Lance Armstrong

[chester]

Did he do it? Probably

Did everybody do it? Probably

Has he ever had a positive test? No

Have we been told he's tested positive? Many times, though nobody has shown it

Has he gone through tons of scrutiny, legal action, money spent, investigations? Constantly

Would I finally tell everybody on my back to fark off at this point? Heck yeah!

 

Whatever he did, I just feel that it's been gone through so many times already that 'they' were just going to keep at it until he gave in.

 

Discuss

[nuke'em ttg]

no evidence...he injected Cheryl Crow, lucky basstard

[nuke'em ttg]

seriously how does he pass all those tests? i don't think the piston pumpin machine wood give in if he were innoscent, looks like he finally got right with himself and like ya say who really gives a chit

[Azazello1313]

Did he do it? Probably

Did everybody do it? Probably

Has he ever had a positive test? No

Have we been told he's tested positive? Many times, though nobody has shown it

Has he gone through tons of scrutiny, legal action, money spent, investigations? Constantly

Would I finally tell everybody on my back to fark off at this point? Heck yeah!

 

 

sums it up fairly well. it'll be interesting to see what he does from here now that he doesn't really have anything else to lose.

[nuke'em ttg]

Over Haulin show oughtta take their parts brack

[detlef]

Did he do it? Probably

Did everybody do it? Probably

Has he ever had a positive test? No

Have we been told he's tested positive? Many times, though nobody has shown it

Has he gone through tons of scrutiny, legal action, money spent, investigations? Constantly

Would I finally tell everybody on my back to fark off at this point? Heck yeah!

 

Whatever he did, I just feel that it's been gone through so many times already that 'they' were just going to keep at it until he gave in.

 

Discuss

 

I mentioned this in the Non-football sports thread about him.

 

As much as I'm pretty sure he doped, I do not like how this has "ended". It defies the entire notion of guilty until proven innocent.

 

There is absolutely nothing he could ever do to prove that he didn't do it, so this was never going to end. And, we can all guess, but none of us truly know.

 

However, now the accusers are claiming victory and that's that.

[Pope Flick]

Do his performances seen extreme? Yes but who hasn't failed a drug test besides him? if he'd been doping all these years what did he know or do the scores of others did not?

Edited August 24, 2012 by Pope Flick

[Chief Dick]

Did he do it? Probably

Did everybody do it? Probably

Has he ever had a positive test? No

Have we been told he's tested positive? Many times, though nobody has shown it

Has he gone through tons of scrutiny, legal action, money spent, investigations? Constantly

Would I finally tell everybody on my back to fark off at this point? Heck yeah!

 

Whatever he did, I just feel that it's been gone through so many times already that 'they' were just going to keep at it until he gave in.

 

Discuss

 

 

Pretty much how I feel about it.

[gilthorp]

What's really going to blow is in about 6 years, he's going to want to dig it all up again to once and for all prove he's innocent. We haven't heard the last from him on this.

[detlef]

What's really going to blow is in about 6 years, he's going to want to dig it all up again to once and for all prove he's innocent. We haven't heard the last from him on this.

 

But there's nothing for him to dig up. The only time you can ever prove you didn't do something was if it was a specific crime that took place at a specific time and place and you can prove you were nowhere near there at the time or something.

 

You can't prove you didn't, at some point, take a drug. The closest thing you can do is get tested all the freaking time and never fail. Which he's done.

[Clubfoothead]

Ironically, the Tour de France is probably not going to strip him of any titles because they can't find anyone clean to vacate those titles to, correct?

 

Lance Armstrong has done a ton for cancer research. He seems like a pompus dick. I have never thought he was clean because his story doesn't pass the smell test. He overcomes aggressive cancer to win 7 tour de frances when everyone he is competing against is all roided out or shooting HGH or rubbing cream? And I am supposed to believe he did it clean? Please...

 

I am not a means justifying the ends guy but given the amount of money Lance Armstrong has generated for legit cancer research that would not have happened had he not won them races, I'll cut him a wide latitude. Flawed or not, he is still in the + column in my book.

[cre8tiff]

Guilty until proven innocent results in a lot more convictions. It's a terrible way to run a sport, though.

 

If I were a fan of some cyclist that was shoved into historical irrelevence because Armstrong raved, I may think differently.

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

I must admit to being pretty conflicted on this issue.

Lance Armstrong is a di(k. He says so in his autobiography, his dealing with Cheryl Crow seems to reinforce that, and my one encounter with him in a Marfa Texas restaurant that my friend owns certainly doesn't dispell that notion (it was also weird to see a grown man with 2 20 year old bimbos trying to impress them). But his personal struggles with cancer, and how he has dedicated himself to that cause are more than laudable, and make him an extraordinary man (btw I can not recommend his autobiography 'It's not about the bike' enough)

There is no doubt in my mind that he cheated, as did a gazillion other riders in his era, and strangely, and I know I am opening myself up for a rebuke here, if he had won 3 or 4 tours it wouldn't bother me as much as it does. It is very similar to the McGuire Sosa home rune race; everyone loves it until a sacred record gets beaten. The Tour is almost as old as MLB, and as opposed to MLB has only one record that counts: titles. Lance won the one title that counts while doping (at least in my mind it is clear). The Tour is also like MLB in so much that it is so unchanged that we THINK we can compare the athletes of yore to todays talent (which btw is totally insane. Many people talk about baseball as if Mickey Mantle or Babe Ruth could play in today's league just fine, which is of course preposterous) and like all middle aged people I find myself finding the athletes of yore preferable.

Though the USADA does seem to have a strong case against him (and I don't want to hear it being dismissed as 'it's all circumstantial', after all, if you have 10 eyewitnesses to a crime, odds are that the guy being fingered will be found guilty) I don't thik Lance is wrong in saying that the USADA has a hard on for nailing him, as of today the USADA is claiming that he is to be stripped of his 7 titles, and as far as I am concerned that is not their call to make, and makes them look like the douches they are being portrayed as by Lance.

Of course, should he be stripped of his titles that means that a bevvy of past dopers will all of a sudden be crowned (hellllloooo Jan Ullrich) so I don't see anything good coming from this.

Anywho, this all reminds me that the tour used to be one of those magical moments for me as a kid that just totally lost it's magic for me once I reached my thirties due to all of the doping scandals. It just makes me sad.

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

haven't posted in so long here that I don't know how to edit my posts anymore. Just a nod to Club and Cre8 who posted similar thoughts to my own as I was slowly typing

[tazinib1]

Could care less. Rotten husband and boyfriend....I have no respect for him what-so-ever. I just hope his next flame doesn't come down with cancer. He'll be outta their faster than he can bike a time trial.

[detlef]

Guilty until proven innocent results in a lot more convictions. It's a terrible way to run a sport, though.

 

If I were a fan of some cyclist that was shoved into historical irrelevence because Armstrong raved, I may think differently.

 

Eddie Merckx and Bernard Hinault are the only who come to mind because he eclipsed their record of titles, but neither is remotely in danger of being shoved into irrelevence among the fans of the sport. So, I don't think that's an issue.

 

Indurain won a bunch in a row, but he's certainly got the cloud of doping over his head as well.

[muck]

The problem is bigger than cycling, or sports itself. The problem is that some people have a real problem with anyone else succeeding, and will go to all sorts of lengths to tear down the one who does succeed.

 

And, if you didn't know the USADA is tax-payer funded ... we paid for this never-ending crusade against a guy who never failed a drug test. I have a hard time thinking that is a good use of our resources at any time, much less now.

 

Oh, and also if you didn't remember, he was a phenomenal tri-athlete before dedicating himself to cycling. IIRC, he was tested when he was a teenager regarding his body's ability to process oxygen, and his scores were among the 5-6 highest scores ever recorded. It's not like this is some guy who got out of his 18-wheeler and decided to be a world class athlete via injections (etc.)...

 

Statement by Lance Armstrong (if you've not read it) ==> http://lancearmstrong.com/news-events/lance-armstongs-statement-of-august-23-2012

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

The problem is bigger than cycling, or sports itself. The problem is that some people have a real problem with anyone else succeeding, and will go to all sorts of lengths to tear down the one who does succeed.

 

 

 

Frankly that sounds like a bit of a right wing political sound bite that isn't warranted here.

I have a problem with Ben Johnson winning a gold medal while doped to the gills, I have a problem with Bernie Maddof making a fortune while defrauding his investors, I have a problem with a scrabble player keeping a couple of blank tiles in his pocket to win.

While I certainly respect anyone's opinion that Lance did not cheat, as it is not an open and shut case, the issue is not 'success envy' here. The issue is cheating.

[detlef]

Frankly that sounds like a bit of a right wing political sound bite that isn't warranted here.

I have a problem with Ben Johnson winning a gold medal while doped to the gills, I have a problem with Bernie Maddof making a fortune while defrauding his investors, I have a problem with a scrabble player keeping a couple of blank tiles in his pocket to win.

While I certainly respect anyone's opinion that Lance did not cheat, as it is not an open and shut case, the issue is not 'success envy' here. The issue is cheating.

 

Well said

[paulzale]

Well said

 

Frankly that sounds like a bit of a right wing political sound bite that isn't warranted here.

I have a problem with Ben Johnson winning a gold medal while doped to the gills, I have a problem with Bernie Maddof making a fortune while defrauding his investors, I have a problem with a scrabble player keeping a couple of blank tiles in his pocket to win.

While I certainly respect anyone's opinion that Lance did not cheat, as it is not an open and shut case, the issue is not 'success envy' here. The issue is cheating.

 

Isn't the issue proving he cheated? In my mind he took banned substances, but nearly every rider did because there weren't repiable test to check for EPO back then, now there are. He passed tests of the time and that should be enough.

 

Why the witch hunt?

 

I think the guy is a JELLY BEAN and can't stand him, but am amazed by his athleticism and it is cool to see him back at triathlons. Doping or not, he should be respected as an elite level athlete!

[Pope Flick]

Part of the issue is condemning without any physical evidence whatsoever.

[detlef]

Isn't the issue proving he cheated? In my mind he took banned substances, but nearly every rider did because there weren't repiable test to check for EPO back then, now there are. He passed tests of the time and that should be enough.

 

Why the witch hunt?

 

I think the guy is a JELLY BEAN and can't stand him, but am amazed by his athleticism and it is cool to see him back at triathlons. Doping or not, he should be respected as an elite level athlete!

 

I think the issue that Dr. has with what Muck said. Well, at least it's the issue I have, is the implied motive. That, we simply can't stand the fact that someone is great, so we just have to break them down. I was thrilled that Armstrong was housing the tour. I would really rather believe that he did so cleanly.

 

I think the motive is, it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, so there were some guys hell-bent on proving it's a duck.

 

Now, if you can't prove it, you can't prove it, and at some point you've got to move on. But implying that it was some deep-seated hatred of greatness seems to go too far.

Edited August 24, 2012 by detlef

[Azazello1313]

I know I am opening myself up for a rebuke here, if he had won 3 or 4 tours it wouldn't bother me as much as it does. It is very similar to the McGuire Sosa home rune race; everyone loves it until a sacred record gets beaten. The Tour is almost as old as MLB, and as opposed to MLB has only one record that counts: titles. Lance won the one title that counts while doping (at least in my mind it is clear).

 

that is a good point (and a great post overall). I have to say though...mcguire/sosa/bonds dethroned roger maris and hank aaron. I don't know that there is any suspicion whatsoever that those guys ever cheated in any meaningful way. lance dethroned who? eddie merckx who actually tested positive for doping on three seperate occasions? jacques anquetil, a confessed doper? doping in cycling is as old as the sport itself.

 

so I guess I just don't know how "sacred" any of the records and milestones in cycling have ever been.

[Chavez]

Eddie Merckx and Bernard Hinault are the only who come to mind because he eclipsed their record of titles, but neither is remotely in danger of being shoved into irrelevence among the fans of the sport. So, I don't think that's an issue.

 

Indurain won a bunch in a row, but he's certainly got the cloud of doping over his head as well.

 

 

Yeah, Merckx is still the yardstick....even after 7 GT wins, I don't think I've often heard Armstrong mentioned in the same breath as Merckx.

 

 

As for Hinault, if Lance ever does this on people interrupting his bike race....http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IzfJIejpFlM/TiZQpmkFjtI/AAAAAAAABwU/Rr_bZst9Avo/s660/Hinault-punch-PINP-1.jpg ...then we can start talking.

[Chavez]

I think the issue that Dr. has with what Muck said. Well, at least it's the issue I have, is the implied motive. That, we simply can't stand the fact that someone is great, so we just have to break them down. I was thrilled that Armstrong was housing the tour. I would really rather believe that he did so cleanly.

 

I think the motive is, it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, so there were some guys hell-bent on proving it's a duck.

 

Now, if you can't prove it, you can't prove it, and at some point you've got to move on. But implying that it was some deep-seated hatred of greatness seems to go too far.

 

 

 

Maybe muck is in the midst of a re-read of the Collected Works of Ayn Rand.