top of his game and I completely bought into the story. I bought the books, watched the interviews like the man was a God. How gullible was I?

I think the thing that makes me feel the most 'sad' about the whole affair is that I feel my innocence (is that the right word? I hope you'll understand what I mean) has been brutally ripped away. I am unable to watch an amazing attack now and not wonder. I take everything with a pinch of salt and am just so cynical towards the sport, which is a real challenge for me because I still love it so much.

I guess the mental tide started to turn when you start watching guys that Lance used to beat getting spanked for failed controls and you logically think 'How can Lance beat convicted dopers if he's clean?' I know Paul Kimmage has a mixed reputation, but I bought Rough Ride and read that and it changed my perception of life inside the peloton.

It was interesting watching the documentary, because I really struggled to reconcile the Lance that visited the children's Cancer hospital with Lance the racer. I think the former was as honest and unmanufactured as I have ever seen him. Genuine, nice and caring. I found myself thinking 'Oh FFS Lance you ars*, why did you have to dope?'.

As others have alluded, my beloved George didn't come out of it well either. I didn't expect him to, but still

When the investigation broke I did want him to go down in a ball of fire, but the documentary has softened that view now. What he did was wrong, there are no excuses. The way he tried to cover it up and the way he hurt former friends and colleagues to do that is shameful. Was he the only one? No he wasn't. Was he the best at it? Yes he was. I'm still trying to settle how I feel about him and what he did now, because my position has changed, but I don't feel comfortable now pinning him to the cross alone. I'd like to see someone get to the bottom of Verbruggen's complicity as well.

I hear you... have you read Wheelmen? It casts US Cycling (Ochowicz and co) and the guys behind Tailwind (Weisel etc ) in a pretty poor light as well.

kleinstroker

Pretty much sums up my feelings, LA was at the centre of a very large well organised doping ecosystem. Hein Verbruggen wanted the Armstrong story and was prepared to do almost anything to help LA keep avoiding being caught, tailwind as investors in us postal certainly knew what was happening, johan Bruyneel must have been complicit as well.
The livestrong foundation no doubt has helped thousands through cancer so cannot be forgotten, and that would not have existed without the LA story.
Looking back over the past 60 years of cycling almost every big name cyclist without exception, doped. Singling out Lance armstrong as the devil just seems a bit petulant to be honest. Everyone really did do it.

ddraver

TMR wrote:

I think the thing that makes me feel the most 'sad' about the whole affair is that I feel my innocence (is that the right word? I hope you'll understand what I mean) has been brutally ripped away. I am unable to watch an amazing attack now and not wonder. I take everything with a pinch of salt and am just so cynical towards the sport, which is a real challenge for me because I still love it so much.

I'm not sure if this needs to go in a Pantani or Armstrong thread but...

I can't remember if it was Friebe or Bernie that said it but I think that's an interesting point with all the Pantani Love ins going on at the moment. He said that the 98 Giro was the last time anyone watched a GT with any innocence about the realities of Pro cycling. After that the Festina Scandal happened and from then on every performance was tainted by a degree, however small or large, of suspicion.

Whatever I think about him I do believe that they were in a position of dope or go home and that the people that put them there were the likes of Pantani and the Italian Doping Doctors.

I also don't buy the stuff about a Tour of Renewal either, if USPS hadnt doped, somebody else would have started and we'd have ended up in the same place just with a different looking Wicker Man...

mike6

kleinstroker wrote:

Pretty much sums up my feelings, LA was at the centre of a very large well organised doping ecosystem. Hein Verbruggen wanted the Armstrong story and was prepared to do almost anything to help LA keep avoiding being caught, tailwind as investors in us postal certainly knew what was happening, johan Bruyneel must have been complicit as well.
The livestrong foundation no doubt has helped thousands through cancer so cannot be forgotten, and that would not have existed without the LA story.
Looking back over the past 60 years of cycling almost every big name cyclist without exception, doped. Singling out Lance armstrong as the devil just seems a bit petulant to be honest. Everyone really did do it.

Did it though? I heard it was only to "Raise the awareness of cancer" (and Armstrong himself) and that seems a strange motive when you consider how many people were not aware of it before Mr Armstrong's illness.
I also read that most of the money was used to fund the foundation offices and staff, and to fund helicopter trips around the states for Armstrong and his cronies, little was used for research.

iainf72

mike6 wrote:

I also read that most of the money was used to fund the foundation offices and staff, and to fund helicopter trips around the states for Armstrong and his cronies, little was used for research.

To be fair, they never said they were funding research. It was more about support and advise. All quite important stuff, especially in the US Health Care system.

I was thinking about the ProCycling interview in 08 when we (the forum) upset Lance. I remember my first question was along the lines of what happens to the charity longer term when his comeback was about increasing the awareness. I guess he didn't consider the comeback would effectively destroy the charity.

LutherB

iainf72 wrote:

mike6 wrote:

I also read that most of the money was used to fund the foundation offices and staff, and to fund helicopter trips around the states for Armstrong and his cronies, little was used for research.

To be fair, they never said they were funding research. It was more about support and advise. All quite important stuff, especially in the US Health Care system.

I was thinking about the ProCycling interview in 08 when we (the forum) upset Lance. I remember my first question was along the lines of what happens to the charity longer term when his comeback was about increasing the awareness. I guess he didn't consider the comeback would effectively destroy the charity.

Interesting article here on the research/awareness confusion:

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-ad ... l?page=all

Crankbrother

Watched the docu. and it didn't really do anything for me ... Just a lot of the same noise we've read about before ...

Frankie came off quite well and it comes across that Betsy is the driving force behind their negativity ... I noticed she was also the only wife/partner hanging around in footage of the early US Postal days ... Maybe likes the spotlight?

Vaughters also did himself no favours ... Even admits he kept silent so he and his team could stay in the sport ...

dennisn

Crankbrother wrote:

Watched the docu. and it didn't really do anything for me ... Just a lot of the same noise we've read about before ...

Frankie came off quite well and it comes across that Betsy is the driving force behind their negativity ... I noticed she was also the only wife/partner hanging around in footage of the early US Postal days ... Maybe likes the spotlight?

Vaughters also did himself no favours ... Even admits he kept silent so he and his team could stay in the sport ...

Aren't most documentaries really slanted one way or the other? If the filmmaker decides he can have a more profitable, watchable, film making someone look bad or good then the truth be d*mned. Everything in media is edited(even twisted - if you will) to suit the purpose of the people putting it together. Generally that purpose is money. Truth is most likely on the cutting room floor because it's probably too boring to sell.

napoleond

It's on YouTube here, grab it while you can!!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=yout ... 3Dyoutu.be

Richmond Racer

NapoleonD wrote:

It's on YouTube here, grab it while you can!!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=yout ... 3Dyoutu.be

Oooh bootleg - the best type

above_the_cows

Oh god I've just watched the first 1 and a half minutes and I'd forgotten how 'hypnotic' the man is while underneath it all he's just an empty vessel. I'm not sure even Lance knows who the real Lance is.

Ugh I feel a bit violated.

Richmond Racer

Above The Cows wrote:

Oh god I've just watched the first 1 and a half minutes and I'd forgotten how 'hypnotic' the man is while underneath it all he's just an empty vessel. I'm not sure even Lance knows who the real Lance is.

Ugh I feel a bit violated.

Skip along to the scene where Bruyneel loses it when Bert attacks - it'll cheer you up, honestly

Crankbrother

Folks keep saying that, but he just acted like he'd forgotten to use his nectar card at Sainsbury ...

Richmond Racer

Crankbrother wrote:

Folks keep saying that, but he just acted like he'd forgotten to use his nectar card at Sainsbury ...

Ok. What did it register on the Crank-o-meter?

Crankbrother

4/10

takethehighroad

NapoleonD wrote:

It's on YouTube here, grab it while you can!!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=yout ... 3Dyoutu.be

Thanks for this, just finished watching.

I don't want to over analyse, 'cos it's late and I need some time to digest what I've watched, but I think it's important for cycling fans to watch it, to really understand what the sport has been for the last 20 years or so.

My favourite parts were the " behind the scenes" footage mixed with archived stuff. So Bruyneel saying on the team bus to support Contador and Lance, and then having a hissy fit when Contador attacks, is absolutely mind bendingly good/interesting/epic (*delete as appropriate).

RichN95.

Well I had a look. Not that revealing really. These are some random thoughts:

The thing that most interested me was putting faces to names, mostly journalists, although I never really knew what Simeoni looked like.

There was a more interesting Armstrong v Contador film trying to get out. (Less interesting to the general public though).

Why weren't their subtitles for the very small bits in foreign - mostly Bruyneel & Simeoni?

Drug testers come in all shapes and sizes. UCI send retired Germans, USADA send 20 stone black men. It struck me that drug testing might be a nice vocation for a retired couple. A nice bit of travel all paid for.

Hincapie has got some flak, but I thought he was just straight talking in a matter of fact way. He didn't really seem to be working an angle to me.

If Gary Imlach kicks Gibney in the balls next time he sees him then fair enough. He was never a cheerleader.

If I had to spend an evening in the company of Michele Ferrari or Betsy Andreu I would chose Ferrari every time.

dennisn

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

It's on YouTube here, grab it while you can!!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=yout ... 3Dyoutu.be

Thanks for this, just finished watching.

I don't want to over analyse, 'cos it's late and I need some time to digest what I've watched, but I think it's important for cycling fans to watch it, to really understand what the sport has been for the last 20 years or so.

The makers of this film set out to do one thing. Make something that would make them money. They had two ways to go with the subject matter. One, make everyone look like feel good, heroic bike riders(and most likely not sell a single ticket). Or two, make cycling seem all nasty, dirty, full of druggies, and low lifes(and that's what sells the tickets). If you believe what you're watching is anything approaching reality then I've got some good swamp land and something called London Bridge to sell you. :roll: :roll:

gmb

I know how I should feel. I know how I actually feel. That footage of "the look" and of Pantani/vonteaux 2000 still brings a lump to my throat.

Hamilton is still my all-time favourite rider.

I hope cycling is clean but accept it's not. Is it better to just give up or hope for the best?

Ignore me - I'm drunk and feeling maudlin after watching the documentary.

PS. Thanks for the link.

ddraver

RichN95 wrote:

Why weren't their subtitles for the very small bits in foreign - mostly Bruyneel & Simeoni?

Cos you re a filthy pirate who steals handbags from old ladies and money form gret philanthropic organisations like the movie companies! Leftie liberal hippy Douche! (there were in the cinema)

PS Dennis - shut up now eh? you ve tried and failed to convince us you were nt a fanboi, it's getting tiresome now.

above_the_cows

Johan Bruyneel gives me the creeps.

Le Commentateur

I think I'm going to wait until a venue puts this on as a double-bill with the Pantani film.

Paulie W

I could see how someone relatively fresh to the whole story would get much more out of it than those of us who have been immersed in it for the last 15+ years - the Andreu stuff felt very stale and for me some of the stuff at the margins was more interesting such as the Contador-Armstrong rivalry, Ferrari's personality, the tactics in 2009. But I thought it was a pretty mediocre documentary in its own right regardless of the story being told. The structure was all over the place; it didnt have an obvious narrative which was perhaps deliberate but made it feel a bit like a string of clips and interviews - some of them admittedly very good - rather than a coherent whole at times.

napoleond

I've not watched it yet, planning a couple of hours on the rollers either tonight or tomorrow.

dennisn

ddraver wrote:

PS Dennis - shut up now eh?

Heh heh. Make me! Sorry, couldn't resist. :oops:

disgruntledgoat

Gah, bookmarked it to watch tonight and it's gone now. What a gip.

napoleond

Doh! I have a friend of a friend that downloaded it from youtube using tube downloader.., I don't know him...