I hate Lance Armstrong.

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
No really, I hate this guy. Sheryl Crow? Hello? What the hell is he thinking? I so hope he loses.

Jannyboy, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 11:52 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

everyone prefers Jan, i think ms crow is even well aware that he is a nicer chap. Lance is a force of nature though, and is going to get number 7 under his belt.

lukey (Lukey G), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 11:58 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Sheryl is a silly ageing groupie who will probably dump Armstrong for Crazy Frog.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 11:59 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"If it makes you happy..."

"Ding! Ding!"

Matt (Matt), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 12:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Dude, join the club. Lance is a smug jerk who looks like Spuds McKenzie.

Leon C. (Ex Leon), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 12:05 (thirteen years ago) Permalink


Amanda Platell yes; Sheryl Crow no.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 12:05 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I prefer Vinokourov. He's so spunky!

Btw, is anyone watching now? He's about to win the stage!

bicci, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:32 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Is Armstrong the greatest cyclist in the Tour de France there has ever been? No, there's just too little organised opposition now (Ullrich's past it, the Basques are great but unpredictable, and the Italians have fallen apart since Pantani, and there don't seem to be many Columbian climbers any more).

If Armstrong was "decent" guy, he'd have retired after his fifth win, and put himself up there with Mercx, Hinault, Indurain and the other two whose names escape me now, who've all won five times. When you're one of the greats, you don't need to go further, unless you've some flaw in you're make up that makes you unaware of that fact.

Plus his reaction to some of the other riders at various times over the last few Tours has been nothing short of petty tyrany. Okay it's a sport and he wants to win, but he should be able to do it without being a mean spirited bully.

andyjack (andyjack), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:37 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

If Armstrong was "decent" guy, he'd have retired after his fifth win

that's ridiculous!

mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:39 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Unm... scratch that, I don't want to speak too soon and ruin anything.

bicci, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:41 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Can you ride a bike better than Lance Armstrong? Then shut up.

geyser muffler and a quarter (Dave225), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:45 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

On yer bike.

Leon C. (Ex Leon), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He's no merckx, to the best of my knowledge he's not won a giro, tour of spain or tour of switzerland.

Ed (dali), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

wow, what horseshit! i mean, why the hell wouldn't he keep riding since only a few years ago HE THOUGHT HE WAS GONNA DIE. and i really fail to see how he's smug! he's just competitive (and also really fucking good).

Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

One person's "competitive" is another person's smug.

Leon C. (Ex Leon), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:49 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Let's call the whole thread "Off"

geyser muffler and a quarter (Dave225), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:49 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"Fine" with me.

Leon C. (Ex Leon), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 13:50 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He's no merckx, to the best of my knowledge he's not won a giro, tour of spain or tour of switzerland.

Well, Edster was rumoured to be taking doping. ;-)) Yes, I realize he was cleared but the rumour persisted (here anyway). I loathe both guys. But I guess this has more to do with me: I just don't like smug arrogant self-obsessed winners.

nathalie's body's designed for two (stevie nixed), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:03 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

and i really fail to see how he's smug! he's just competitive (and also really fucking good).

In North America, we only hear about Armstrong the gutsy hero who recovered from cancer and became a better rider than he had ever been before.

Armstrong really is the Barry Bonds of cycling ... the doping allegations that are regularly leveled against them are spectacularly similar ... and neither guy hesitates to spit venom when speaking to the media. The Tour coverage here never goes beyond "Lance is still in yellow, and some other guy won the stage today", so most people never get to hear actual interviews with Lance where he rips into other riders -- sometimes those on his own team. As for Armstrong's smug arrogance, look no further than him chasing down Fillipo Simeoni in last year's Tour de France for completely personal reasons.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:05 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

If Armstrong was "decent" guy, he'd have retired after his fifth win, and put himself up there with Mercx, Hinault, Indurain and the other two whose names escape me now, who've all won five times.

Doping accusations aside, this is easily one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Get one understanding of competition.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:08 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Or maybe focussed on winning other competitions. I mean, the Tour's the only thing he really focusses on, no?

nathalie's body's designed for two (stevie nixed), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:10 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Why doping accusations aside? Funny how various runners who've been associated with BALCO, but have for years said how bad doping is, have suddenly discovered that they aren't that good at sprinting after now the finger's been pointed and they're under scrutiny. Funnily, Armstrong has not got worse since the doping allegations surfaced (or no one else has got better), so either he was never on the dope or he had bloody good doctors giving it to him (and since the rewards of winning are much greater than the rewards of some poor schmuck in a lab trying to find out what fiendish dope has just been devised, I reckon the dopers will always be one step ahead).

On a good day, I can get even dumber.

andyjack (andyjack), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:16 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

After last year's Tour, he originally claimed that he would skip it in 2005 and ride the Giro instead. Eventually, he came to his senses, realizing that the Italian fans would have made his ride a living hell because of the bad blood in the ongoing Simeoni-Ferrari-Armstrong affair. Not to mention that there was a real risk of him getting arrested in Italy for sporting fraud and intimidation of a witness (Simeoni).

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:17 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

When you're one of the greats, you don't need to go further

This was the key sign of Andy's retardation...

Jimmy Mod Is Sick of Being The Best At Everything (ModJ), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:19 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

my parents always make sure to lend me his books because they're so "inspiring". and the books piss me off to no end. he sometimes makes it sound like OH LOOK AT ME, I OVERCAME CANCER WITH SHEER DEDICATION. it's nice to read about people who overcome illnesses and actually are inspiring--but this guy is just an arrogant fuck, one more person who pretends to be inspirational just to make a spectacle of himself and try to gain admirers.

in his books he presents himself as a really nice all-american guy with all these people against him, but that aforementioned smugness and self-importance is totally apparent nonetheless.

juliaaa, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:20 (thirteen years ago) Permalink


what's wrong with him knowing that he's good in an event and deciding to concentrate on that? He obviously has passion for the Tour, even if it is just an ego driven one. He's participating in a sport, a very competative one, and he's doing what practically every other cyclist would do in his position.

To be honest I don't think he cares whether people loathe him or not, but it seems to be odd that so many people loathe him for wanting to win the Tour and being good at it.

Vicky (Vicky), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:23 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Hmmmmmmm, what can Jimmny mean?

Best possible result in sport? A draw at the end of a five day test (cricket, to those who don't understand). Discuss.

andyjack (andyjack), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:23 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The best result in sports is a big heap of pussy when you're the best at what you do.

Jimmy Mod Is Sick of Being The Best At Everything (ModJ), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:26 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Vicky ... it's like why some people hate Manchester United or Michael Schumacher(and the same reason some love them) ... because they always win and it thus gets very boring (okay, so not any more with those two examples, but it was the case). Plus, of course, some people hate to see other succeed.

It is not enough for me to succeed, others must fail. Discuss

andyjack (andyjack), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:27 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I thought about those very examples as i was typing. It's a very pesimistic way to approach sport. Instead of wanting someone to fail, why not hope someone else succeeds?

Vicky (Vicky), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:33 (thirteen years ago) Permalink


andyjack (andyjack), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:35 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I think the fact that it is LANCE ARMSTRONG MONTH on approximately 17 (not even sports-related) US cable channels right now isn't helping the Lance Armstrong love. I mean I know next to nothing about the dude or cycling and hold no ill will against him and I'm freaking sick of seeing his face.

Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:37 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He was on the discovery channel's version of PIMP MY RYDE. He was kind of a dick.

jocelyn (Jocelyn), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:39 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Well, Edster was rumoured to be taking doping. ;-)) Yes, I realize he was cleared but the rumour persisted (here anyway).

They are all on drugs.

Ed (dali), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:40 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

It is not enough for me to succeed, others must fail. Discuss

Get one more understanding of competitive sports.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 14:44 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Sorry, I don't understand you syntax.

andyjack (andyjack), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

In order for one to succeed in competetive sports, one must fail. So, inevitably, those who root for the one who has yet to win wish that the one who has won already will fail. So that their guy or team wins. This is pretty obvious. Teams/players that ALWAYS win tend to generate a lot of ire because fans of other teams/players grouse about it being "someone else's turn already."

Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:06 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

in todays morning paper I read an article about Lance and how some doctors/researchers in the upcoming issue of Journal of Applied Physiologys claims that Lance's succes might have something to do with his cancer treatment. it's something about the testosteron he recieves in his treatment. the testosteron helps build red blood cells which is essential for sports like cycling. i cant remember the rest.

Lovelace (Lovelace), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:24 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

that story was going around last year too.

perpetual winners are boring. i like athletes who know how to lose with style, and who occasionally win, also with great style.

andrew m. (andrewmorgan), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:26 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Jesus what asshattery. Go ahead and hate if you want, but at least be honest about what you're looking at. Seriously.

it's nice to read about people who overcome illnesses and actually are inspiring--but this guy is just an arrogant fuck, one more person who pretends to be inspirational just to make a spectacle of himself and try to gain admirers.

Juliaaa, why don't you tell us the story about how you or a loved went about facing metastatic cancer? I hope you have not had to do so, but if you have, then you know how impossible it can feel, and how important it is to feel hope, and have courage to just keep going.

Millions of people who have cancer, who have beaten cancer, or have friends and loved ones who have suffered with the disease ARE ACTUALLY INSPIRED by Lance Armstrong's experience. And Armstrong ACTUALLY HAD REAL LIVE CANCER THAT HAD METASTASIZED TO HIS BRAIN AND LUNGS. So when you say that Armstrong "pretends to be inspirational," are you saying that he faked cancer? That you, "juliaaa, Arbiter of Righteousness," are NOT inspired is YOUR personal reaction, and many share it. You may chalk Armstrong's celebrity (and in some corners, veneration) up to a PR machine, but it really is beyond that. His recovery from cancer and his victories in TdF are very real, and are proof of a very, very exceptional person.

And a guy that in so many ways is a smug, petty, egotistical jerk.

I also possess a sensitive BS detector, and it makes me allergic to the type of fanboy Lance-worship so nauseatingly present in the July media. But, step back from your emotional reaction to the machine and the hype to consider what Armstrong actually delivers, beyond his obvious, near extra-terrestrial physiology: extreme competence, extreme determination, extreme focus, and extreme courage and perseverance.

If you wish to discuss dopage, it's certainly a huge issue for cycling and an element of Armstrong's story. I don't know if he's doping now or not, but I do know that even if he is, he is not alone by any means. An exercise phsiology PhD friend of mine (and racing teammate) wonders if Armstrong has experimented with gene-doping. This is not to excuse doping by any means, but I will tell you this, his level of success at the TdF, even with doping, is extra-fucking-ordinary. The type of planning, consistency, focus and even good fortune, required to win six Tours is huge. The best physiology and/or the best dope in the world will not accomplish it, and you may ask Jan Ullrich about it. I do not allege Ullrich has doped here, but he is obviously an amazing specimen. Are Ullrich's "failures" because he is too spoiled? Dunno, but he has pretty much been coddled in the wake of his success in the 96 TdF, and his victory in 97. He has his own management team that is semi-detached from his actual team (and the arrangement is acrimonious). Yet, I think Ullrich's problem is that he is a normal man, a good man, in all-time great cycling body. And he may be a better person than Armstrong, with a far better "EQ," but that doesn't win the TdF six times consecutively in mostly dominating fashion.

Confession time: I am kind of a bitter hater by personality type. I don't care for people like Armstrong--vindictive and self-obsessed. As I contemplate Armstrong's move into the political sphere, I feel the fear. But I will say that Armstrong is the Texan that George W. Bush wishes he were. They share the chip on the shoulder, they both demand total loyalty, and like to punish their enemies, and take everything reaaaal personal. But there is a big difference. Armstrong knows adversity, he micro-manages everything, making the decisions himself, and he is fucking awesome at it.

I won't apologize for the bastard, and I won't give him a free pass, but I am impressed by what I see.


Hunter (Hunter), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:30 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

of course some have to fail for one to win, but someone can win with the intent to succeed, or with a clear intent to humiliate others in order to make themselves look good (and, of course, to succeed that way). maybe that's what was being said, or that's how i interpret it.

xp i'll respond to that in a minute

juliaaa, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:36 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

People who criticize people that they know nothing about personally for criticizing people that they know nothing about personally - c/d?

n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:38 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Armstrong is as much an asshole as Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Roger Clemens, Nolan Ryan, Babe Ruth, etc. He's an ultimate competitor with an absolute killer sense of competition. I love the guy. Though I've never met him personally, a friend of mine knew him pretty well four years ago and has nothing but positive things to say.

I hope he wins.

don weiner (don weiner), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Roger Clemens truly is an awful asshole though, I mean I thought everyone agreed on this.

Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

(xp to nick)

i never claimed to be an arbiter of righteousness, and resent the tone of your post, hunter. yeah, damn straight i'm not much inspired by lance. i may not have cancer but i can certainly relate far too well to what you said here for my own health-related reasons:

then you know how impossible it can feel, and how important it is to feel hope, and have courage to just keep going.

to me (and obv this is ONLY MY OPINION) lance talks about his cancer in his books as if it were not really that big of a deal. to me, he comes across as oh-i'm-such-a-hero, rather than truly portraying the suffering and terrifying feelings of helplessness that can come with a serious illness. he makes it look easy, and that seems to trivialize what a lot of people go through in facing similar challenges. maybe i'm just a bitter, jaded bitch, but that's my opinion.

in terms of doping, they've tested him like mad, and found nothing. maybe he just has a physiology that disposes him to a level of athleticism that most can't achieve, as well as training like mad to maximize what he can do athletically.

juliaaa, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:52 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

n/a, I don't know anything personally about almost anyone on ILX even after being here for 4 years. Regardless, if I was too harsh, particularly my rhetorical question to juliaaa, I do apologize.

with a clear intent to humiliate others in order to make themselves look good

Armstrong lives to enforce his dominance against those he takes as his enemies. He does not need to do it to look good. His treatment of Simeoni only made him look like a villain, I was appalled. His assertion that he let Pantani win atop the Ventoux was also not classy (and to the proud Pantani, a grave offense), but I don't think it was beyond-the-pale. I also think it was true, though, and Lance wanted his generosity recognized in the way that 12 year old boys do.

Hunter (Hunter), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:53 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

juliaaa, I posted my response to n/a before your response post. Apology stands of course.

Further, I regret wasting anyone's emotional energy on something so inconsequential as sports or bike racing.

Hunter (Hunter), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 15:57 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

xps everywhere-
In his first book he makes it clear that chemo hurts like hell, even after he's admitted that his sporting success is partly based on an unusually high pain threshold. He certainly doesn't talk as if it's no big deal. I don't know where you got this impression.

Pantani was a shameless cheat, even if he had a funny face.

I quite like Armstrong myself, though he's certainly been lucky over the years as his rivals have fallen at convenient times (Ullrich, Beloki). He can't be blamed for beating whoever is out there, even if it means he'll enter cycling lore as a Larry Holmes rather than an Ali. As for his politics, he doesn't come across as a Bush fan to me, though I understand the comparison. Dubya is just the sort of prick he's been kicking against all these years.

snotty moore, Wednesday, 13 July 2005 16:15 (thirteen years ago) Permalink


Miss Misery (thatgirl), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 16:53 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Err, yeah I don't get andy's take on this. When you have a competitive spirit about something, you want to push yourself to acheive the absolute most you can. It's not about "making others fail," but it's never about stopping just because you've reached some arbitrary point where others have reached their limit (eg the five wins point). I can't imagine what kind of competitor would say to himself "OK, I'm 'among the greats' now, so I'm satisfied. I could probably go farther, but naaaah."

And of course there's an obvious fault in the logic here; that is whoever was the first "great" to get 5 wins must not have been a "decent guy," because he didn't stop where others had stopped. Come now, this definitely makes no sense.

maaaaasive xpost

sleep (sleep), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 17:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I mean all sports would be stuck in perpetual mediocrity if everyone thought it wouldn't be "decent" to push themselves farther than anyone else has previously. If every team on a winning streak got together and said "alright guys, that's three wins in a row, don't you think we should tone it down and let the others have a chance?" Anyone who breaks a record is not "decent"? Everyone should just aim to tie with each other?


sleep (sleep), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 17:14 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Whilst undeniably a great athlete, no way is Armstrong in the same class as those other multi-Tour winners who competed in full seasons, not just one event a year.

Taste the Blood of Scrovula (noodle vague), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 17:17 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

On the one hand, it is much harder to race events all year long. On the other hand, the level of athletics today simply requires much more discipline and training than 30 years ago. Riders used to be able to race themselves into fitness using Paris-Nice etc. Now, guys train super-hard just to perform well at that race. It is an era of specialization as never before. As Armstrong would have to change a lot to race like Merckx, no way could Merckx compete all year now and expect to have the same results. No. Way.

Merckx was more versatile, but apples and oranges.

Hunter (Hunter), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 19:25 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

That's fair enough but I think cycling doesn't really help itself. If there was a world cup or world ranking based races throughout the season (Most points for the Tour, then a lower tier for the giro, tour of spain etc.) then it could possibly keep athlete racing through the season and raise interest. Currently the tour is the only bike race people know about. I think the sport is poorer for Armstrong being a tour specialist, he's a great tour rider but a great road-racer, nah.

Ed (dali), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 19:56 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He has a terribly corny looking face, he'd fit right in in a town like Vancouver or better yet probably Whistler, he just has an expression on his face like he'd chew you out for smoking near a child even if it's outdoors and twenty yards away......then homeboy retires and starts having Hollywood E parties and gets super controlling throught the whole thing ...."guys, GUYS, please shut up, there and fucking NUANCES to this Maroon 5 records that we are only going to be able to notice in the next few hours. A little decorum, please!"

I'd cut his balls off and tell mama I beat cancer. Corny face.

LeCoq (LeCoq), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 21:02 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

and = are

LeCoq (LeCoq), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 21:02 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I think the people who don't like him secretly have crushes on Sheryl Crow and they either haven't realised it yet or they're too afraid to admit it. *giggles and run off*

Ian Riese-Moraine: the crown prince of understatement. (Eastern Mantra), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 21:06 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

If there was a world cup or world ranking based races throughout the season

There is. There are UCI rankings (International Cycling Union)(er, Union Cycliste Internationale) based on how well riders do in major races. The thing is, most casual fans don't know this because they don't hear about any races other than the TdF. It matters to the riders and to serious cycling fans, though.

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 21:07 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

that's all down to the limited coverage though isn't it? We're lucky to have Eurosport so we get a fair bit of the Giro, the Vuelta and oddly enough the Tour of Langkawi. Never get to see such great races as the Paris - Roubaix though for shame.

I think Lance is great, and have a harder time understanding the hate, for me, the reason I can't stand, say Manyoo is that mainly it's the fans that bleat on that get on my nerves (ILX is a pretty manyoo-bore free zone compared to much of the internet - the fans here are mainly reasoned and not text talking idiots) with Lance you don't get that (although maybe in the states with the media on Lance-alert creates that feeling) you just see a cold-hearted cycling assasin, but one with a bit of a character, not a faceless machine such as big Mig.

This is one of the most rambly posts I've ever made, I'm really tired, sorry.

Porkpie (porkpie), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 21:14 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Just belated responding to some things way upthread:

I've got no problem with Lance Armstrong. To suggest he should have quit after his fifth win is ridiculous. At least he is an attacking rider. Yesterday he destroyed everyone in the mountains. When Indurain used to win every year that WAS boring as he'd just play it safe in the mountains and grind everyone down in the time trials. Merckx (sp?) was a better all-rounder, but Armstrong knows what he's good at and concentrates on that - what's the problem? Also, talking about Merckx and doping is missing the point a bit as it's pretty much accepted that at least 95% of professional riders were (are?) on drugs.

Teh HoBB (the pirate king), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 21:24 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I liked his scene with Vince Vaughn in Dodgeball:
Lance Armstrong: Hey, aren't you Peter La Fleur?
Peter La Fleur: Lance Armstrong!
Lance Armstrong: Ya, that's me. But I'm a big fan of yours.
Peter La Fleur: Really?
Lance Armstrong: Ya, I've been watching the dodgeball tournament on the Ocho. ESPN 8. I just can't get enough of it. Good luck in the tournament. I'm really pulling for you against those jerks from Globo Gym. I think you better hurry up or you're gonna be late.
Peter La Fleur: Uh, actually I decided to quit... Lance.
Lance Armstrong: Quit? You know, once I was thinking of quitting when I was diagnosed with brain, lung and testicular cancer all at the same time. But with the love and support of my friends and family, I got back on the bike and won the Tour de France five times in a row. But I'm sure you have a good reason to quit. So what are you dying of that's keeping you from the finals?
Peter La Fleur: Right now it feels a little bit like... shame.
Lance Armstrong: Well, I guess if a person never quit when the going got tough, they wouldn't anything to regret for the rest of their life. Well good luck to you Peter. I'm sure this decision won't haunt you forever.

estela (estela), Wednesday, 13 July 2005 22:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

unfortunately don't happen to follow cycling much but I'm always thinking that years of success do dispel any thoughts of doping. cheats seem to rise to the top of their sport v quickly, win, then disappear.

Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 14 July 2005 10:30 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

'But, step back from your emotional reaction to the machine and the hype to consider what Armstrong actually delivers, beyond his obvious, near extra-terrestrial physiology: extreme competence, extreme determination, extreme focus, and extreme courage and perseverance.'


latebloomer: occasionally OTM (latebloomer), Thursday, 14 July 2005 12:49 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"he's a great tour rider but a great road-racer, nah."

theres pre- and post- cancer eras to take into account here. he was certainly a great road racer, a real one day dude, prior to cancer. i saw him win the texas state championships for fun when the rest of his team was at corestates (which he couldn't do 'cause he was still amateur) in like '91 i think. he was already a regional legend in TX then. triathlete. whatever happened to chann macrae actually?

noizem duke (noize duke), Thursday, 14 July 2005 17:42 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Yknow I think I saw his name on a results page for a stage race out in Connecticut, racing for a low level D3 team.

Hunter (Hunter), Thursday, 14 July 2005 18:03 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

It must've been some other oldster's name I saw cause it looks like McRae is just doing long course triathlon.

Hunter (Hunter), Thursday, 14 July 2005 18:15 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Nope, I was right-- he raced the Fitchburg/Longsjo Classic couple of weeks ago-- he finished pretty far far back.

104 Chann McRae (TARGETRAINING) 10.20

I claim ultimate cycling results trainspotting idiocy.

Hunter (Hunter), Thursday, 14 July 2005 18:26 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

thats awesome thanks
i had a 8X10 print of a picture of them two that i bought at a race when i was a kid on my wall. so maybe i at least WAS worse. but as i said they were like local heroes to me and my friends back then...

noizem duke (noize duke), Thursday, 14 July 2005 20:56 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

bbbbbbut just last year:

Lance Armstrong is a God

scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 14 July 2005 21:14 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I had forgotten about that thread ... and despite the contradictory thread titles, the contents of each thread are mostly the same!

30 Bangin' Tunes That You've Already Got ... IN A DIFFERENT ORDER! (Barry Brune, Thursday, 14 July 2005 21:38 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

yes, this is true. the bile remains the same.

scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 14 July 2005 21:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

At the risk of repeating myself yet again: Armstrong - he's alright. And they're all on drugs. DRUGS, I tell you. Lots of them.

Teh HoBB (the pirate king), Thursday, 14 July 2005 21:52 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

i don't care how many drugs you are on. that race is nuts. even with help, you gotta be near superhuman to finish the thing.

scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 14 July 2005 23:07 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Superman is kind of a jerk too.

Leon C. (Ex Leon), Thursday, 14 July 2005 23:33 (thirteen years ago) Permalink


scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 14 July 2005 23:34 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I think Jannyboy secretly wants to have 8 million of LAnce Armstrong's babies.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 15 July 2005 03:30 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

i will rape Lance Armstong!!!!!!!

Mel Ester, Sunday, 17 July 2005 00:42 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

There seems to be some strange hate here.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 17 July 2005 04:01 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He's teh man.

Teh HoBB (the pirate king), Sunday, 17 July 2005 15:37 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

i will rape Lance Armstong!!!!!!!

BUt do you HATE him?

nathalie's body's designed for two (stevie nixed), Sunday, 17 July 2005 16:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

This is a sick message board and was probably conjoured up by someone who really has nothing in their life. Feels nothing has nothing to say and gives nothing. Do something with yourself you failure.Perhaps you might get something out of your life. Ps Hope you never have to suffer cancer.

pissoffyouwinging losers, Monday, 18 July 2005 08:54 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I am a big admirer of Miguel Indurain, but I have to hand it to Lance.

Peter Stringbender (PJ Miller), Monday, 18 July 2005 08:56 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

What many of you might not know, or haven't figured out is that Lance most probably developed cancer from his use of dangerous performance enhancing substances, starting when he was 15-16 years old (that's when he turned pro as a triathlete). The odds of a super-healthy super-fit guy with a heart 33% bigger than the average human getting a bizarre form of testicular, pancreatic, lung, and brain cancer in their early twenties is phenomenally high.

He beats cancer, and becomes one of its biggest spokespersons and fundraisers, but he continues to dope in more and more sophisticated manners and with better and better drugs. As he amasses more loot, he can employ the services of the world's best medical experts on safely doping (and covering up the evidence) so that the woefully inadequate tests currently in use can't detect his cheating abuse.

Following the scandal of the 1998 Tour (Festina nabbed attempting to smuggle massive quantities of drugs into France in a team car, etc.), France (who had just won the World Cup) was in horrible disarray because of the damage done to its most well-known, popular -- and most profitable -- sporting event. The French Ministry Of Youth And Sport spent millions upon millions of dollars on the current post-race urine test for use of EPO.

However, it is currently widely acknowledged amongst doping experts that the test is useless in detecting the practice of "topping off" -- mini doses of EPO (1/5 the normal) administered the night before a big race or a big stage. (The serious EPO doping occurs 1-2 weeks before a stage race). The reason is that the amount of water circulation and blood circulation in the body during a long and hot or mountainous stage of The Tour is quite sufficient to wash away the evidence.

Additionally, drugs far superior to EPO are now on the (black) market including Oxyglobin, SERS, and others.

Lance publically disavowed (in a sympathetic manner) his and USPS/Discovery's relationship with Dr. Michele Ferrari when Ferrari was found guilty in Italy for illegally and inappropriately prescribing and supplying dangerous drugs (Ferrari's the guy who said "taking EPO is like drinking orange juice" ... but guess what?

A few months after this supposed parting-of-ways occurred, Ferrari was seen in Girona (Lance's training base) at a time Lance was there, and rumour has it that Lance has continued to be heavily dependent on Ferrari for his "training methods" -- has been for the last 10 years (at least) and so it makes little sense that he would suddenly stop now and be able continue his superhuman domination of the peloton (many of whom also are doping).

The tragedy of this is two-fold:

1. Lance is perhaps the biggest hypocrite in the world. He gets cancer from doing very dangerous things to his body so that he can cheat at professional sports, and then he uses the disease to his advantage to build an image of a God-like saviour of the terminally ill. EPO and the other drugs Lance used/uses to cheat at sport are specifically developed to treat the terminally ill. It's despicable.

2. Scores of young, poor, and naiive riders continue to literally instantly drop dead from doping, most notably Jose Maria Jiminez in March of this year. This is because incorrect use of EPO and similar drugs thickens the blood and during exercise the heart becomes overworked pumping the thick blood. It gradually is weakened and damaged and there comes a point where massive heart failure occurs.

These riders do not have the money to employ the services of Ferrari or other top "doping doctors". A lot of them are uneducated. They obtain the drugs and advice on how to use them from other riders and then self-administer. Additionally, many of the lesser teams are known to not only be dirty but also not care for their riders, and -- as hard as it may seem to belive -- don't really mind if a few guys drop dead along the way, as long as it keeps the business profitable.

It's one thing to be poor, have a family, and been in desperate need of a paycheck and to turn to doping to enable oneself to compete with others who are doping.

It's quite another thing to engage in this behaviour when you are a multi-multi-millionaire (Lance's fortune is reportedly in the neighborhood of $26 million, and that does not include the huge bonus Discovery will pay him for completing his contract to ride 2005 Tour).

The journalists who wrote the book "La Confidentiel" which exposes Lance's doping are not hacks looking for a quick payout. They are long established cycling journalists. Unfortunately, the only evidence they could obtain and which their publisher was willing to take the legal risk of printing is circumstantial evidence -- but that's expected: if there was any evidence that could hold up in court, the UCI or other authorities or the courts/police would take action.

The journalists are not both French as is commonly believed -- it's not a "French hate Americans" dynamic. The lead writer, David Walsh, is Irish, and he has a long and respected career as a cycling journalist -- until Lance started applying pressure to various teams and riders and other journalists to not talk to him any more. Luckily, Rupert Murdoch (worth billions) is backing up Walsh, and so Lance's bullying has finally encountered a bigger bully.

Lance attempted to have this book banned in France. When that failed he attempted to have a disclaimer page written by himself inserted in every copy: the French courts dismissed his claims and fined him for filing a frivolous lawsuit. However, Lance's attorneys were successful in effectively preventing publishing of the book in America. This is not only because of legal threats, but because of American publishers and American arms of foreign publishers reluctance to publish the book due to the massive popularity of Lance in America -- due to his involvement with cancer, and primarily because of the mindless "America kicks the rest of the world's ass" mentality that unfortunately is so pervasive and powerful in this country.

Lance got ahead of the doping game early on, before doping well-known and before tests were deployed, and even before many of the substances were illegal. He's been able to consistently stay ahead of the game because he is one of the smartest and most savvy guys to ever play the game -- any game. And his monetary fortune was amassed ahead of the curve -- he was becoming a bigger and better paid star faster than the anti-doping forces could work to effectively combat the problem.

Finally, Lance has massively abused his money and power (both legal power, and the power of influence within the peloton) to attempt to destroy the careers of any rider, journalist, or other person who would dare say anything against him: this includes David Walsh, Pierre Ballister, Filippo Simeoni (following The Tour, Lance will face a defamation lawsuit filed by Simeoni in the French courts), and many, many others.

Many are not aware that Lance is hated by a great many in the peloton. He is not a leader like Merckx who was respected by nearly all. Almost every other American cyclist in The Tour hates him (perhaps all except his friend and current teammate George Hincapie) and this includes ex-teammates such as Floyd Landis. One of the world's greatest sprinters, Australian Robbie McEwen hates Lance for his bullying and threats against lesser riders.

Lance is perhaps the greatest sporting fraud of the last 100 years. What is especially sickening is that reportedly he has targeted politics as his second career.

Do you really think that Greg LeMond (rich, famous, and long-since retired) would publically accuse Lance of doping and suffer enormous damage to his popular image amongst Americans (not to mention his friends, comrades, and business relationships within the cycling world) if he hadn't heard the real scoop on matters? Word gets around, and Greg did the right thing -- attempting to stop.

Unfortunately for Greg, America is currently obsessed with Lance kicking the world's ass, just like we were obsessed with the NBA superstars team kicking the world's ass at the Olympics. Nothing apparently will stop this steam-train of nationalistic egomania.

Tyler Hamilton's recent 2-year ban from cycling for homologous blood doping on two occassions is more proof that top (and already rich) American cyclists are abusing our superiour science and medical knowledge to cheat at sports in a dangerous manner motivated by egoism and lust for fame, power, and more money -- or when they are in a rough spot in their careers.

Forget about Lance. He's not hero. The man is bullshit.

baltostar, Monday, 18 July 2005 14:20 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I'm not sure I hate Lance Armstrong exactly, but I can't imagine why anyone would want to root for him these days, after he's already won the Tour multiple times and proven himself beyond expectations. I don't get what's exciting about him at all.

jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 18 July 2005 14:26 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

It's like being a Yankees fan or something.

jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 18 July 2005 14:26 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I have no idea how you're drawing a connection between doping and suceptibility to cancer. Otherwise, I agree with many of your points -- just a few more reasons why Lance is the Barry Bonds of cycling.

Australian Robbie McEwen hates Lance for his bullying and threats against lesser riders.

This made me laugh.

30 Bangin' Tunes That You've Already Got ... IN A DIFFERENT ORDER! (Barry Brune, Monday, 18 July 2005 14:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Lance would be the Barry Bonds of cycling if:

A) Barry was winning World Series after World Series;
B) Everyone else in baseball was Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, and dude who wrote the whiny tell-all book.

Unfortunately for Greg, America is currently obsessed with Lance kicking the world's ass, just like we were obsessed with the NBA superstars team kicking the world's ass at the Olympics. Nothing apparently will stop this steam-train of nationalistic egomania.

Hahahahaha did you forget about what happpened at the last Olympics???

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 18 July 2005 15:06 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

but they're all on drugs

Teh HoBB (the pirate king), Monday, 18 July 2005 16:03 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Ejected rider Frigo's dad agrees with you HoBB: "No, ladies and gentlemen, it’s impossible to go that fast."

Part of Lance's team once livened up the culture, cos he was deadly as a vulture.

Hunter (Hunter), Monday, 18 July 2005 16:08 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

A) Barry was winning World Series after World Series

If Barry didn't bother playing in the regular season (except for a few games here and there so he could get used to the daily rigours of competition), and spent his whole year training in anticipation of his special invite to join the roster of one of the teams playing in the World Series, then he'd have several championships too.

30 Bangin' Tunes That You've Already Got ... IN A DIFFERENT ORDER! (Barry Brune, Monday, 18 July 2005 16:17 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

But really, winning grand Tours in cycling vs winning WS titles in baseball really aren't comparable.

30 Bangin' Tunes That You've Already Got ... IN A DIFFERENT ORDER! (Barry Brune, Monday, 18 July 2005 16:18 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

As a generalisation, I'm getting the idea that most of you don't like Lance Armstrong. I'm from a country about 10,000 miles south west of the US of A, and I thought we had a problem with "tall poppy syndrome", however nothing compared to this. Despite my distance from Austin, Texas, I am strangely only 2 degrees seperated from Lance. The 2 degrees in between are connected through his medical and physical testing, and I can confirm with much certainty that, yes, as most of you Lance-haters say, he is definitely taking performance enhancing drugs. Sure, it's not right, and he probably is blatently lying when he says he isn't taking anything, but as we all know, so is the competition.

In spite of this, I think we all miss one important point about Lance. You can see it in any documentary, or his books, he sees only what he wants and will step over anything to get it. He often doesn't see reason or common sense when it steps in the path of what he is after. Most thherefore label him as a selfish egomaniac, which might not be far from the truth, but if he has no sense or thought of the fact that he is screwing others over, then maybe he's not so selfish. Anyway, the traits that make him so difficult to get along with are obviously what enables him to be so successful. Take Jan for example, physiologically better than Lance, and a nice guy to boot. Unfortunately he is not so driven or self-centric to get as far as Lance does every July. Just look at how his marriage broke up. You can tell from reading his book that he would be a pain in the ass to live with.

In spite of being a doped up, lying, impossible-to-live-with egomaniac, I kind of like him, and would love to see him win the TdeF one last time. In years to come, it won't quite be the same without so many people cheering for an all conquering hero, or the rest hoping there is someone else out there who can match him. The fact is he is an inspiration to so many, and needs to be the way he is to do so. And it cannot be denied that he simply is a cut above the rest of us who dreamed of achieving similar feats. One final thought however; we know all top level pro cyclists take drugs, just so they can get to where they want to get, and seemingly take a vow of secrecy when they do, so spare a thought for those like Scotsman David Millar (former TdeF prologue winner), who, unlike Lance, when asked straight up by the press whether he took Epo, his reply was, "well, yeah, sorry, I did"......... It's sad that honesty might not always be the best policy.

rpvh, Tuesday, 19 July 2005 03:14 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

one more thing, baltostar said all the drugs early in Lance's career caused him to get cancer. Rubbish.

rpvh, Tuesday, 19 July 2005 03:20 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

i was this close to getting like 45 LIVESTRONG bands to wear on my arm at my then-office job earlier this year. at one point does sincere agreement turn into ironic parody?

kingfish (Kingfish), Tuesday, 19 July 2005 04:41 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

rpvh ....

You don't think that abuse of drugs meant for specifically terminal medical illnesses can lead to cancer ?

I suggest you visit your personal doctor tomorrow and ask him about that one.

It is very well known in medical science that drug abuse (of many and varied kinds) catalyzes and assists in the development of cancer.

Cancer is a disease where the genetics of the cells are altered so that that they reproduce excessively -- extremely excessively. This genetic modification is often due to the cells' reaction to foreign substances. Have you ever heard of skin cancer? That's caused by too much UV radiation destroying the natural genetics of the epidermus cells.

baltostar, Tuesday, 19 July 2005 05:26 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

also rpvh ...

When it comes to having the courage to attempt to put a stop to an out-of-control spiral that is causing scores of otherwise super-healthy and super-fit young men in their early twenties to instantly drop dead from massive heart attacks, I would say that honesty is the only policy.

Paul Kimmage and David Millar are heros. Lance is not.

Dominating the competition and amassing impressive victories, fame and fortune does not constitute heroic behaviour in my view of the world.

What is heroic is those who have the courage to step back from living a lie, who have the courage to disclose the truth, and to stop the poor, ignorant, and desperate from being used as expendable (expendable in the worst sense of that word) pawns in a game of giant profits for corporations.

This isn't like baseball in the US. This isn't Barry Bonds. The deaths from abuse of EPO, HGF, etc. in pro cycling are up in the hundreds.

It's basically young kids who are dying. Cycling is a sport where you either make it or you don't by your very early twenties. Actually, 21 is about the average age where you either get a contract or give it up.

These young guys give it all to the sport ... it's completely exhausting and all-consuming to become a pro cyclist ... you have to train continually almost year round (maybe one month semi-off around Christmas) ... and so these guys are only rolling only one set of dice in life.

It's not like in American sports where you can grab a college degree or a second career in the off-season. In cycling, there is no off-season. And you're dead tired -- exhausted in an armchair, or in bed-- when you're not on your bike.

Finally, I don't believe that all top cyclists are on drugs. Especially in France. The police and the courts are so on top of it these days that it's very difficult to be doping on a French team and not be caught. The French teams themselves have done a 180 from the late 80s.

It's a matter of national image, saving their most treasured and valuable sporting institution. The government got involved and applied serious pressure to the sponsors -- mainly French corporations. This is what has to happen to stop the trend. But first the truth needs to be told.

And many French riders are saying that this year it is "a race at two speeds". The French just can't keep up. No Frenchman is high in the GC. Considering France's long history of producing perhaps the highest percentage of great cyclists of any country, a believable explanation for their lack of success in this year's tour is that the French teams are generally clean, and other teams are not.

I don't know who you are, what you do ... myself, I'm not a professional athlete, so it's not my war to fight. But if something that is incredibly wrong is occurring in my profession then I would take steps to put a stop to it if I could. Not figure out a way to profit from it.

baltostar, Tuesday, 19 July 2005 06:00 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

You seem weirdly sure about all this, balto- aren't you exaggerating a (genuine) problem somewhat? ('hundreds' of deaths in pro cycling- really? Surely other endurance athletes like runners and triatheletes would be dropping like flies too? EPO and HGF aren't cheap either). Offer some evidence rather than wild speculation.
The lack of a French GC contender has more to do with the increasing globalisation of the sport and consequent wider talent pool. Laurent Jalabert was world number one quite recently, and Richard Virenque wasn't bad, at least when he was on drugs (something the French publique don't seem to hold against him).
Kimmage was a reasonable platoon rider who realised that he wasn't prepared to risk his long term health to make twenty grand a year as a domestique. Fair enough, but not exactly heroic. He knew he wasn't turning his back on glory.
But if you believe that self serving guff about Millar only taking EPO once and saving the capsules to remind him never to be naughty again, you really will believe anything. I love your assertion that cycling is a game generating 'giant profits for corporations' too. Is there another sport called 'cycling' that I know nothing about, because this one seems to promote hearing aids, wooden flooring and the odd supermarche?
Cycling never was clean and chivalrous. Riders have been self-medicating for a hundred years now, yet talent, even drug aided talent, will always rise to the top. Coppi and Anquetil were no cleaner and if Armstrong inspires cancer sufferers, then good on him. He's mad, but as I don't have to live with him so what. As the old movie had it, 'If in doubt print the legend'.

snotty moore, Tuesday, 19 July 2005 11:03 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Yes. Everything you've said is right.

Teh HoBB (the pirate king), Tuesday, 19 July 2005 22:00 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Balto, you know what, I won't argue with you, simply because for all intensive purposes you are correct (I still disagree about the cancer business, Lance could just as likely have got it without drugs, we'll never know, but again, correct, it may have played a part). I am as disgruntled about the drug culture as you, I also really, really wish honesty was the policy for these guys, and I probably should opt for better judgement when cheering Lance on.

As you say, there are clean cyclists, but my comment was "top level pro cyclists", ie the top 10, 20, 50, whatever in the Tour. I doubt the honest guys will find themselves in there.

rpvh, Tuesday, 19 July 2005 23:39 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Unfortunately, the only evidence they could obtain and which their publisher was willing to take the legal risk of printing is circumstantial evidence -- but that's expected: if there was any evidence that could hold up in court, the UCI or other authorities or the courts/police would take action.

What a pesky little detail we have here. I like how we're supposed to accept circumstantial evidence as outright fact, let alone the widescale conspiracy required to sustain the accusations.

The case against Armstrong has always been founded on his assholic personality and fueled by jealousy and rumors. Until there is legitimate proof that he is or was (or more relevatory, one of few) doping, nobody is going to give a shit.

don weiner (don weiner), Wednesday, 20 July 2005 00:09 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

My uncle's been a competitive cyclist for over a decade now, and says that Armstrong was a complete asshat before he got cancer, but he's a genuinely nice guy now.

He learned his lesson, re-evaluated his priorities, and is a much better person because of it. I don't see where the hate is coming from...no one's online making a hate filled post about you because you were an asshole ten years ago, why do you feel the need to do so?

Matt P., Wednesday, 20 July 2005 01:00 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I didn't start this thread. I didn't say Armstrong is an asshole. You need to re-read what I've written.

I said that Armstrong is a fraud in many ways and, overall, he has not been good for the health of cycling as a professional sport, and he has indirectly contributed to the abuse and killing of poor and desperate young men by powerful corporate-backed entities.

The guy who said that cycling is sponsored by a bunch of Mom 'n Pop operations obviously just doesn't have a single clue about modern cycling. Who do you think T-Mobile is? Who do think Motorola is? Who do you think Liquigas is? Who do you think Credit Agricole is? Who do you think Benneton is? Who do you think Phonak is? The list is endless. These are huge corporations with billions in revenue. Just go to a website that covers pro cycling (like velonews.com or procycling.com) and look up the sponsors for yourself. Do some research. Many giant corporations are involved in cycling sponsorship.

What is most interesting about all of this to me is that some people dismiss the whole subject just because their is not definitive proof that would stand up in court. But this really is kind of a "it takes 30 years for the truth to come out" type of thing -- like Watergate and Deep Throat's identity. Because the numerous journalists who know what's going on can't speak about it.

Years, or decades from now we'll probably learn the truth, with definitive proof provided -- if we're still alive to hear it. Myself, I have a number of sources, and I don't feel that I need to hear anymore. I'm convinced. You should do your own research and draw your own conclusions.

Here's a point some of you may not realize: sport drug abuse, in certain respects, is very similar to street drug abuse. The addicts need reliable "on call" dealers they can depended upon to provide them the "good stuff" and not snitch them to the authorities. And there just aren't very many really good drug dealers -- it's a very difficult "profession".

So ... word gets around pretty quick ... the dealers doing a lot of the talking. Another guy who is rumoured to be dirty amongst the professional cycling press corps is Chris Horner. If you make a real effort to befriend (even if only through e-mail) some pro cycling journalists, a few of them will share some tidbits with you. It's relly tough for someone like Lance to nail them for what they discuss in a private e-mail (as opposed to a widely read print or web publication).

As far as hundreds of amateur or pro cyclists dying from EPO abuse ... I'm am fairly certain that that number in fact is not speculation if you extrapolate the number of widely reported profesional deaths out into the amateur ranks. Do some digging on Google. Especially in the late 90s. I believe about 50% of a certain Euro pro team died one year in the 90s -- not all at once, but spread over a few months. I really don't have time right now to dig up all my notes on this, I have to leave for work.

baltostar, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 15:08 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I know very well who Credit Agricole and T-Mobile are, schoolboy, and I don't need to 'research' it. (Phonak does not have billions in revenue by the way, nothing like it, though it spends big on its team). But a mediocre Formula One driver who's never won a race like, say, Jenson Button earns more in a year than the entire annual budget of a Tour qualified team. In modern sporting terms cycling is very small business indeed and only a handful of major corporations are involved, putting in, for them, tiny numbers. Clearly you don't have a single clue about modern sports finance and modern sponsorship arrangements. When Ullrich retires, just watch- T-Mobile will instantly restructure or even end their deal. Though if cycling was cleaner perhaps it might attract some serious money.

All hacks in all fields know the unprintable, but this does not necessarily mean that abuse is any more or less prevalent than it ever was. Your complaints about 'poor and desperate young men' are as old as organised sport. As for Chris Horner, wooah! Stop the presses! We caught a big fish here! A cyclist taking drugs!

'I am fairly certain that number is fact not speculation' sounds a hell of a lot like speculation to me and anyone else reading. And although I don't doubt the sincerity of your concern and even agree with much of what you say (the difference being I'm not surprised in the slightest by any of it), insulting people who perhaps take cycling rather less seriously than you do makes you sound hysterical, especially when you back track when challenged.

I agree that sport drug abuse is very like street drug abuse though, only the greed is on both sides of the deal. But until 'sporting fraud' becomes a criminal offence, nothing will be done. And ultimately too few care enough about this fascinating minority pastime to change it.

snotty moore, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:54 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The real story, that will probabily never be revealed, is how LA got cancer to begin with.. Do some research on what the risks of teen-age steroid use in males are ... lets see.... testicular cancer?

Tom Terrific, Friday, 22 July 2005 13:53 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Wow, Snotty, you chose the perfect name for yourself. I am rather impressed.

Now then ... instead of two men of our age exchanging idiotic insults, let's think logically. I am not an F1 expert by any means, but my understanding is that currently each F1 team has 2 principal drivers, 1 or 2 back-up drivers, and some test drivers. So, let's say 3 big $ earners per F1 team. As there are only 10 F1 teams in the entire world, that only adds up to 30 big money stars in the sport.

Top-level cycling has quite a few more teams involved across the entire season, and quite a few more riders per team. What is it? About 12 or so? So, perhaps 300 riders, and their salaries all add up.

But this is not really relevant ... why is the relative amount of money sponsors spend your metric of choice?

Cars cost a lot much more than bikes, there is more need for cars than for bikes, and so cars generate much the greater profits for their manufacturers than do bikes, and so the F1 sponsors spend a great deal more to promote their products on an absolute basis -- but probably not on a relative basis.

What is relevant is that big money (compared to an average person's salary, or net worth, or the worth of a small business, etc) is in fact spent on both cycling and motosports -- which are two of the world's most popular sports in terms of fan-bases and related consumer purchases of machines and gear.

Have you noticed that both Ronaldo and Lance wear Nike caps? Nike isn't stupid.

And if you think that just because a problem has been around for ages that nothing should be done about it ... I really don't know what to say to you. Terrorism has been around for ages, but now it is spiralling upwards and out-of-control. The safety and ability of civilized society to function is at stake. So, something must be done now.

Similarly, cycling is the worst sport in terms of killing people off with performance-enhancing drug use. Can you name a sport that kills off more people due to drug use?

Clearly, something must be done.

baltostar, Saturday, 23 July 2005 04:27 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Agreed. Any sport which damages (and even kills) its participants is damaging itself. Such overlooked cynicism is ruining sports as varied as rugby and running, but cycling is still out ahead, perhaps because such a culture is seen as ineradicable and even historically justifiable. (Nonetheless even the mechanics in F1 are paid more than some domestiques.)

Well done to Cadel Evans for cheeking the headmaster three days before his retirement, in case we'd all forgotten about L.A.

snotty moore, Saturday, 23 July 2005 17:30 (twelve years ago) Permalink

There's several reasons why I dislike Lance Armstrong. Drug abuse, blatant disrespect for his team mates (for example shouting at team mates for being idiots, riding up to team mates ordering them to slow down, shutting out team mates because they competed/wanted a better place,...),... What I think some (Americans) don't understand is how he brought an American spirit in a European sport, it's something a lot of Europeans dislike. Remember that Merckx didn't participate in the 1973 because of criticism from the French for winning all the time. Would Lance do this? Nope, it wouldn't even cross his mind. You can call it dumb, but I think it shows a clear difference in mentality. I only hope he stops this year, because it's just a sad race now: you know he's going to win (and not on fair terms, because of his drug abuse). I wonder if he'll do a *Flo-Jo* and how the public will react. I don't wish it upon him, he hope he can live off his 26 million with Sheryl but just not cycle anymore.

nathalie's body's designed for two (stevie nixed), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:34 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Everyone is so jaded and negative.

roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:38 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Steroids? Man if they are using steroids they should get their money back.
You ever seen these guys close up?
I mean, geeeeez, Rasmussen, all 135 punds sopping wet, should start taking SOMETHING LOL or at least eat better.
Heck, Hincapie is 6-3 and 180, and he is considered huge. EPO and similar drugs in the tour.... sure. Steroids, I doubt it. Steroids in football and baseball where large muscle mass is essential for success: I can see that.
Here is a link to a scientific article, in a highly regarded peer reviewed journal, on the physiology of a TDF racer.

Are there any other physicians around this place?

Ok, let the flames begin. I suppose some people out thre are really working their panties into a bunch right now.

and if my typos offend somebody's ubermensch mentality, too bad.

frodo baggins, Sunday, 24 July 2005 08:14 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Meanwhile, turns out my parents went biking last week with Sheryl Crow's tour manager or something, as he is a friend of a friend. Strange world.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 24 July 2005 08:17 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Did they take drugs?

Onimo (GerryNemo), Sunday, 24 July 2005 08:21 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Not at the time, I presume.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 24 July 2005 08:25 (twelve years ago) Permalink

The author very much appreciates the respectful cooperation and positive attitude of Lance Armstrong over the years and through it all.

I didn't really need to read more. ;-)

nathalie's body's designed for two (stevie nixed), Sunday, 24 July 2005 08:58 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Personally I could just do without those arm bands.

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Sunday, 24 July 2005 14:59 (twelve years ago) Permalink


Onimo (GerryNemo), Sunday, 24 July 2005 15:12 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Speaking from the podium after his farewell triumph, Armstrong paid tribute to his closest rivals and his team.

"I couldn't have done this without the team behind me - I owe them everything," said the American.

"Ullrich is a special rival and a special person and Basso is almost too good of a friend to race - he may be the future of the Tour."

Armstrong ended with an appeal to cycling's critics in an era dogged by drugs controversies.

"You should believe in these people [the cyclists]. There are no secrets.

"This is a hard Tour and hard work wins it. Vive Le Tour."

Onimo (GerryNemo), Sunday, 24 July 2005 16:39 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Hasn't we won this yet, my preciousssssssssss?

Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Sunday, 24 July 2005 18:37 (twelve years ago) Permalink

i hate this guy. not because he wins all the time or anythign like that, i think that's great. but the fact that he left his wife and kids, after they stood by him through his whole cancer thing- thats shady and makes him an a** in my opinion. he left his wife and kids , and is with freakin sheryl crow. what a jerk

shannon, Sunday, 24 July 2005 19:41 (twelve years ago) Permalink

You asterisk ass?

Teh HoBB (the pirate king), Sunday, 24 July 2005 20:14 (twelve years ago) Permalink

but the fact that he left his wife and kids, after they stood by him through his whole cancer thing

Um, didn't they meet after he finished his chemo in '97? Weren't the kids born after they met (you'd think)?

what a jerk

-- shannon

Onimo (GerryNemo), Sunday, 24 July 2005 20:21 (twelve years ago) Permalink


Teh HoBB (the pirate king), Sunday, 24 July 2005 20:23 (twelve years ago) Permalink


Onimo (GerryNemo), Sunday, 24 July 2005 20:26 (twelve years ago) Permalink


Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Sunday, 24 July 2005 20:53 (twelve years ago) Permalink

The problem I think is not Lance Armstrong himself, but the media treatment of him. I mean if Lance Armstrong was just another strong guy who thought he was great, who cares? But as Julia points out, parents are giving their kids his books and saying 'be like him' or 'learn from him'. Just because you are strong and can ride really fast on a bike -- that's a pretty moderate accomplishment. Not that I'm putting L. Armstrong down personally, I'm just saying, sport has become far too important. Sport should be amateur, friendly and something everyone engages in with pleasure. Idols could maybe possess qualities that anyone can aspire to, such as kindness or generosity, things that benefit society in general, not just things that, for instance, only very strong men are capable of. So it's annoying that Lance Armstrong is seen as a 'role model'.

I don't agree with those above who are saying that Lance-haters are stupid for saying things like, 'it would have been good if he stepped down after five races' or 'he shouldn't be so competitive'. It's okay that he didn't do those things, but it's exactly right that if he'd behaved in an unusally noble fashion, that would have made him a good role model. Those are the qualities that could be applied to society at large and would probably improve it or whatever.

Another thing, this is pure speculation of course, but if it's true that everyone at the top level of these sports is engaged in steroid-related doping and so on, those drugs effect your psychology as well as your physiology. Like, even when drug users aren't on drugs, their personality seems less subtle.

sps, Monday, 25 July 2005 01:22 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Last night I watched a film and it was Dodgeball and it had Lance Armstrong in it and it was rubbish and don't be tempted even though it is on 4.99.

PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Monday, 25 July 2005 07:33 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I have to admit, that when Kristin and Lance broke up, I was rather disappointed. But I think there are a lot of dynamics that are going on which the public does not see. if we look at the surface, it is easy to say 'what an a-hole' (no asterisks here). Granted, it seems easier just to be superficial, and it does take time and energy to see what is really happening. One thing I find irritating is reflexive reactions with no thought from people who display an adamant refusal to consider matters which run deeper than we know.

For accuracy, Lance and Kristin met at the Ride for Roses, in 1997, as he was finishing chemotherapy. The religion issue was likely a facftor, especially as the children grew: Kristin is Catholic and Lance is pretty much agnostic/atheist (sorry if I do not quite understand the distinction there, but let's not turn this discussion into a vitriolic semantics discussion).

I would also point this quote from Kristin:
Kristin Armstrong about the breakup of their marriage, 2/2003: Marriage problems were "brought on gradually by a number of pressures, rather than one big blow-up. We've been together 4 1/2 years, and we've had six homes, three languages, three countries, one cancer comeback, three children, four Tour de France wins and one rise to celebrity. You're not supposed to cram such a huge amount of events into such a small period of time."

Perhaps by the time they split, one could say the bloom was off the rose. An oft repeated maxim is that there are always three sides to any divorce: her side, his side and the truth. Would it be perhaps fair to demean Kristin Armstrong for not putting up with Lance's travels and work? No, it would not be fair to her. How many people could forever tolerate a personality that is, shall we say, somewhat intense and apparently demanding. I make that observation from what I have seen on many occasions. His public persona seems so exacting and meticulous, hence the moniker 'millimeter man', I wonder if he can just switch that off when he goes home. I do not know many people who can do that.

Pardon my objectoivty here, it's just the nature of my training in science and research.

Paul_T, Monday, 25 July 2005 07:33 (twelve years ago) Permalink

If Armstrong was "decent" guy, he'd have retired after his fifth win

If Lance Armstrong was a TRUE INDIE ROCKER he wouldn't sell out and do Nike commercials and would currently be dating Karen Osomeone so cool we haven't even heard of her yet, not Sheryl Crow.

Cunga (Cunga), Monday, 25 July 2005 08:27 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I wonder if she sings "I've Goit a Brand New Combine Harvester" to him. I like to think so.

PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Monday, 25 July 2005 08:31 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I wonder if she sings "I've Got a Brand New Combine Harvester" to him. I like to think so.

PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Monday, 25 July 2005 08:31 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I made a mistake. I am not milimetre man.

PJ Miller (PJ Miller 68), Monday, 25 July 2005 08:32 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I wonder what is meant by "selling out"? I see this term often, but do not fully understand it. We have collaboration here, not a nice thing to call somebody a collabo. From what I have seen and read, Mr. Armstrong seems remarkably loyal to his frends, and Nike and Oakley were the only sponsors to support him after his diagnosis. Oakley even put him on the payroll so he would have insuarnce during his treatment. Cofidis and the rest droppped him like the hot potato, which certainly puts them on his bad side.

It seems consistent with his mentality to support those who supported him. Nike was also the company that gave the start money for the LIVESTRONG bracelets, which has provided millions to cancer research.

Gerard_D, Monday, 25 July 2005 09:34 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I wonder what is meant by "selling out"? I see this term often, but do not fully understand it. We have collaboration here, not a nice thing to call somebody a collabo. From what I have seen and read, Mr. Armstrong seems remarkably loyal to his frends,

He only remains loyal if you do what *he* wishes. The amount of enemies he has far outnumbers his friends.

If Armstrong was "decent" guy, he'd have retired after his fifth win

If Lance Armstrong was a TRUE INDIE ROCKER he wouldn't sell out and do Nike commercials and would currently be dating Karen Osomeone so cool we haven't even heard of her yet, not Sheryl Crow.

Kind of ridiculous to demand that Lance retire, but Eddy Merckx did not participate in the '73 tour because of criticism that he won all the time. I think it's not about decency. It's about a wish that there's more competition (for first place). If Lance participates, he'd need to fall flat on his face to see him lose. So yeah I hope he retires.

nathalie's body's designed for two (stevie nixed), Monday, 25 July 2005 10:32 (twelve years ago) Permalink

He only remains loyal if you do what *he* wishes. The amount of enemies he has far outnumbers his friends.

Yes, he is an exacting individual, undoubtedly one of the MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY sorts. The point I had tried to make was that he is backing Nike's marketing, likely as a response to the support they have given him when was being treated, and afterwards with the livestrong racelets, among others.

Gerard_, Monday, 25 July 2005 11:23 (twelve years ago) Permalink

four weeks pass...

Leblanc - Armstrong fooled us all

Wednesday, August 24, 2005 Posted: 1623 GMT (0023 HKT)

Leblanc (right) congratulates Armstrong after his seventh Tour win
PARIS, France -- Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc claims Lance Armstrong has "fooled" the sports world, over new allegations he used a performance-boosting drug.

Leblanc's comments come a day after L'Equipe reported that six urine samples, provided by Armstrong during the 1999 Tour, tested positive for EPO.

"For the first time -- and these are no longer rumors these are proven scientific facts -- someone has shown me that in 1999 Armstrong had EPO in his body," said Leblanc.

"The ball is now in his court. Why, how, by whom? He owes explanations to us and to everyone who follows the tour. Today, what L'Equipe revealed shows me that I was fooled. We were all fooled."

Leblanc called the latest accusations against Armstrong shocking and troubling.

Armstrong, a frequent target of L'Equipe, vehemently denies the allegations, calling the article "tabloid journalism."

"I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs," said Armstrong.

Armstrong, who retired from professional cycling after winning the Tour a month ago, was not immediately available for comment regarding Leblanc's latest remarks.

EPO, formally known as erythropoietin, was on the list of banned substances at the time Armstrong won the first of his seven Tour's, but there was no effective test then to detect it.

The allegations surfaced six years later because EPO tests on the 1999 samples were carried out only last year -- when scientists at a lab outside Paris used them for research to perfect EPO testing.

The national anti-doping laboratory said it promised to hand its finding to the World Anti-Doping Agency, provided it was never used to penalize riders.

Five-time cycling champion Miguel Indurain said he couldn't understand why scientists would use samples from the 1999 Tour for their tests.

"That seems bizarre, and I don't know who would have the authorization to do it," he told L'Equipe. "I don't even know if it's legal to keep these samples."

L'Equipe's investigation was based on the second set of two samples used in doping tests. The first set were used in 1999 for analysis at the time. Without those samples, any disciplinary action against Armstrong would be impossible, French Sports Minister Jean-Francois Lamour said.

Lamour said he had doubts about L'Equipe's report because he had not seen the originals of some of the documents that appeared in the paper.

"I do not confirm it," he told RTL radio. But he added: "If what L'Equipe says is true, I can tell you that it's a serious blow for cycling."

The UCI did not begin using a urine test for EPO until 2001, although the drug was banned in 1990.

For years, it had been impossible to detect the drug, which builds endurance by boosting the production of oxygen-rich red blood cells.

nathalie starts to cry each time we meet (stevie nixed), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 19:03 (twelve years ago) Permalink

"care for another bottle of Piss De Lance?"
"ah, a 1999 - a fine year"

zappi (joni), Wednesday, 24 August 2005 19:54 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Armstrong considers shock return

Lance Armstrong
Armstrong to marry singer Crow
Lance Armstrong says he could come out of retirement to try for an eighth straight Tour de France victory.

Armstrong said: "While I'm absolutely enjoying my time as a retired athlete, the recent smear campaign out of France has awoken my competitive side.

"I'm thinking it's the best way to piss [the French] off. I'm not willing to put a percentage on the chances but I will no longer rule it out."

Asked how serious he was, Armstrong replied: "I'm exercising every day."

Armstrong believes he is the target of a "witch hunt" by the French media.

French sports daily L'Equipe reported in August that urine samples taken from Armstrong during his first Tour victory in 1999 tested positive for the banned substance EPO.

There will always be a place on the team for him if he decides to come back
Johan Bruyneel
Armstrong's team manager at Discovery Channel
The 33-year-old, who recovered from cancer, has always vehemently denied taking any performance-enhancing drugs.

He retired in July after winning his seventh straight Tour de France.

Armstrong's spokesman Mark Higgins insists the cycling legend is serious about a possible comeback.

"He's still fit and very much in his prime," said Higgins. " He is not ruling out a return to racing.

"In light of the stuff that's been going on in the past few weeks, a comeback has become appealing.

"At the same time, he's a retired athlete who is very much enjoying being with his children and working with charities. And he just got engaged. We'll just have to see."

Johan Bruyneel, Armstrong's team manager at Discovery Channel, said the door was still open for the star rider to return.

"We could decide during our training camp in December, which will be decisive (for the Tour)," Bruyneel told the Belgian news agency Belga.

"But don't make me say that Lance has already decided what he will do with the rest of his career. That said, we speak for 15 minutes on the phone every day, and for 13 of those we talk about cycling."

"He got back on the bike to train three weeks after the end of the Tour de France. He follows the team's progress closely and it's sure that he's still hungry for success.

"There will always be a place on the team for him if he decides to come back. Anyway, he's still under contract with us till the end of 2006."

Last Of The Famous International Pfunkboys (Kerr), Wednesday, 7 September 2005 00:56 (twelve years ago) Permalink

The 33-year-old Armstrong, who is set to marry rock star Sheryl Crow, is considering coming out of retirement in response to the allegations.

Also because he knows how much I hate him. :-)))))

nathalie's pocket revolution (stevie nixed), Friday, 9 September 2005 13:13 (twelve years ago) Permalink

four months pass...
so much for that...

Armstrong, Crow announce they're breaking up
Associated Press
Cycling News Wire

AUSTIN, Texas -- Lance Armstrong and Sheryl Crow have split, the couple announced in a joint statement Friday night.

The seven-time Tour de France champion and the rock star announced their engagement in September. It would have been her first marriage and his second. He has three children from a previous marriage.

"After much thought and consideration we have made a very tough decision to split up. We both have a deep love and respect for each other and we ask that everyone respect our privacy during this very difficult time," the statement said.

my name is john. i reside in chicago. (frankE), Saturday, 4 February 2006 03:20 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I love how that "love and respect" is used in every press statement. The last couple to use this was Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey. I'm awaiting the statement that's honest: "If I come across that twerp aagin, I'm gonna KICK HIS ASS..."

I saw Lance in that Dodgeball film. It almost ruined the film for me. ;-)

Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 6 February 2006 09:52 (twelve years ago) Permalink

two months pass...
Fuck Armstrong dudes!

The only real champion the world has seen was Marco Pantani "the pirate"...hadn't he been persecuted by italian justice Armstrong would have won no Tours! Just remember Courchevel 2000 at the Tour...


Max, Sunday, 23 April 2006 23:33 (twelve years ago) Permalink

As if Marco could keep off the cocaine, amirite folks?

Bring Me The Head of ESTEBAN BUTTEZ (ESTEBAN BUTTEZ~!!!), Monday, 24 April 2006 01:28 (twelve years ago) Permalink

some disturbing attitudes toward cancer here....full of 'googlers'

woweez, Monday, 24 April 2006 03:05 (twelve years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

OH MY GOD he's coming back...IN ADELAIDE??

Nottingham: it's the new Abu Dhabi (King Boy Pato), Monday, 5 January 2009 09:44 (nine years ago) Permalink

And apparently (according to Mike Rann), it's the MOST IMPORTANT THING EVER!

I don't like him for the simple reason that I used to supertext-caption the news, and every year the Tour de France and Tour Down Under were a nightmare of demented names and esoteric terms poured out by deranged commentators at nightmare speeds. (Though to be fair, I could at least spell 'Lance Armstrong' correctly, so he should have been one of those I hated least)

James Morrison, Monday, 5 January 2009 22:11 (nine years ago) Permalink

the brett favre of cycling

my fingers is a jellyfish (omar little), Monday, 5 January 2009 22:13 (nine years ago) Permalink

or roger clemens

my fingers is a jellyfish (omar little), Monday, 5 January 2009 22:13 (nine years ago) Permalink

And apparently (according to Mike Rann), it's the MOST IMPORTANT THING EVER!

Oh, don't tell me you're writing into The Advertiser now. Those people are the reason why I left Adelaide.

Nottingham: it's the new Abu Dhabi (King Boy Pato), Tuesday, 6 January 2009 11:16 (nine years ago) Permalink

I don't think many people realise that Lance is coming back for Astana, so he'll be racing in the glorious colours of KAZAKHSTAN!!

Nottingham: it's the new Abu Dhabi (King Boy Pato), Tuesday, 6 January 2009 11:17 (nine years ago) Permalink

Oh, don't tell me you're writing into The Advertiser now. Those people are the reason why I left Adelaide.

Er, what?

James Morrison, Tuesday, 6 January 2009 12:25 (nine years ago) Permalink

cant believe i ever wasted time opining about this and so annoyingly

Booker van Permalink (Hunt3r), Tuesday, 6 January 2009 16:13 (nine years ago) Permalink

This is a very rare case of accomplishment completely supplanting douchiness.

't (wanko ergo sum), Tuesday, 6 January 2009 16:18 (nine years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

another ex-teammate just came out of the woodwork and fired some accusations in lance's direction.


omar little, Friday, 20 May 2011 19:46 (seven years ago) Permalink

as far as this guy managing his public reputation, he fucked up by not coming clean years ago when he still had tons of positive cache -- his redemption tour would've come full circle by now, but at this point I think he's generally seen as a massive fraud

J0rdan S., Friday, 20 May 2011 20:05 (seven years ago) Permalink

I don't think so... he cured cancer and won 7 tours with one ball, he still is a hero in the eye of the typical american sports fan (ie, has no clue about cycling).

it's a meme i made and i like (Steve Shasta), Friday, 20 May 2011 20:08 (seven years ago) Permalink

My favorite MSM defense piece of Lance came early this year when referring to Armstrong as retired... yet Lance was racing a stage race in Australia at the time.

Let me try to find it, it was pretty funny.

it's a meme i made and i like (Steve Shasta), Friday, 20 May 2011 20:09 (seven years ago) Permalink

i think that the "defiant" reaction to accusations like this is actually kind of revealing. i would think people who were being accused of something absolutely untrue over and over again by some of their closest compatriots would actually react with more palpable hurt and shock rather than some kind of "haters gonna hate" defiance.

omar little, Friday, 20 May 2011 20:11 (seven years ago) Permalink

Sports Illustrated 1/18/11:

by Joshua Norman

Doping allegations have followed Lance Armstrong into retirement. (Credit: AP Photo/Mark Lennihan)

Lance Armstrong has tested negative for performance enhancing drugs on countless occasions. He counts among his friends and supporters former presidents and some of the world's biggest celebrities. He is also among the most prominent spokespeople for eradicating cancer and helping those suffering with it.

Regardless, journalists and federal prosecutors just won't let the now-retired legendary cyclist be.

A federal investigator experienced at probing performance enhancing drug use in U.S. sports who already nabbed track star Marion Jones and baseball great Barry Bonds has barely concealed his continued investigation into Armstrong's alleged use of PEDs.

Now, Sports Illustrated magazine has sent two of its investigative journalists on the trail to uncover evidence of Armstrong's alleged use of PEDs. They will report the full findings in the magazine on newsstands on Wednesday, but in the meantime, they have leaked evidence that they believe may link Armstrong to "the saddest deception in sports history."

None of SI's leaked evidence is particularly strong, however.

Included in their key findings are:

- Armstrong had "access" to a drug that boosts the blood's oxygen-carrying capacity in the 1990s called "HemAssist." He has since denied every taking it and never publicly tested positive for it.

- "Lance had a bag of drugs and s---," said former teammate and admitted doper Floyd Landis, when talking about being stopped by customs in St. Moritz in 2003. Agents allegedly found syringes and drugs with labels written in Spanish. Landis claims Armstrong then asked a member of his traveling crew to convince customs "agents that the drugs were vitamins and that the syringes were for vitamin injections." Armstrong has since denied this happened.

- Armstrong's testosterone-epitestosterone ratio was reported to be higher than normal on three occasions between 1993 and 1996, although the evidence for this is spurious. The lab that reported the higher levels has long since dismissed the tests, and all attempts at unearthing them have fallen flat.

- Another former teammate who has admitted taking PEDs said Armstrong was "the instigator" in 1995 when it came to his cycling team using the banned blood booster EPO. Again, Armstrong denies the accusation and has not tested positive for EPO during his career.

it's a meme i made and i like (Steve Shasta), Friday, 20 May 2011 20:16 (seven years ago) Permalink

Meanwhile while this article was published he was in the middle of a 7 day Tour Down Under stage race (1/16-1/23/11), earning to a 67th place finish in the biggest race south of the equator:

it's a meme i made and i like (Steve Shasta), Friday, 20 May 2011 20:19 (seven years ago) Permalink

Professional cycling is NAGL

boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Friday, 20 May 2011 21:45 (seven years ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.