Is Armstrong a fraud and bully?

[CAMPYBOB]

From: CBC


Indurain also calls the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's case against Armstrong "strange," claiming its pursuit of the American was "without scruples."
The Spanish cyclist, writing in Saturday's Marca newspaper, says he isn't surprised Armstrong chose not to contest charges from USADA.


Da Big Mig must still be tired.

 

[limerickman]

Originally Posted by alienator .


How many races did Armstrong do in a year in addition to the TdF?

Armstrong never won the TDF.

/img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif

 

[hpearson]

Originally Posted by CAMPYBOB .

From: CBC


Indurain also calls the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's case against Armstrong "strange," claiming its pursuit of the American was "without scruples."
The Spanish cyclist, writing in Saturday's Marca newspaper, says he isn't surprised Armstrong chose not to contest charges from USADA.


Da Big Mig must still be tired.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iav-cWGJMz41pzafK8NywkmrgVPg?docId=CNG.f57961c5283e9342673162e0c8492940.751

Really, at this I think they all doped with whatever was available in their era. Indurain, Hinault, Lemond.........There is no reason to believe that any are clean. All it takes is one to start using and gain a competitive advantage and the rest fall like dominoes.

It certainly does not exonerate Armstrong but if there was an absolutely clean winner I think they would come out strong against what Lance did.

Ultimately what will kill Armstrong is not the pursuit of money or fame but at some point he looked at his reflection in the water and fell in love with what he saw.

 

[hpearson]

At the risk of pissing off the Alienator:

This is right on point.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/23/will-lance-armstrong-ever-fess-up-and-face-truth/

 

[danfoz]

Originally Posted by hpearson .

It certainly does not exonerate Armstrong but if there was an absolutely clean winner I think they would come out strong against what Lance did.

Clean or not, one winner did come out "strong" against Lance. Lemond.
ESP? Bona fide contention? old man sour grapes going out to the pasture? Only one guy will probably ever know.

 

[hpearson]

This is the final word on Armstrong for me!

http://Will Lance Armstrong ever fess up and face the truth? Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/23/will-lance-armstrong-ever-fess-up-and-face-truth/#ixzz2ABDXJ2oH

 

[limerickman]

Originally Posted by hpearson .

This is the final word on Armstrong for me!

http://Will Lance Armstrong ever fess up and face the truth? Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/23/will-lance-armstrong-ever-fess-up-and-face-truth/#ixzz2ABDXJ2oH

Pox News.

 

[nonns]

Yep very good article and accurate too you see said psychiatrist used the following word ...

Armstrong’s truth—and likely the driving force in his winning seven Tour de France titles while allegedly injecting himself with steroids and mainlining his own blood Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/23/will-lance-armstrong-ever-fess-up-and-face-truth/#ixzz2ADGXMRD4

Its one hell of a lot of damage for a set of allegations and there still lies the fundament of the problemo in my books. He may well have doped but tittle tattle and allegations prove it not so why then should the Armstrong face up to it or fess up to it.

• If he doesn't fess up to it and he has doped then he's an ****. But if he's doped he's an **** anyway.
• If he doesn't fess up to it and he hasn't doped then he's lost no more than he has already. Reversing the position from where it stands right now is probably an insurmountable hill to climb. Ultimately if he raced without cheating then he knows he's won and actually ultimately from that point of view thats all that really matters.
• If he does fess up to it and he has doped then he's just confirmed all the suspicions and at the end of the day everyone will still call him a cheat only he will have confirmed it. He will also be criticised for waiting so long to do so. Whats more he would probably open the floodgates for those looking to get there money back that much wider.
• [SIZE= 12px]If he doesn't fess up to it and he has doped then he still leaves a teensy weensy bit of room for doubt and perhaps holds the stable door wide open but not off the hinges (though these things are all a nit tenuous anyway).[/SIZE]

[SIZE= 12px]To me the staggering stupidity of this whole thing is that the they have really left him with only one choice which is to keep shtum and leave the teensiest bit of room for doubt.[/SIZE]

In the meantime we have Basso riding/Contadope riding and how many others all of whom have claimed to be mistakenly identified as dopers at some point in the past. They need to decide on a clear set of rules. Ensure that dopers have no place in the sport. Make the criteria clear and make it strict. Don't report on suspected doping (which only tarnishes reputations) but only on actual doping and then throw the book at the offender. I still believe very strongly that there should be an amnesty and from this point on anyone caught gets booted out of the sport (1 offence and you're done for). For a team 3 offences and you're done for.

 

[limerickman]

Originally Posted by nonns .

Yep very good article and accurate too you see said psychiatrist used the following word ...

Armstrong’s truth—and likely the driving force in his winning seven Tour de France titles while allegedly injecting himself with steroids and mainlining his own blood Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/23/will-lance-armstrong-ever-fess-up-and-face-truth/#ixzz2ADGXMRD4

Its one hell of a lot of damage for a set of allegations and there still lies the fundament of the problemo in my books. He may well have doped but tittle tattle and allegations prove it not so why then should the Armstrong face up to it or fess up to it.

• If he doesn't fess up to it and he has doped then he's an ****. But if he's doped he's an **** anyway.
• If he doesn't fess up to it and he hasn't doped then he's lost no more than he has already. Reversing the position from where it stands right now is probably an insurmountable hill to climb. Ultimately if he raced without cheating then he knows he's won and actually ultimately from that point of view thats all that really matters.
• If he does fess up to it and he has doped then he's just confirmed all the suspicions and at the end of the day everyone will still call him a cheat only he will have confirmed it. He will also be criticised for waiting so long to do so. Whats more he would probably open the floodgates for those looking to get there money back that much wider.
• [SIZE= 12px]If he doesn't fess up to it and he has doped then he still leaves a teensy weensy bit of room for doubt and perhaps holds the stable door wide open but not off the hinges (though these things are all a nit tenuous anyway).[/SIZE]

[SIZE= 12px]To me the staggering stupidity of this whole thing is that the they have really left him with only one choice which is to keep shtum and leave the teensiest bit of room for doubt.[/SIZE]

In the meantime we have Basso riding/Contadope riding and how many others all of whom have claimed to be mistakenly identified as dopers at some point in the past. They need to decide on a clear set of rules. Ensure that dopers have no place in the sport. Make the criteria clear and make it strict. Don't report on suspected doping (which only tarnishes reputations) but only on actual doping and then throw the book at the offender. I still believe very strongly that there should be an amnesty and from this point on anyone caught gets booted out of the sport (1 offence and you're done for). For a team 3 offences and you're done for.

Mangled syntax and grammar.

You Armstrong supporters get more and more inventive with the conspiracy theories.

 

[nonns]

Yep indeed typed quickly and badly on an iPad.

 

[nonns]

I see no conspiracy theory. He either did it or he didn't. I don't know. The people who did the tests say the sample were suspicious but not positive. Gee call me strange but i'm more inclined to believe that than the guy who claims he is part composed of himself and an unborn twin who is hoping for resurrection and some cash as a result of his confessions. This leaves some questions in my eyes. I prefer to actually see the positive test before I accuse people. I haven't said that there is a conspiracy. Just that i'd like to see some explanations. What i said was that I see no positive outcome for Armstrong in confessing so why would he do it. If he did it then he seems not to have trouble looking at himself in the mirror so why would be confess to gratify all those against him. If he didn't do it and says so then no one will believe him at this point and clearly there would be no benefit to be had claiming guilt in the event that he hadn't doped so why confess. Why say anything at all. Btw if he didn't do it then justice has not been served and this is a tragedy. If he did then justice has been done but the aftermath is being handled badly. I'm no Armstrong fanboy. I think he was a pretty good bike rider (maybe the best of his time and maybe not) and could clearly push his bike up mountains faster than could I.

 

[limerickman]

Originally Posted by nonns .

I see no conspiracy theory. He either did it or he didn't. I don't know.
I'm no Armstrong fanboy. I think he was a pretty good bike rider (maybe the best of his time and maybe not) and could clearly push his bike up mountains faster than could I.

The evidence of his cheating has been assembled and presented.
The charges have been made.

The defendant has sought not to contest the charges which is his prerogative.
Therefore he is guilty.

Whether you don't know whether he "did it or he didn't" makes no difference at this point. Armstrong is guilty of doping and cheating.

I can understand your (misplaced) loyalty though.

 

[danfoz]

Originally Posted by nonns .

I'm no Armstrong fanboy. I think he was a pretty good bike rider (maybe the best of his time and maybe not) and could clearly push his bike up mountains faster than could I.

He was the baddest mofo TDF rider to ever walk the face of the earth. He is also a cheat, a liar, a bully, and a coward for not facing the music.

 

[jhuskey]

Originally Posted by danfoz .


He was the baddest mofo TDF rider to ever walk the face of the earth. He is also a cheat, a liar, a bully, and a coward for not facing the music.

He not only faced the music, he embraced it and slept with it. Remember Ms. Crow?

 

[danfoz]

Originally Posted by jhuskey .

He not only faced the music, he embraced it and slept with it. Remember Ms. Crow?

She does sing a nice song.

 

[slovakguy]

Originally Posted by nonns .
In the meantime we have Basso riding/Contadope riding and how many others all of whom have claimed to be mistakenly identified as dopers at some point in the past. They need to decide on a clear set of rules. Ensure that dopers have no place in the sport. Make the criteria clear and make it strict. Don't report on suspected doping (which only tarnishes reputations) but only on actual doping and then throw the book at the offender. I still believe very strongly that there should be an amnesty and from this point on anyone caught gets booted out of the sport (1 offence and you're done for). For a team 3 offences and you're done for.

your solution, then, is to accept only doping positives as conclusive proof of a violation? even though homologous blood packing hasn't yet found a reliable test? even though the dopers know how easy it is to game the tests including the bio passport?

oddly enough, i am steering closer to your schedule of penalties for dopers. if half the names alleged to have used ferrari's services find their proof in the padua investigation documents, then i see no alternative but life time bans.

 

[nonns]

Slovakguy Actually yes. My view is fairly extreme. If you can't test reliably for it then don't use it as a means of punishing people. When you can test reliably for something then by all means do so and when you find someone is guilty of contravening the rules (whoever they are) take them down - they're done. They are clearly not cut out for professional sport and what it is supposed to represent. Clearly someone can be exhibiting suspicious results. If you catch someone like that then focus on them to get to the truth. Make it clear that a rider who exhibits dodgy readings of anything will be subject to fairly extreme monitoring. Not just more tests but serious observation. Without hard positives though I think it's not a great idea to screw people over and ruin careers. If there are tolerances e.g. Its 1 in 1 million who exhibit figures higher than 50 "twizzles" in test x then they have to prove conclusively under test each year that they race that it is normal for them. I would argue that they should agree to lab level monitoring for x weeks in the off season where their environment can be controlled and their food/medication/supplement intake monitored. Everyone else has to work with much tighter tolerances. Missed tests/spot inspections should be considered to be the equivalent of a positive. You should only be allowed to miss 2 in any career. Get to 3 and you're out. When it comes to reporting positives. Sufficient positives should have been found to ensure there can be no doubt. I think perhaps three labs should be used. All three must have conclusive positives before a rider can be deemed positive. If you incorrectly or prematurely report a rider as positive then the reporting publication should be banned from official reporting for a period of 1 year. The individual who prematurely leaked the info should be fined or fired and the cyclist concerned exonerated. There has to be some penalty or incompetence in the governing bodies. If a rider has doped then all their results should be struck off from both before and after they raced. The assumption should be you doped you can' be trusted - ever! Their winnings should be returned (corrected for inflation at standard euribor rates). Any bonuses for wins should bereturned to the providers. Though salary increases not. This should be automatic. The UCI should not be making these decisions - merely the announcements! If a team gets more than 3 doped riders in any rolling 5 year period they're finished. They are no longer able to function as a team. Their director sporting and coaches ahold be old they are no longe welcome in cycling. The can then decide whether to chase down the offending riders fr compensation themselves. It might stop any thoughts any teams have of starting any doping program's and it might mean they watch their riders more carefully. When it comes to Bullying of riders by riders or officials. I think it should result in automatic loss of professional license Or of position. It's not acceptable in the workplace why should it be acceptable in the professional peloton? Incidentally that is probably the aspect of the LA thing that I find most distasteful. His bullying of Simeoni why should it be acceptable in the professional peloton? Incidentally that is probably the aspect of the LA thing that I find most distasteful. His bullying of Simeoni. Obviously all of this would need careful thought to get right but its certainly clearer than he wispy washy **** we have now.

 

[nonns]

Oh and I forgot no more with the pursuing people years after the event. You test for drugs with the tools available at the time. You apply the sanction at the time the result is found. If this had been applied in LA's case I'd have said burn the Farquhar!

 

[alienator]

I see no conspiracy theory. He either did it or he didn't. I don't know. The people who did the tests say the sample were suspicious but not positive. Gee call me strange but i'm more inclined to believe that than the guy who claims he is part composed of himself and an unborn twin who is hoping for resurrection and some cash as a result of his confessions. This leaves some questions in my eyes. I prefer to actually see the positive test before I accuse people. I haven't said that there is a conspiracy. Just that i'd like to see some explanations. What i said was that I see no positive outcome for Armstrong in confessing so why would he do it. If he did it then he seems not to have trouble looking at himself in the mirror so why would be confess to gratify all those against him. If he didn't do it and says so then no one will believe him at this point and clearly there would be no benefit to be had claiming guilt in the event that he hadn't doped so why confess. Why say anything at all. Btw if he didn't do it then justice has not been served and this is a tragedy. If he did then justice has been done but the aftermath is being handled badly. I'm no Armstrong fanboy. I think he was a pretty good bike rider (maybe the best of his time and maybe not) and could clearly push his bike up mountains faster than could I.

While Landis' and Tyler's testimony by themselves would be suspect, Landis and Tyler were not the only testifying. There were 24 other witnesses that testified. There 24 other witness whose testimony, along with Landis' and Tyler's, meshed, didn't conflict. Please explain how that happened. Was there a conspiratorial group of 26 people who got together to fashion false testimony against Armstrong? How many of the witnesses who gave sworn testimony to a federal grand jury, under threat of jail if they committed perjury, do you think perjured themselves? I'll say it again: if it smells like sh!t, looks like sh!t, feels like sh!t, and tastes like sh!t, it's sh!t.

 

[hpearson]

Originally Posted by nonns .

I see no conspiracy theory. He either did it or he didn't. I don't know. The people who did the tests say the sample were suspicious but not positive. Gee call me strange but i'm more inclined to believe that than the guy who claims he is part composed of himself and an unborn twin who is hoping for resurrection and some cash as a result of his confessions. This leaves some questions in my eyes. I prefer to actually see the positive test before I accuse people. I haven't said that there is a conspiracy. Just that i'd like to see some explanations.
What i said was that I see no positive outcome for Armstrong in confessing so why would he do it. If he did it then he seems not to have trouble looking at himself in the mirror so why would be confess to gratify all those against him. If he didn't do it and says so then no one will believe him at this point and clearly there would be no benefit to be had claiming guilt in the event that he hadn't doped so why confess. Why say anything at all.
Btw if he didn't do it then justice has not been served and this is a tragedy. If he did then justice has been done but the aftermath is being handled badly.
I'm no Armstrong fanboy. I think he was a pretty good bike rider (maybe the best of his time and maybe not) and could clearly push his bike up mountains faster than could I.

Well what value to do place on truth. I am not talking about just telling the truth but living in truth. To do so is to choose to enter your own pain, to enter your own reality. People will not do this of their own will. Circumstances like Lances may force him to assess some major character flaws and there origins......or maybe not. Maybe he continues with his alternate reality to the end but can he live with the lie. IF so what will befall Lance next, some other way of self coping. He is off the fame cocaine. Maybe the real cocaine will work?

Maybe he continues this charade with his kids, SO, friends, but if there is no truth then you stand for nothing. Ask Lance what he stands for. I assure his response will be hollow for there is nothing left of any substance.

His kids? Nope, look at the legacy has left them!
People afflicted with Cancer? He had them hoping in a lie to glorify himself!
The sport of cycling? No respect for the sport at all
His friends? Discarded them when they did not agree with him

Lance loves the IMAGE of Lance like we all did at one point. But it is only an IMAGE! Lance does not know anything beyond the image. The image is being shattered leaving only the reality od a dreadful past that started way before bike racing. He left himself a long time ago. He left that kid that no one cared to love and like the article said not cause he was unlovable, it was because the inner circle of Lances childhood had no idea what love was?

Morally he is still 8 years old, with the same 3rd grade temper, manipulation and lack of moral code and I might add the inability to love anything other than an image of himself. Many ahve contested "His Mom love him" ... she brought several men into his life that beat him and did not care for him and then left him.

But it is not to late to become a man of truth. It is not to late to understand love, to truly love his kids, to truly love Cancer survivors, to truly love the sport of cycling and his friends but first he will have to realize that there was nothing wrong with that 8 year old boy and he will need to learn to love that boy and not despise him. If he can accomplish that then he can do the rest.

He can still win that race and in the end it is the only one worth winning!