Scott Lemond on Facebook
- Thread starter thunder
- Start date
Perhaps Lance should start one titled 'Get a life, you bitter twisted freak'
This is quite boring really who cares everyone doped Lance was still the best, perhaps Scott should realise that if his father was cycling in the group one/two generations younger he would have also been doped to the eyeballs.
I know it is **** but it is very hard to make a decision to be clean when you know that means losing, not just one race but for your whole career.
The cycling authorities allowed it to get out of hand and they are the ones to blame not the individuals.
This is quite boring really who cares everyone doped Lance was still the best, perhaps Scott should realise that if his father was cycling in the group one/two generations younger he would have also been doped to the eyeballs.
I know it is **** but it is very hard to make a decision to be clean when you know that means losing, not just one race but for your whole career.
The cycling authorities allowed it to get out of hand and they are the ones to blame not the individuals.
I don't agree with your sentiment. We here in CF know that LA was as doped as his competitors. I would think that most people in the public don't know/realize this, and still look at him as a hero, and as a role model. It is good to educate these people on the reality of the situation. Also, the other reason why most here are especially ****** with LA is that he got away with his doping for 7 years with Tour wins thanks to his connections to the UCI.plectrum said:
TheDarkLord said:
It's the sleaze and corruption around ASrmstrong's 7 wins that stinks to high heaven - the lies and excuses, bribes and backhanders, faked TUEs and friends in the highest places. The UCI were desperate to globalize the sport and rehabilitate its image in the wake of Festina and the rumours around Verbruggen and lo! it cam to pass that an American superchampion was born - how very convenient
The Dark Lord / Micron
It will do absolutely no good for an Armstrong related saga to hit cycling, actually it could destroy it. Also everyone here seems to forget exactly what Armstrong did for global cycling amongst the general public. During le Tours, his cycling was brilliant and regardless of doping he was still better than the rest.
I was always an Ulrich fan, maybe because he was from Europe, maybe becuase he was a goliath. He was smashed each time by Lance, not because of dope but because the latter was better prepared mentally and physically for the competition.
You talk about corruption and place it firmly on Armstrong's shoulders but if it wasn't for Festina / Puerto we would never have known about countless other cyclists. Do you think UCI was bribed all these years or do you think that on occasions it has become too obvious for authorities to ignore.
Yes the situation has been **** and got way out of hand but there is no way it is one man's fault, especially a cyclist who only really ever wanted to cycle on one competition each year.
LeMond needs to get on with his own life and forget about someone who really has little to do with him or his career.
It will do absolutely no good for an Armstrong related saga to hit cycling, actually it could destroy it. Also everyone here seems to forget exactly what Armstrong did for global cycling amongst the general public. During le Tours, his cycling was brilliant and regardless of doping he was still better than the rest.
I was always an Ulrich fan, maybe because he was from Europe, maybe becuase he was a goliath. He was smashed each time by Lance, not because of dope but because the latter was better prepared mentally and physically for the competition.
You talk about corruption and place it firmly on Armstrong's shoulders but if it wasn't for Festina / Puerto we would never have known about countless other cyclists. Do you think UCI was bribed all these years or do you think that on occasions it has become too obvious for authorities to ignore.
Yes the situation has been **** and got way out of hand but there is no way it is one man's fault, especially a cyclist who only really ever wanted to cycle on one competition each year.
LeMond needs to get on with his own life and forget about someone who really has little to do with him or his career.
I agree that he wasn't the only one riding doped who wasn't being caught. And he just rode the best of the doped bunch. But I also agree with your point that the system provided an environment where they either doped, or quit, or rode way under their comparative ability level. And the only way to really solve this problem is to expose the corruption in the governing body and other administrators of the sport that helped create this rotten system... so that they can be replaced with a new ethos and dedication to not repeat the evils of the past. Whilst corruption, fraud and lies are not exposed.... crime pays and it continues to live on...plectrum said:
I have wondered myself what the effect would be if Armstrong was shown to have been doping (/cheating) all the time. I imagine that many people who are slightly interested in cycling will regard armstrong as pretty much the whole sport. If armstrong was to be found out then this fan base may just crumple - how long would they have been deceived for? The last winner who would be 'clean' would be Indurain in 1995 although some would question this too.... Indeed, i have wondered if this will be the year when he gets revealed in some way.
It made good copy in 1999 to have a winner who had come back from near death. In some ways this resembles the tour itself. Also, it was better commercially to have someone to win who hadnt been around for the last few years rather than someone with a question mark over their head. Especially if the said person could tap a large new market. This proves nothing of course as it is simply a run of events.
The main problems i have with armstrong are i) the simeoni incident and ii) the way that all his contemporaries have been done for doping while he has ridden away scot-free with all the wins and a celebrity lifestyle. I suppose at least he helps raise some money for cancer though
It made good copy in 1999 to have a winner who had come back from near death. In some ways this resembles the tour itself. Also, it was better commercially to have someone to win who hadnt been around for the last few years rather than someone with a question mark over their head. Especially if the said person could tap a large new market. This proves nothing of course as it is simply a run of events.
The main problems i have with armstrong are i) the simeoni incident and ii) the way that all his contemporaries have been done for doping while he has ridden away scot-free with all the wins and a celebrity lifestyle. I suppose at least he helps raise some money for cancer though
I agree that it's not one man's fault. I think the Festina revelations had nothing to do with UCI and everything to do with French Customs busting ***** Voet and the gendarmarie raiding team hotels.plectrum said:
Puerto was also a police operation. As soon as it moved to the prosecutor's office, it ... Well, something happened, I'm sure. Blowed if I know what it is.
If the cops aren't involved, nothing will change.
I continue to be amazed by statements that cycling was globalised by the likes of Armstrong, and that proving him to be a doper would destroy cycling.
Baloney. As we have stated time and time again, the heartland of cycling is Europe. That is that. This is where crowds of people gather in bars to watch the world road race championships and 60 y.o. guys (who have never raced) smoke cigarettes, drink beer and comment on whether Bettini sprinted in a 53X13 or something else.
Cycling in countries like the US has been a great boost, especially to bicycle and component producers, but it is my belief that it will always remain a niche.
After all, there are baseball players in Italy (heck, there is even a national league) but I would be hard pressed to even name one team or player... Even if an Italian baseball superstar was born, moved to the US and played in the ML, it could lead to an increase in popularity of the sport, but things would go right back to normal when he retired.
Baloney. As we have stated time and time again, the heartland of cycling is Europe. That is that. This is where crowds of people gather in bars to watch the world road race championships and 60 y.o. guys (who have never raced) smoke cigarettes, drink beer and comment on whether Bettini sprinted in a 53X13 or something else.
Cycling in countries like the US has been a great boost, especially to bicycle and component producers, but it is my belief that it will always remain a niche.
After all, there are baseball players in Italy (heck, there is even a national league) but I would be hard pressed to even name one team or player... Even if an Italian baseball superstar was born, moved to the US and played in the ML, it could lead to an increase in popularity of the sport, but things would go right back to normal when he retired.
It isn't really baloney though, Trek bikes are absolutely huge, Specialized is a US company, Marin is a US company, Giant is a Taiwanese company and Ridgeback .. dunno but doesn't sound German, Italian or French!Powerful Pete said:
I know it is great to think of cycling as Campagnolo & Colnago but isn't it this part of cycling which is miniscule. You can talk about Europe but when le Tour started in London last year the crowds were immense and how many of these associate what they see with Armstorng's fame.
I know we want to all see honesty and openess but firstly it will never ever happen, Armstrong doesn't ride professionaly any more and so will never EVER fail a drug test. The nearest was some BS about EPO but that was so clouded in **** it shouldn't have ever reached the press and to be honest if it wasn't in Le (I hate USA) Monde then the editor would have been sacked.
For me over the last 15 years there have been 3 truly great le Tour cyclists, Armstrong, Indurain and Le Mond. Yes there were loads of others with talent and personality such as Fignon or Patani but it is those 3 that placed cycling on a higher echelon, accesible to the general public..... and Indurain had 0 personality!
Plectrum, you have misunderstood my argument (or maybe I was not clear). It is not about harking back to the good ole days and ensuring that everyone rides Colnagos. Although I do think they look better than Treks. And please do not get me started on the clothesline hangers on Shimano STIs. 
The point I was trying to make is that the UCI strategy of 'using' Armstrong and the like to globalise cycling was faulty - the bedrock of cycling remains Europe (and I count the Brits in on that, although they tend to be selective about considering themselves to be part of Europe ).
The US population that follows cycling will not increase significantly anytime soon. This has nothing to do with the qualities of US racers (Levi, Floyd and all the rest may be on the juice like the others, but are just as competitive!)
And of course this has nothing to do with US equipment or bicycle makers, who have helped kick things up a notch in what was a very clubby and semi-artisanal industry in Europe.
And the diehard cycling fans (of which there are quite a few, in European countries, as per our your statement re: the Tour in GB or if you check out a mountain stage at the Giro) continue to support cycling. Confirmation (if it ever occurs) of Armstrong's doping will not kill the sport. It is that simple, IMVHO, of course.
Hope this makes a bit more sense than my earlier post.
The point I was trying to make is that the UCI strategy of 'using' Armstrong and the like to globalise cycling was faulty - the bedrock of cycling remains Europe (and I count the Brits in on that, although they tend to be selective about considering themselves to be part of Europe
). The US population that follows cycling will not increase significantly anytime soon. This has nothing to do with the qualities of US racers (Levi, Floyd and all the rest may be on the juice like the others, but are just as competitive!)
And of course this has nothing to do with US equipment or bicycle makers, who have helped kick things up a notch in what was a very clubby and semi-artisanal industry in Europe.
And the diehard cycling fans (of which there are quite a few, in European countries, as per our your statement re: the Tour in GB or if you check out a mountain stage at the Giro) continue to support cycling. Confirmation (if it ever occurs) of Armstrong's doping will not kill the sport. It is that simple, IMVHO, of course.
Hope this makes a bit more sense than my earlier post.
And to think, I almost drafted a rational, sincere reply. Thank goodness I read this paragraph first. I've written this progression down before:plectrum said:
1) Armstrong doesn't dope, he's America's hero;
2) The French are out to get him with those '99 EPO samples;
3) He's retired, get off his back;
4) Everyone was doping during that era, so what?;
...and now...
5) If Armstrong is exposed, then cycling will die!
Armstrong supporters are believers in fantasy.
So, what are you trying to say here? Did the immense crowd at the start of the Tour in London come because of Armstrong's fame or not? I really cannot infer what you mean by the last sentence.plectrum said:
As Pete said, the point is not about which company is dominating the bicycle market - it is a fact that pro-cycling as a sport enjoys a viewership in Europe that is not there in US, and this is not going to change in the immediate future; there are other sports that dominate over there.
I was in that immense crowd in London with my family and I would say that there was a proportion of the crowd who were die hard cycling fans, some enjoying the spectacle and the free day out, a lot of aussies cheering for their lads, some casual fans who knew the TdF and nothing else, some who were there to cheer on Cav and Wiggins - not so very different to the crowds I stood in in Brighton and Portsmouth in 1994 when Armstrong DNF so I doubt many were there because of him then either.
Armstrong might have brought one race to the attention of more fans in the US but he has done little to globalise the sport - the viewing demographic hasn't markedly changed because of his participation - and he hasn't made the sport notably more popular in Europe.
The only way in which he and Bruyneel changed the sport was to make it common practice for 8 teammates to be on the front of the peloton nearly to the top of the last climb on a hard mountain stage. This simply wasn't the norm before Armstrong post cancer. Thankfully, there have been signs in early season racing that that is no longer the norm - it certainly isn't acceptable any longer.
Armstrong might have brought one race to the attention of more fans in the US but he has done little to globalise the sport - the viewing demographic hasn't markedly changed because of his participation - and he hasn't made the sport notably more popular in Europe.
The only way in which he and Bruyneel changed the sport was to make it common practice for 8 teammates to be on the front of the peloton nearly to the top of the last climb on a hard mountain stage. This simply wasn't the norm before Armstrong post cancer. Thankfully, there have been signs in early season racing that that is no longer the norm - it certainly isn't acceptable any longer.
Since you obviously are the patriot/Armstrong is an American hero type who believes cycling would have died if it weren't for him, I have a suggested sport for you to investigate. Professional Wrestling is filled with flags and contests that the faithful believe are real athletic competitions. It is a great sport for hero worshiping types like you who blind themselves to reality. In fact, I would be surprised if you were not already intimately familiar with the personalities involved in the sport.plectrum said:
I also detest the manner in which you revel in the fact that he probably doped, but they didn't catch him. You make me want to vomit as does Mr. Armstrong. Cycling would have been better off without his uber doping, and his 7 TdF victories are one of the greatest sports farces to have ever taken place. He deserves the Barry Bonds treatment, but he raises money for cancer, so he must be a great guy, right? Well that is unless you read what the people who know him say about him.
Hey, I hear they need Bigfoot hunters too, maybe a change of career for you? (BTW, I love Bigfoot stuff because as a kid my dad took us to a movie about Bigfoot and would always tell us these scary stories about Bigfoot sightings in our area. I hope you catch one, because even though I grew out of my belief they exist, it would be kind of cool if they did.) If that doesn't suit you, I have a multi level marketing company that I would love you to get involved with. I know people will term it a "pyramid scheme" but they are just haters who don't realize that it is a trapezoid, and that if you work really hard, I will get rich. Hey, I will donate some of my..err....our money to a charity or cancer research if that will sweeten the deal.
Similar threads
