Cyclings greatest fraud on nat geo +1

GT_TDI_150

Interesting clip/quote from armstrong

LA:"why would i dope, i have money, i have success, i've my families name, why would i risk someone stepping up to my son in highschool in 2012 and say 'hey armstrong, your dad got popped for doping'..."


Paraphrased: "I'm not doping, how would i collect my kids from school if i doped and got caught?"

happytramp

Crap, missed it. Did they catch him?

GT_TDI_150

happytramp wrote: »

Crap, missed it. Did they catch him?

He admitted to most(depending on statute of limutations ) of it in the end :eek:

Shattered my world so it did ...

laraghrider

I watched it last week and to be fair it didn't have anything we didn't already know. It wasn't great.

On his quote about having money and success etc... I think Dan Martin's quote sums it up better than anyone ever has.

"It's a question of morals. I don't dope for the same reason I don't walk out of a shop without paying for something"

Wishbone Ash

laraghrider wrote: »

I watched it last week and to be fair it didn't have anything we didn't already know. It wasn't great

+1

Seemed to be targeted at US audiences. I don't recall anyone being interviewed who wasn't American (open to correction).

disco1

People seem to foget he was the strongest doper.. They all did it, he still won all those tours over the other dopers..

Why home in on one person...

He is the fall guy here. And I still admire him..

fondriest

disco1 wrote: »

People seem to foget he was the strongest doper.. They all did it, he still won all those tours over the other dopers..

Why home in on one person...

He is the fall guy here. And I still admire him..

Yes there are many other dopers and he is the fall guy , but probably deserves to be the fall guy more than others . He rode better but he also doped better . He's a bully, I certainly don't admire him .

Brian?

disco1 wrote: »

People seem to foget he was the strongest doper.. They all did it, he still won all those tours over the other dopers..

Why home in on one person...

He is the fall guy here. And I still admire him..

You admire a cheat? Your moral compass needs a service.

disco1

Brian? wrote: »

You admire a cheat? Your moral compass needs a service.

do you admire any cyclists since the early 90 that did well???? If not fine, if so then check your own moral compass

Wishbone Ash

disco1 wrote: »

Why home in on one person...

He was an out and out bully who liked to be photographed with presidents and other VIP's yet his treatment of some staff, fellow riders and others who questioned him was despicable.

...and you admire that?

Idleater

disco1 wrote: »

do you admire any cyclists since the early 90 that did well???? If not fine, if so then check your own moral compass

My hero died alone, in a cheap hotel room, from an overdose, reportedly because he had lost all that was dear to him along the way. He cheated along with the others, but in my view he didn't bully his way to his millions and fight tooth and nail to keep what he had earned beating others doing the same.

The morality of both circumstances is different.

Brian?

disco1 wrote: »

do you admire any cyclists since the early 90 that did well???? If not fine, if so then check your own moral compass

Lance Armstrong was a bully, a cheat and a liar. There was reason enough to dislike him if he had never doped. But
he was instrumental in the most sophisticated doping program in the history of cycling.

There are plenty of cyclists who doped. There is only one who dominated the sport by doping.

I hate him.

BadCharlie

I hope you admire him not because he doped, but for something else?

When you think about it he did some good armstrong, but the bad far outweighed the good. And for that i could never admire the guy.

morana

disco1 wrote: »

do you admire any cyclists since the early 90 that did well???? If not fine, if so then check your own moral compass

thats a very good point and something I have been struggling with tbh

GT_TDI_150

People seem to have mist my subtle hint in my OP, forum rules dont allow me to be more specific

shaka

BadCharlie wrote: »

I hope you admire him not because he doped, but for something else?

When you think about it he did some good armstrong, but the bad far outweighed the good. And for that i could never admire the guy.

To be honest I don't see how he did any good. If you are referring to live strong , long before he was exposed as the fraud he obviously was I had lost respect for that organisation. It served one function and that was to aid the pharmstrong myth and offer protection from inquisitive questioning.

Many were cheating at the time but far from all and anyone who were outspoken against doping paid a heavy price..

Max_Charger

Brian? wrote: »

You admire a cheat? Your moral compass needs a service.

Didn't I read posts from you, and a few others here, cheering on Contador during the tour?

laraghrider

Idleater wrote: »

My hero died alone, in a cheap hotel room, from an overdose...

My hero climbed off his bike at the mere sight of a hill and spent the final two weeks of the tour being photographed with many beautiful women on various beaches throughout Italy. Much to the disgust of other riders who were slogging their guts out in the alps. What a man

Brian?

Max_Charger wrote: »

Didn't I read posts from you, and a few others here, cheering on Contador during the tour?

Absolutely. I enjoy watching Contador race and wanted him to do well to make the tour more competitive.

I don't admire him for winning by cheating though. He tested positive and was striped of a tour and a giro. Good enough for him.

I think it's perfectly acceptable to separate the 2.

Kieran81

GT_TDI_150 wrote: »

People seem to have mist my subtle hint in my OP, forum rules dont allow me to be more specific

i didnt miss it , just thought it is ridiculous to compare the two, you think because wiggins said something similar to lance so we should automatically be ultra suspicious he must be a doper .

shaka

Apparently Walsh has said pharmstrongs last and biggest victim is froome, have to say if that's true that's enough for me and beginning to believe in the Kenyan

redzerredzer

Was actually thinking of starting a thread about people's views on Armstrong.
I dislike him for his treatment of people, especially simeoni.
However everyone who finished in the top 50 in all his tours was almost certainly doping and nobody seems to have a problem with them.
It annoys me that LA could dope better than everyone due to his budget and even worse that the authorities turned a blind eye to him and managed to catch others. However, those others would have been only to happy to be in his position and also would have used it to win without worrying about their competitors.
I think Floyd Landis is as bad as Armstrong. I have no respect for him. He is now talked about as a hero for exposing Lance. He only did that for money. He had no problem with doping at all and tried to blackmail his way back onto a doping programme. A complete scumbag.
At least Armstrong didn't rat everyone out to save himself. Like Landis, hamilton and miller. I can admire that even if I don't like him.

BQQ

redzerredzer wrote: »

Was actually thinking of starting a thread about people's views on Armstrong.
I dislike him for his treatment of people, especially simeoni.
However everyone who finished in the top 50 in all his tours was almost certainly doping and nobody seems to have a problem with them.

Exactly. Many doped, but only he treated people like s**t and used the cancer shield.

redzerredzer wrote: »

At least Armstrong didn't rat everyone out to save himself. Like Landis, hamilton and miller. I can admire that even if I don't like him.

He never got the opportunity, they'd all come clean already.
What's wrong with telling the truth anyway?

Seve OB

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

+1

Seemed to be targeted at US audiences. I don't recall anyone being interviewed who wasn't American (open to correction).

Missed the first 10 minutes, but I actually though it was a pretty decent and informative program.

Emma O'Reilly was on it a bit and she ain't a yank!

redzerredzer

BQQ wrote: »

He never got the opportunity, they'd all come clean already.
What's wrong with telling the truth anyway?

He could rat on many team mates that hadnt come forward. He could rat on Ferrari.

Its wrong to tell the truth for the wrong reasons. All of these guys had an agreement. When it suited some of them they jumped ship to save themselves. I respect that Armstrong and Ferrari went down together without dragging anyone down with them.

I always hated this guy at school. He was one of the lads until he got detention. Then he told the teacher about what the rest of us had been doing. Hes still a prick now in his 40s.

Chartsengrafs

redzerredzer wrote: »

I always hated this guy at school. He was one of the lads until he got detention. Then he told the teacher about what the rest of us had been doing. Hes still a prick now in his 40s.

All this talk or rats.. are you in a crime gang or have you seen too many mafia movies?!

The likes of Hamilton etc seem to be seeking some form of redemption. True, he'll probably make a few quid in the process, and that's not something I'm too happy about.

But the stakes are higher here. It's different to being caught doing something you shouldn't in school. The sport needs people to speak out so it can move on. Otherwise it'll die. You seem to place value on the toxic tradition of Omerta in the peloton, and I just can't agree with that.

kfod

laraghrider wrote: »

My hero climbed off his bike at the mere sight of a hill and spent the final two weeks of the tour being photographed with many beautiful women on various beaches throughout Italy. Much to the disgust of other riders who were slogging their guts out in the alps. What a man

Class post! It ties into RokOn's thread about sport becoming more scientific and boring. Though maybe Sagan is the new Cipo?

redzerredzer

Basster wrote: »

All this talk or rats.. are you in a crime gang or have you seen too many mafia movies?!

The likes of Hamilton etc seem to be seeking some form of redemption. True, he'll probably make a few quid in the process, and that's not something I'm too happy about.

But the stakes are higher here. It's different to being caught doing something you shouldn't in school. The sport needs people to speak out so it can move on. Otherwise it'll die. You seem to place value on the toxic tradition of Omerta in the peloton, and I just can't agree with that.

Yes I'm in a crime gang, but also the term rat was always used whether it was a police informant or a little brother telling his mum.
It's not that I respect the peloton omerta it's that I don't respect the informants who come out for the wrong reasons. Floyd Landis was happy to dope after his ban was served. When nobody wanted him, he told his story. That makes him a rat not an anti doping campaigner.
I very much respect Semeoni because he spoke up while in the peloton and spoke up for the right reasons.

uphillonly

disco1 wrote: »

do you admire any cyclists since the early 90 that did well???? If not fine, if so then check your own moral compass

It is an interesting area. I loved the style of Vinokourov & Contador but have real issues admiring them as they never accepted their guilt. Vino was caught blood doping. As far I'm aware, there is no steak sandwich, Jack Daniels or any way of accidentally having someone else's blood in your system. I think it was pre-Twilight films so he can't even claim it to be man-love emulation of RPatz.

I have more time for Hamilton & Millar who showed genuine contrition. OK, they both sold books but their message seems real. I think many were caught up in an era doing things they didn't want to do. Armstrong never gave the impression he had any moral issues with his approach. A great tweet during the Oprah interview - Armstrong "hmmm, what would a human say now." He came across so calculating.

I can't remember the context but on stage 2 or 3 of the tour in a post-race interview Millar, unprompted, called himself an ex-doper. Refreshingly honest.

Dan Martin's quote is brilliant & it's great that he's riding in an era his approach can achieve success.

uphillonly

Alex Gibney is making a documentary on Armstrong which should be excellent given his back catalogue which includes Enron: Smartest Men in the Room & Mea, Maxima, Culpa: Silence in the House of God.

dedocdude

I love all the LA bashing that comes from lads that rode around the Phoenix Park with him in '09 - not saying anyone here who bashes him did that, but there are a lot of people in the Irish Cycling Community who did (rode) and do (bash) - luckily it was a very well photographed event, if you get me.

And for the lads that say - "sure i didn't know what he was up to all the way back in '09" - well I have very bad news for you regarding Santa Claus....

uphillonly

dedocdude wrote: »

I have very bad news for you regarding Santa Claus....

He dopes?

mcgratheoin

uphillonly wrote: »

He dopes?

He's never tested positive

Kav0777

uphillonly wrote: »

He dopes?

The most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping program in the history of sleigh pulling...

hardCopy

uphillonly wrote: »

He dopes?

I've always been suspicious of his superhuman climbing ability.

NeedMoreGears

mcgratheoin wrote: »

He's never tested positive

Maybe but that Rudolph guy and his red nose!

IM0

ok if we take it that all the main contenders were dopers at that time then he is even more of a scumbag, no one else destroyed other peoples lives in the process of defending a lie, so that puts him head and shoulders above anyone else for being the worst offender by far

dedocdude

uphillonly wrote: »

He dopes?

worse, he's a Hypocrite - used to wear Livestrong underpants up till a fortnight ago and now he's on the anti-Lance bandwagon too

Like i said, if you were naive since '99, selling your Trek now doesn't make up for it.

Kieran81

just a little off topic , but very much connected , with all the talk of the last 20 odd years being the "epo era" or basically being all but written off as tainted and lance's quote of it being impossible to win the tdf clean , is there any winners during this time regarded as clean ? greg lemond , cadel evans or carlos sastre for example ? sastre is a bizarre one , i see him being referred to as mr clean etc , never linked to any scandal , qouted as saying he promised never to dope because of the depression and early death of a brother-in-law , lance seemingly hating him... but yet was on bjarne riis teams for many years which seems to totally be at odds to riding clean

hardCopy

Lemond has been one of the most vocal anti-doping campaigners: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_LeMond_anti-doping_stance_and_controversies He even lost his business because of his criticism of Armstrong

I don't think Evans has ever had any dodgy results or accusations and is regarded as clean, although he did work with Ferrari at one point.

redzerredzer

Kieran81 wrote: »

but yet was on bjarne riis teams for many years which seems to totally be at odds to riding clean

99% pro cyclist don't have much choice. They need a job that pays as much as they can get.
If they don't like the boss or his values it is not like they can just go to the next team like a top footballer can.
As i think i recognise you from the mma forum I will compare it to the UFC. I'm sure the fighters hate Dana White but they can't speak up. There is no where else for them to make much money or build a reputation.

Kieran81

redzerredzer wrote: »

99% pro cyclist don't have much choice. They need a job that pays as much as they can get.
If they don't like the boss or his values it is not like they can just go to the next team like a top footballer can.
As i think i recognise you from the mma forum I will compare it to the UFC. I'm sure the fighters hate Dana White but they can't speak up. There is no where else for them to make much money or build a reputation.

i do be on the mma forum alright
i understand the dilema most would have had regarding job security , but i would have thought a guy with sastre's mr clean record and his results would be a dream signing and might be a plus when trying to attract sponsors , and he could move on relatively freely?