Why Do so Many People Dislike Lance Armstrong?

[f1943r]

I’m just curious why so many people dislike Lance Armstrong. As we all know he has won the Tour 7 consecutive years. Been drug tested over 500 times the most tested athlete ever without one positive return. Is a cancer survivor and with the help of his Livestrong foundation a spokesperson for over 28 million people with Cancer. If you dislike Lance Armstrong, Why?

 

[gtm]

Because he's an arrogant, cheating thug who has done untold harm to the sport I've been following for the past 25 years.

That good enough for you?

 

[mrkratchet]

Because he's an arrogant, cheating thug who has done untold harm to the sport I've been following for the past 25 years.

That good enough for you?

please explain.

 

[gtm]

please explain.

You need to do your own research. All the information you need is easily available online.

 

[pearl-drum-man]

I suspect there is some anti-American aspects of it for some as well, especially dominating an event such as the Tour de France.

As for the performance enhancing, even though I've considered myself a Lance "fan", I find it illogical to think they he was clean during an era in which doping was widespread amongst other top contenders, and he was able to dominate.

 

[tjonz]

I’m just curious why so many people dislike Lance Armstrong. As we all know he has won the Tour 7 consecutive years. Been drug tested over 500 times the most tested athlete ever without one positive return. Is a cancer survivor and with the help of his Livestrong foundation a spokesperson for over 28 million people with Cancer. If you dislike Lance Armstrong, Why?

Jealousy/envy...pure and simple. People will always dislike the guy/gal on top. It's that way in all of society.

 

[TKOS]

Is he a jerk and arrogant? probably, but many top of their game athletes are driven to win and succeed and that probably comes off as arrogant.

I certainly don't hate him, though often wished someone might beat him in the Tour back in the day. But I felt the same way about Contador this year. And I feel the same way about F1 racers. Eventually you just hope a new face gets to win the race.

Does he use drugs? I don't know, I haven't met him in person, he hasn't offered me drugs and his tests so far are clean. No body tells the truth about doing things illegally until they are caught. Otherwise we wouldn't have courts. So I wouldn't expect that if Lance was, is or will use drugs in the future that he would say so unless he is forced to. Human nature.

I will wait and see what happens to lance coming up, but he does good charity work and so far is innocent, that is the way the law works. I'll re-evaluate latter.

 

[Aussie_Al]

I just watched the documentary "Bigger Stronger Faster" about steroids in bodybuilding they mentioned a lot of the blood doping and performance enhancing drugs in cycling - I forget if they mentioned or not

Personally I have no problem with the guy and I think he has done more good for the sport than bad - but hey thats just my 2 cents

 

[f1943r]

You need to do your own research. All the information you need is easily available online.

Cheater? And what research, all lies. Until he has tested positive he is not a cheater.

 

[Bro Deal]

Cheater? And what research, all lies. Until he has tested positive he is not a cheater.

He has tested positive. For EPO six times. Both developers of the EPO test, Robin Parisotto and Michael Ashenden, have looked at the tests and concluded that there is no question that Armstrong was using EPO. Whether Armstrong was a doper or not was settled long ago. He is a doper. In the interview below Ashenden discusses Armstrong's EPO positives:

Michael Ashenden | Velocity Nation - Bike racing culture, news and events

People do not like Armstrong because he a doper, a liar, and a fraud who exploits people with terminal disease for his own profit.

 

[Bro Deal]

The Armstrong fraud is going mainstream. Here is an articile in GQ:

Is Lance Armstrong a Doper?: Profiles: GQ

And another written by the publisher of Forbes:

Lance Armstrong’s Tragedy « Digital Rules - Forbes.com

Both are extremely harsh. The media is smelling blood, and there is nothing that sells better than scandal.

 

[TKOS]

In the interview below Ashenden discusses Armstrong's EPO positives:

Michael Ashenden | Velocity Nation - Bike racing culture, news and events

I do like this part from the interview

AS: You were able to analyze the results, correct?

MA: I interpreted the results. They assessed each sample according the different criteria, and those were the results that we were given.

Nothing says science like personal interpretation.

 

[Bro Deal]

I do like this part from the interview

AS: You were able to analyze the results, correct?

MA: I interpreted the results. They assessed each sample according the different criteria, and those were the results that we were given.

Nothing says science like personal interpretation.

Maybe you should get your PhD so that you can interpret EPO isoforms and give us a second opinion. I won't hold my breath.

 

[f1943r]

He has tested positive. For EPO six times. Both developers of the EPO test, Robin Parisotto and Michael Ashenden, have looked at the tests and concluded that there is no question that Armstrong was using EPO. Whether Armstrong was a doper or not was settled long ago. He is a doper. In the interview below Ashenden discusses Armstrong's EPO positives:

Michael Ashenden | Velocity Nation - Bike racing culture, news and events

People do not like Armstrong because he a doper, a liar, and a fraud who exploits people with terminal disease for his own profit.

The samples you posted were taken in 1999 and not tested until two years latter in 2001 and after the A samples were destroyed. The 6 positive EPO results were eventually dismissed by the International Cycling Union (UCI) and the French Anti-Doping Agency (ALDF because of improper testing methods.
　

 

[gtm]

The samples you posted were taken in 1999 and not tested until two years latter in 2001 and after the A samples were destroyed. The 6 positive EPO results were eventually dismissed by the International Cycling Union (UCI) and the French Anti-Doping Agency (ALDF because of improper testing methods.
　

Read the Ashenden interview very, very carefully - it's damning.

 

[Bro Deal]

The samples you posted were taken in 1999 and not tested until two years latter in 2001 and after the A samples were destroyed. The 6 positive EPO results were eventually dismissed by the International Cycling Union (UCI) and the French Anti-Doping Agency (ALDF because of improper testing methods.
　

The test that was used is the same test that is used today. The results are valid. Just because they cannot be used to sanction a rider does not erase the fact that there was artificial EPO in Armstrong's urine. He is a doper. At the time the UCI produced a bogus "indepedent" study about Armstrong's EPO use, Armstrong gave the UCI a large under the table payment. That so called study is now the object of redicule. The AFLD stands by the results and offered Armstrong a chance to have the samples retested. Armstrong refused because he knows that the results would again show that he was using EPO.

 

[slovakguy]

The Armstrong fraud is going mainstream. Here is an articile in GQ:

Is Lance Armstrong a Doper?: Profiles: GQ

And another written by the publisher of Forbes:

Lance Armstrong’s Tragedy « Digital Rules - Forbes.com

Both are extremely harsh. The media is smelling blood, and there is nothing that sells better than scandal.

muchas gracias for the links, bro. each article has a good thread to follow. the link to science of sport site was worth the read. quite surprised at the discussion of w/kg compared to years past (wondering about the numbers from last year, though).

 

[lance_armstrong]

I’m just curious why so many people dislike Lance Armstrong. As we all know he has won the Tour 7 consecutive years. Been drug tested over 500 times the most tested athlete ever without one positive return. Is a cancer survivor and with the help of his Livestrong foundation a spokesperson for over 28 million people with Cancer. If you dislike Lance Armstrong, Why?

Maybe the question should be "Why do so many people support Lance Armstrong while refusing to even consider that he may be guilty of doping?"

A lot of people, me included (U.S. citizen, by the way), have been following his career for years and are simply wary of all the doping allegations that have come and gone. Some accusations are incredible. Others are very credible. I would have to be a fool not to consider that a lot of this evidence over the years points to cheating. I'm also not foolish enough to believe that the only riders guilty of cheating are the ones who fail drug tests.

P.S. Let's not validate his cycling career with his enormous contribution to cancer research. What he has done there is beyond reproach. I just don't believe one has anything to do with the other.

 

[slovakguy]

P.S. Let's not validate his cycling career with his enormous contribution to cancer research. What he has done there is beyond reproach. I just don't believe one has anything to do with the other.

not sure how you can state that one has nothing to do with the other. the laf came into existence and prospered due to the "miracle" of his recovery. were he just some domestique the story would have been just as inspirational, but, in all honesty, do you think the laf would have accumulated the same wealth?

 

[lance_armstrong]

not sure how you can state that one has nothing to do with the other. the laf came into existence and prospered due to the "miracle" of his recovery. were he just some domestique the story would have been just as inspirational, but, in all honesty, do you think the laf would have accumulated the same wealth?

I simply mean that his remarkable story and his contribution to cancer research should have no bearing on whether or not he can be suspected of doping. By the same token, I would hope that any potential proof of doping by Lance Armstrong does not diminish what he has done for cancer research.