Armstrong drops case against David Walsh & LA Confidentiel book

[meehs]

That's what I heard. The source? Some guy.

Let me put out this disclaimer: It's all hearsay. Just some guy spouting off and I sincerely hope this disclaimer helps restore some of my good karma for throwing out unfounded bs on Levi, because, here's my half-baked theory on why I think it MIGHT be one of the thousand explanations for what I saw yesterday and the days previous ref. Levi's performance:

When I saw him cross the line in the -- what was it? stage 7? -- ITT, the look on his face was not that of a tired or sick man, it was one of disgust. His color looked fine, his technique looked good, but he just looked ******, like he got halfway through with a 50th-place time check and just said f_ck this. The mountains he looked the same way.

But yesterday, on OLN, they showed some footage of Levi before the start of the stage. Now, I don't know this guy and have never seen him race, so maybe he's always cocky, but I know when I get my ass handed to me a couple days in a row, the next stage or race I go to, I'm not feeling all that confident. In fact, I'll hide out until just before the field rolls off. But there he was, standing next to Zabriski before the start and looking like he was the king of everything he saw. He even handed Zabriski his hat so he could change his jersey and it was like, "Here, take this *****." Z-boy gave it to some kid in the crowd. Nice move.

I've never done a GT -- done more than a few G&Ts -- but I've done about a dozen six-day stage races and a three 12-day deals down in S. America. I got sick toward the end of one of those 12-dayers and I was lucky to finish. In fact, if our team car had been air conditioned, I wouldn't have. Point is, in my experience, one doesn't get sick in the middle of a stage race and then get better the next day unless someone pays a late-night visit to your hotel room with that special package you've been waiting for.

But, that said, I'm not a world class stage racer, so maybe they do recover like that.

Yeah, Levi really did have a remarkable turn-around yesterday in comparison to his previous performances in this year's TdF. But it's all speculation as far as the reason for it. Although I'm not surprised that the doping rumors have started. I will say that it's not unprecedented for a rider to have such a turn-around though. There have been other riders that came back from really bad days in the TdF. Of course I'm at a loss to site a specific example.

 

[Mansmind]

Yeah, Levi really did have a remarkable turn-around yesterday in comparison to his previous performances in this year's TdF. But it's all speculation as far as the reason for it. Although I'm not surprised that the doping rumors have started. I will say that it's not unprecedented for a rider to have such a turn-around though. There have been other riders that came back from really bad days in the TdF. Of course I'm at a loss to site a specific example.

Basso last year, in the Giro however.

 

[tcklyde]

Yeah, Levi really did have a remarkable turn-around yesterday in comparison to his previous performances in this year's TdF. But it's all speculation as far as the reason for it. Although I'm not surprised that the doping rumors have started. I will say that it's not unprecedented for a rider to have such a turn-around though. There have been other riders that came back from really bad days in the TdF. Of course I'm at a loss to site a specific example.

What will really be interesting is to note who has big improvements after the rest day next week. If Hincapie (or Rujano or Pena or Gomez) suddenly wins on L'Alp d'Huez on Tuesday I think we will all be able to guess what he was doing on Monday.

 

[meehs]

What will really be interesting is to note who has big improvements after the rest day next week. If Hincapie (or Rujano or Pena or Gomez) suddenly wins on L'Alp d'Huez on Tuesday I think we will all be able to guess what he was doing on Monday.

Yeah, I'm afraid that would look a little suspicious. But look at what Popo already did today! Actually, I could see Azevedo doing something in the Alps. He hung with the lead group longer than any of the other Disco boys and he looked pretty good. Still... a suspiciously bad performance by Disco overall yesterday.

 

[mercurycu99]

From both Emma and her brother.

And .............Moderated.

 

[Bro Deal]

(People who lie in writing also lie speaking.)

This LA Times article shows that Armstrong's portrayal of the resolution of the case with SCA was a combination of lies, misleading statements, and spin control:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/cycli...9,0,7810733,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Comparing the facts of the case with Armstrong's statements about it, it is clear that nothing Armstrong says should be believed.

People who lie in writing also lie speaking, and no one has as much to gain by lying as Armstrong does.

 

[wolfix]

You need to point out those lies.

 

[mercurycu99]

This LA Times article shows that Armstrong's portrayal of the resolution of the case with SCA was a combination of lies, misleading statements, and spin control:

That LA Times article was a bunch of mud slinging **** and I wrote the editor and told him so as I cancelled my subscription. . Half truths and partial facts distotrded to give the same old tired anti Armstrong agenda like the French press rags. When the court despositiions are read in their entirety, the biased and distorted reporting sticks out likes sore thumb. Just another newspaper trying to makes the same old tired splash in the headlines at Tour time by spinning and distorting half truths.

Chrystie

 

[Bro Deal]

Half truths and partial facts distotrded to give the same old tired anti Armstrong agenda like the French press rags. When the court despositiions are read in their entirety, the biased and distorted reporting sticks out likes sore thumb.

An American newspaper obtained access to the case documents, and their unbiased story clearly shows that Lance Armstrong is a liar. All you have to go on is Armstrong's lies and selective release of case fragments.

Not only has he lied about the court rejecting charges of doping, misled the public into believing the extra $2.5M was for punative damages instead of interest and attorneys fees, and dissembled about how the case was settled, he also slandered Greg Lemond with allegations that have no foundation. By lying about Lemond, he showed that he has no reluctance about using lies to assassinate the character of anyone who opposes him. His side of the story about the Andreus and O'Reilly cannot be trusted.

 

[mercurycu99]

Deleted message : Moderated.

 

[helmutRoole2]

This baffles me…

That LA Times article was a bunch of mud slinging **** ...Half truths and partial facts distorted to give the same old tired anti Armstrong agenda like the French press rags. When the court dispositions are read in their entirety, the biased and distorted reporting sticks out likes sore thumb.

And not as bad, but still…

…their unbiased story clearly shows that Lance Armstrong is a liar.

I read the entire story and I could not reach a conclusion based on fact one way or the other.

On first read, in the first three graphs of the story, it seemed the reporter was taking aim at Lance, but on second read, it just seemed as though the reporter was unfamiliar with Armstrong's history because the rest of the story was balanced.

Without getting too bogged down in it, my problem with the first three graphs were the statements, "... modest personal stats..." and "..seemingly out of nowhere, Armstrong took control (of the Tour)...", neither of which are true. He was fourth at the worlds ITT, had a high placing at the Vuelta and world RR champions the year before. Plus, he won the Tour de Luxembourg, the Rheinland-Pfalz Rundfarht in Germany, and the Cascade Classic in Bend, Ore., USA that same year. All this in addition to earning a world road championship and a world cup win and several world cup podiums previously. He wasn't some hack as those statements imply.

Those graphs should have been re-written by the editor to include something like, "although he didn't come out of nowhere to win the Tour, his victory was surprising." That's a statement they can back up with facts.

Anyway, back to the issue, which is, how people perceive the inner workings of the media, particularly mainstream newspapers and magazines. I've worked as a reporter and editor for daily newspapers and weekly/monthly magazines around the USA and I've sat through hours of editorial meetings (called budgets) and I've never heard anyone say, "okay people, let's figure out how we can spin the news today." It doesn't happen.

Newspaper reporters and editors, once they rise to the level of LA Times -- and even before that -- are not biased. You're going to have to take my word on this. If they're biased, they get fired. It's a matter of ethics, which starts in J101 and in every college journalism class there after. If they're biased, and secretly grinding an ax in their reporting, it'll be obvious and the editor or publisher will give them the boot.

Don't get the news pages confused with op/ed pages. Anything goes on an op/ed page and that's why, on bigger newspapers, reporters and section editors don't write op/ed pieces. (side note: on NY Times newspapers, the op/ed office is separated from the rest of the newsroom). It's an obvious conflict of interest. Small town weekly newspapers, you'll see reporters and section editors writing op/ed pieces due to labor shortages, but it's still wrong. Bigger newspapers, it doesn't happen. Reporters report. They don't spin. If they have opinions, which they do, those opinions should not be perceivable to the reader.

Now, do reporters and editors make mistakes? All the time. And why? Because they're thinking about punching out, or they get bad information, or because they don't have a firm handle on the information or a grasp of the situation, like the case with LA Times. The newsroom is like any other work place. People make mistakes for a variety of reasons. When someone down at the Ford plant installs a part wrong, is that a conspiracy? Mistakes happen. People start thinking about punching out or they just get sloppy. There's no Rush Limbaugh or Air America media conspiracy going on. That's just a bunch of **** to sell radio advertising.

It's over simplification to believe that the reporters and editors for the LA Times have it in for Lance and that they're willing to prostitute their ethics so they can make money for their newspaper or work a book deal. Same thing with the French press. It's obvious jingoism to say that, just because Lance, an American, won the Tour, a French race, that the French media is out to get him (side note: they never went after LeMond). It makes me cringe when Lance alludes to that nonsense like he did` repeatedly at the ESPY awards last night. He's playing to jingoistic, none-thinking Americans because, really, aside from those in the cycling community, that's his fan base.

Now, about TV news. Look, if you get all your news-related information from the **** tube, you get what you get. TV news, by in large, caters to people of average intelligence, and in America, that means average folks encumbered with buying power. These people aren't thinking about the intricacies of world or sporting politics. They're thinking about what kind of golf clubs to buy or the color of their new kitchen cabinets or how much horsepower that new riding lawnmower has. They don't have time to get mired in details about two big fat messy wars much less whether LA doped.

Come on. Drop the media conspiracy ****.

 

[whiteboytrash]

Nice post and very well constructed citing references for each argument.

On this forum I have often asked posters to provide evidence that newspapers such as L’Equipe is a tabloid paper which just prints “****” or “whatever it likes” because they hate Lance and have been “out to get him”. I’m yet to see a post which has shown this is the case.

I find on this forum that its not the newspapers which have shown a contempt for the truth or to provide evidence for their stories but the posters themselves. Dismissal of well presented factual evidence as “tabloid” is a cop out. I have several copies of L’Equipe at home and they have always celebrated Armstrong’s victories as courageous and inspiring. When L’Equipe published the story on Armstrong’s EPO use in 1999 it was backed up the claims with evidence from a WADA approved laboratory, the UCI doping forms (signed by Armstrong himself) and substantial information from experts in the field. Therefore I saw no reason to class L’Equipe as tabloid, sensationalist or printing lies to bring down Armstrong. I have also read the LA Times article and would say the same of it. It was well researched, printed fact and indicated where the comments might have been hearsay or used of out of context.

It was nice to read a well considered, thoughtful response to the article. I was getting sick of the court room clichés used on this board that everything is a lie and conspiracy to bring down Lance. Surely the strange results in this years Tour is enough to exemplify that maybe these journalist might actually know something we don’t ?

It's over simplification to believe that the reporters and editors for the LA Times have it in for Lance and that they're willing to prostitute their ethics so they can make money for their newspaper or work a book deal. Same thing with the French press. It's obvious jingoism to say that, just because Lance, an American, won the Tour, a French race, that the French media is out to get him (side note: they never went after LeMond). It makes me cringe when Lance alludes to that nonsense like he didn't repeatedly at the ESPY awards last night. He's playing to jingoistic, none-thinking Americans because, really, aside from those in the cycling community, that's his fan base.

Now, about TV news. Look, if you get all your news-related information from the **** tube, you get what you get. TV news, by in large, caters to people of average intelligence, and in America, that means average folks encumbered with buying power. These people aren't thinking about the intricacies of world or sporting politics. They're thinking about what kind of golf clubs to buy or the color of their new kitchen cabinets or how much horsepower that new riding lawnmower has. They don't have time to get mired in details about two big fat messy wars much less whether LA doped.

Come on. Drop the media conspiracy ****.

 

[Mansmind]

Two good posts in a row, isn't that a record???


I think people on this forum, sometimes in jest.. sometimes in seriousness.. relay their own interpretations of an "article" biased by what they WANT them to say. If you don't take an objective view of what has been written, you many times miss the point of the story.