Lance Armstrong

[Paulie_Walnuts]

What are peoples' views on the Lance Armstrong doping scandal? I have to confess that the story has had me hooked since Usada said they were stripping him of his seven Tour de France titles.

I have read quite a lot on the subject as a result of the announcement and it has amazed me how the truth can be so far from what you perceived it to be at the time. I was never a huge cycling fan but always followed the TDF and the mainstream press. I bought into the heroic, fairytale story because that was what was reported.

The power of the internet is such a great thing for stories like this because you can go back and piece together the truth and read the stories of the people who who tried to fight for a clean sport but came up against the money and power of Team Armstrong and the UCI.

I won't go into detail here unless others are interested in the discussion (I know cycling isn't that big in the USA) but my rose-tinted view of Armstrong as an all-American hero has been blasted to smithereens. Instead my view of him now is that he is the biggest sporting cheat of all time and an individual so cold and calculating that he'd build a worldwide cancer charity based on his fraudulent exploitations.

As a taster have a look at this confrontation with journalist Paul Kimmage from 2009 when LA returned to cycling from retirement. Look how he turns the question around to his cancer charity to deflect from answering the real question:

Cycling Legend Rails Against British Reporter

After the revelations and the fact that the UCI, an organisation who were openly criticising Usada, have accepted Usada's decision what do people see as the future for Lance Armstrong? And does anyone still support him?

[BH]

Instead my view of him now is that he is the biggest sporting cheat of all time and an individual so cold and calculating that he'd build a worldwide cancer charity based on his fraudulent exploitations.

No doubt he is the biggest sporting cheat of all time, but when it comes down to it, his charity has helped and inspired millions and millions of people, so I don't look at it as exploitation at all.    I mean, he could have been just a cheater and an asshole, but at least he created one of the biggest charity groups of all time in the process.     Even with steroids he accomplished one of the most amazing come backs from cancer ever IMO.    Do I look at him the same?   Hell no, but I try to keep it in perspective.

[Jon T.]

Instead my view of him now is that he is the biggest sporting cheat of all time and an individual so cold and calculating that he'd build a worldwide cancer charity based on his fraudulent exploitations.

No doubt he is the biggest sporting cheat of all time, but when it comes down to it, his charity has helped and inspired millions and millions of people, so I don't look at it as exploitation at all.    I mean, he could have been just a cheater and an asshole, but at least he created one of the biggest charity groups of all time in the process.     Even with steroids he accomplished one of the most amazing come backs from cancer ever IMO.    Do I look at him the same?   Hell no, but I try to keep it in perspective.

Well said, BH.  I don't have anything against him for using PEDs or whatever the hell they do.  It's widespread in that sport.  It goes back to the NASCAR adage, "If you're not cheating, you're not trying".  It's his arrogance that I can't stand.  He's hated among his peers and it's been well known that he was doping.  Now there's proof of it and he's still denying it. Just get over youreslf and admit it already.

[walterfredo]

^I agree.  I don't think many people still support him in the US, and most think he's a total ass.  I know I do.  I do, however, think it's hard to deny his ability, and what he did, and I personally don't think you can say that he had an advantage over other cyclists during his run of victories.  Yes, he cheated.  As did almost every other cyclist at that time (and still today most likely?).  I'm not trying to say it's right, or the old 'everyone is doing it, so it's OK' adage.  My point is that I truly don't believe he had an advantage over other cyclists he competed against during those races.  Not sure how I feel about him being stripped of his titles.  But yes, he's an arrogant ass, and not particularly liked here in the US. 

[iLikeBeer]

I pretty much agree with everything you said wf.  Pretty much every 'great' cyclist of that era was doping during Armstrong's reign.  To me, he wasn't playing on an uneven playing field so I don't see how his doping would diminish his accomplishments and how I view them.  He still had to work his ass off for everything he accomplished. 

As a human being, yes he is an arrogant ass hole, but he has done a TON for cancer research and fundraising and you can't deny him that. 

[Ruckus]

I agree with all of the above.  Regardless of my favorite "sporting fan public outrage", he was the best of the best when all were juiced.  It's almost a shame that those within the entire cheating fraternity despised him so much they outed him beginning with the pathetic Floyd Landis.  Maybe the money now not being sent to his charity will be diverted to other needy medical causes.

As an aside, much of the doping was not steroids but blood boosters such as EPO amongst other crap I don't understand.  USADA was able to justify their existence and probably received a lot more funding as a result.  (pure conjecture)

[Paulie_Walnuts]

There are a number of points that I disagree with here. It's totally incorrect to say that LA didn't have an advantage over other cyclists during his run of victories. First of all, his doping programme and the team behind it was more sophisticated than anyone else's so he had an advantage over other dopers. The money he made after the fairytale comeback ensured that he remained capable of being at the cutting edge of doping programmes. That's even if you go down the route of saying "everyone was doing it". Within his own team there were some who weren't part of the inner circle so he certainly had an unfair advantage over them. And the argument that "everyone was doing it" just isn't true. His "friend" in the early days, Frankie Andreu, made a conscious effort not to dope (although he did succumb on the odd occasion later in his career when he couldn't compete with the dopers just to try to stay in touch with the peleton).

That was a member of his team who wasn't playing on the same level playing field. Outside of his team there were riders who weren't prepared to dope and tried to compete. Christophe Bassons was one of the most naturally gifted cyclists of his generation and believed he could compete drug free. He made a stand and wrote a diary for a French newspaper whilst he was riding the Tour de France condemning the cheats. During the race it was Armstrong who publicly rode up to him and told him to keep his mouth shut and he eventually quit the race as the other cowards shunned him. Lance Armstrong was never the type of rider who would win the TDF as he wasn't a good enough time trialler and he certainly wasn't a good enough climber until he started doping.

Armstrong certainly wasn't the instigator of doping within cycling. By all accounts when he was at Motorola the US team tried to compete for a number of years without doping but just realised that it wasn't possible. But one of the main problems I have with Armstrong is the way he leaned heavily on other people to dope. It is one thing to put yourself at risk through doping, but another to threaten team mates to dope and to bully their wives or girlfriends into keeping silent. According to the Usada report one member of his team was told that if he didn't join the programme he wouldn't be getting a contract the following season. And the risks of doping were high, especially in the early days. Many people think that Armstrong's cancer may have been brought on by the use of PED's. Other cyclists died in their sleep through the use of EPO in the early days.

The other thing that infuriates me is the view that, yes he's a cheat, but he has done so much for cancer sufferers worldwide as if he can be excused his cheating because it led to Livestrong. First of all that charity, and it's inspirational story, is based on a lie. Even worse in my opinion is that it has led to Armstrong being seen as some kind of generous philanthropist doing all this great work for others. I don't know the exact figures but LA has made many many millions of dollars through defrauding, cheating, lying, bullying, and intimidating others. And he made that money for himself before any of the Livestrong bullshit was ever thought of. It's interesting that when Usada made their decision donations to Livestrong went up significantly. It seems many Americans didn't want to believe the truth and certainly don't like to see their heroes exposed for what they are. It's okay when it's a Canadian (Ben Johnson), but not when it's the inspirational voice of cancer sufferers everywhere. The power of PR is incredible.

Lastly, what about the "pathetic" Floyd Landis's of the world, and Tyler Hamilton et al. Do you really think that it's almost a shame that they exposed him? I despised Floyd Landis when it first came to light that he cheated when winning the TDF, especially as I had no knowledge of LA's cheating at the time. But at least Floyd, and those who have confessed, had the balls to confess and repent to whatever degree. And I genuinely feel they have done it for the good of a sport that they loved which became poisoned, and that they hope that their confessions can lead to cycling returning to the epic sport that it once was. For a true American cycling hero look no further than Greg Lemond, a man far more naturally talented than Lance Armstrong who won three tours and is widely accepted as one of the last "clean" riders to win it. Vilified and bullied by Armstrong like many others were when he spoke out he won it once, missed two years after being blasted with a shotgun during a hunting accident, and came back to win it twice more without cheating. That's an inspirational story.

I might have a little respect for Lance if he'd live up to his manufactured Iron Man triathlete image and confess.

As a footnote, I read this interview with Floyd Landis from 2011 a few weeks ago. It's a long interview but if you are prepared to give it a go it might change your viewpoint on him. I actually think it's an incredibly sad story and that Landis is a victim of the culture that LA was so keen to promote and cover-up to this day.

Floyd Landis interview with Paul Kimmage of the Sunday Times: http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2011/landiskimmage

[Ruckus]

Clearly you are well read on this subject but I simply disagree with the devil's horns being placed solely on Lance's head.  He was an asshole!  That doesn't change the culture of doping nor the character of the cowards that talk now about what a bully he was.  It's like Raphael Palmeiro or Larry Bigby (intentional no name) bitching about Barry Bonds being able to use the Cream and the Clear while they just had to settle for Andro and a fee less HGH cycles.  Singling out only the best makes for a great story and a wise political move by those that weren't best.  According to you Paulie, we are to listen to everyone who are out to sugarcoat their tainted images at the expense of not believing a word Lance says.  There is nothing he can say now because he is forever tainted.  It doesn't change that all the other cyclist's were in on ths big lie.  There were other well funded teams as well.  They just weren't as good at cheating and couldn't sign better cyclists.  Why aren't we talking about Miguel Indurain who was just as guilty.
Great to see you around Paulie!

[Ruckus]

Should add that I'm sorry you were disappointed to find out.  I could have told you in 2006 with absolute conviction that LA was doping.  It's important to mention how much time and resources USADA spent on trying to catch LA and LA alone.  The rest of the USPS team was secondary.  The funding they received and the resources that they devoted had to result in convicting him of doping.  So to just quote them and the jealous riders seems to be a bit one sided.

I just hate to see how people get up in arms when an athlete gets busted.  It happens everywhere all the time!  I know there are fans such as BH that honestly believe Pujols never juiced in St. Louis.  From little known player to 13th round pick to the greatest 1st ten years of any player in history in an era of great, deep pitching.   

Melky Cabrera.....dare I say Tim Lincecum? and thousands of others toiling in lower levels that we'll never hear of.

The whole sport of cycling was dirty Paulie.  Why should Lance be the fall guy?  He was an asshole who cheated but was the best at cheating and in doing so made a positive impact on a lot of lives.

Didn't Charles Barkley once say something about athletes?  I forgot  what it was

[Ruckus]

One last thing.  Is it fair to out someone on no factual basis whatsoever?  No.  However, all my instincts tell me Lemond was doping as well.  I've said over and over that if they were consistently the best in the WORLD during my lifetime at a sport (specifically ones that require repeating a particular skill over and over such as cycling, swimming, running, weightlifting) they were juiced.

[iLikeBeer]

Clearly you are well read on this subject but I simply disagree with the devil's horns being placed solely on Lance's head.  He was an asshole!  That doesn't change the culture of doping nor the character of the cowards that talk now about what a bully he was.  It's like Raphael Palmeiro or Larry Bigby (intentional no name) bitching about Barry Bonds being able to use the Cream and the Clear while they just had to settle for Andro and a fee less HGH cycles.  Singling out only the best makes for a great story and a wise political move by those that weren't best.  According to you Paulie, we are to listen to everyone who are out to sugarcoat their tainted images at the expense of not believing a word Lance says.  There is nothing he can say now because he is forever tainted.  It doesn't change that all the other cyclist's were in on ths big lie.  There were other well funded teams as well.   They just weren't as good at cheating and couldn't sign better cyclists.  Why aren't we talking about Miguel Indurain who was just as guilty.
Great to see you around Paulie!

Exactly!  Cheating is cheating!  I don't care if LA's team was the most well funded team, as Ruckus said, there were plenty of other well funded teams that sunk a lot of resources into cheating!  All of the big boys were cheating and if you weren't, you weren't going to compete or keep up. 

If there was proof that LA and his team were acting alone in doping, then yes, I'd be more pissed off right now.  But the fact is, rampant doping has been tainting that sport for YEARS so it's hard for me to single one person out just because they were the best cyclist in an era of widespread cheating in that sport.

[Ruckus]

Holy Crap!  It took me half an hour to skim that Landis transcript.  It just goes back to athletes not being role models.  Our most prominent business leaders that set up trusts and give back so much to the community, the top athletes and Hollywood starts and their conscientious giving.  In most cases, we'd be better off not knowing exactly how they got there and what they are like when not on camera.

Yes he was a naive Mennonite.  I'm happy his conscience is clear.  I'm sorry he though Lance would be an angel based on a book he read.  I'm sorry it was so terrible that you had to go a strip club with the team with Lance as the leader.

None of this changes anything for me.  Landis made a ton of money as a doper.  He won a Tour.  Why are we outraged again?

[Paulie_Walnuts]

Glad to be back by the way, I've missed this forum.

I can see what you are saying to some degree, and I certainly don't think all the blame should be placed only on Lance Armstrongs' shoulders. I'm sure he entered cycling with the same fresh-faced mindset as Floyd Landis and all the others. But LA was certainly more culpable than most of the other dopers by the way that he bullied and hounded other people who didn't tow the line and maintain the so-called omerta. And there certainly isn't a level playing field when it comes to doping. Most individuals didn't have their doping funded by a team as teams weren't that stupid. Mostly the cyclists funded themselves so if you had the most money you had the best doping doctor e.g. Armstrong using Ferrari. By virtue of his "fairytale" recovery from cancer Armstrong was the biggest box office story and generated the most money so he had the best doctor / doping programme.

And I'm sure you are right that people at the top in a lot of other sports are using PED's to get to that position. It saddens me that your view, which is a view I've read in many other places, seems to be that everyone's doing it so maybe we should just let them get on with it and compete that way. I think that's a sad state of affairs, and I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that sports can be kept clean. It upsets me that sport can go the way of politics where money talks and is the be all and end all. They were all in it together: Lance, Nike, Trek, Oakley, the controlling organisation UCI themselves and Lance was bringing in the cash by the ton.

It's also not true that Armstrong has been singled out by Usada. He just happens to be the biggest name they've got. We all have to justify our jobs and Tygart has done a great job in catching the biggest sporting cheat of all time. Usada have also been prepared to highlight corruption at the highest level in cycling, the UCI, and I hope the can of worms it has opened can make a difference to cycling. I think it's a great shame that people generally have the perception that cycling is made up only of cheats.

To answer your question I don't think it is fair to out someone on no factual basis whatsoever. Are you saying that's what's happened to Armstrong? If it is I beg to differ. Usada charged Armstrong and he was well within his rights to take the matter to the Court Of Arbitration For Sport. First of all he tried a number of times to block the decision of Usada but every time the US legal system said he had no grounds for doing so. He then chose to put up no defence because he knew the weight of real evidence they had against him would come out in the hearing. If you had really won the TDF clean seven times wouldn't you want to defend yourself? I know I would. As a result of not defending himself Usada had to produce the evidence to the UCI and they did that in a 1,000 page report. It was accepted by the UCI, who were also implicated in the report, and WADA. The weight of real evidence on Armstrong stacks up without doubt.

There are other investigations going on in Europe as well so Armstrong's crying that it's a witch hunt agaimst him is just wrong. And I agree, the lack of condemnation from the likes of Indurain, Contador and others is very telling in itself. But if you want to call Lance Armstrong the fall guy then that's fine with me. As far as I'm concerned he set himself up to be the fall guy with his self-promotion as cancer surviving hero and cycling legend.

I do disagree about LeMond by the way. I think if he had really been a doper he'd have just maintained his silence like all the rest of the cheats that won the TDF on drugs. In his case there is no evidence.

Anyway, I just find the whole story incredibly fascinating and how it's possible to hoodwink so many people to such a degree. What I really wonder is whether Armstrong is bothered by the fact that he lost his seven TDF titles. Or was it just about the money for him? I don't suppose we'll ever get an honest assessment from him but I'd love to know what he was really thinking!

[Ruckus]

It's also not true that Armstrong has been singled out by Usada. He just happens to be the biggest name they've got.

One in the Same? 

I wrote this in the movie thread about 9.79.  I took a sports law class back in 2006 where we had a guest lecture from a USADA representative who was not on the low end of the totem pole to say the least.  We were expecting a lecture about USADA's authority in the US and abroad and more legal stuff.  Instead she spent the entire lecture talking about how all of USADA's resources were being used to catch LA.  That was their big fish and they were gonna get him no matter what.  There was serious anger in her voice expressing how frustrating it was that the USPS team were always one step ahead.  It was 90 minutes of "We're gonna catch LA hell or high water."  We all walked out of there scratching our heads and our professor apologized to us at our next class saying she expected something different.  Needless to say, it was entertaining if a little redundant.

[walterfredo]

what a jackass

[Paulie_Walnuts]

After the most insincere TV apology from LA on Oprah I thought I'd post an excellent article I found on Twitter yesterday. I really think this is one of the best pieces of sports journalism I have ever read.

It's by Bill Simmons: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8904906/daring-ask-ped-question

[Ruckus]

After the most insincere TV apology from LA on Oprah I thought I'd post an excellent article I found on Twitter yesterday. I really think this is one of the best pieces of sports journalism I have ever read.

It's by Bill Simmons: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8904906/daring-ask-ped-question

Grantland is an excellent site if you've never followed it.  Bill Simmons used to be a page 2 writer for ESPN but broke off so they can be more candid and even explicit while still being funded by the four letter network.

Aside from the most times tedious pop culture pieces, the sports analysis, whether it be cultural or analytics based, is some of the best around with the added bonus of humor.

I'm not a big Bill Simmons guy but thought it was a decent piece.  As you know, I just assume everyone is juiced so just doesn't matter until players' associations back down at the bargaining table and leagues invest boku buck into testing, enforcement, and most importantly, keeping abreast of the constantly evolving world of designer PED's.

Sure Ray Lewis probably cheated.  It's been spoken by many in the know that the entire Niners defense is juiced.  THey find nothing but steroids (testosterone) in ANdy Reid's son's room at training camp.  He was the assistant strength and conditioning coach.  It wasn't him that was taking all of that.  I know current NFLers that two friends of mine played with in college and they say they were all juiced even in college.

Marquez was as well but we all know Pacman has been too.  He went from scrawny and beatable to the fastest, heavy handed little man the world has ever known, fighting 30lbs heavier than when he started at his natural weight and becoming better and stronger??

[Tracy 2112]

Bill Burr Doesn't Buy Oprah's Holier-Than-Thou Lance Armstrong Interview - CONAN on TBS

[Ruckus]

Bill Burr Doesn't Buy Oprah's Holier-Than-Thou Lance Armstrong Interview - CONAN on TBS

  Love Bill Burr