Log in:  

Register

Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession)

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Irondan, Eshnar, Red Rick, Valv.Piti, Tonton, Pricey_sky, King Boonen

11 Mar 2017 16:22

Lance better start playing golf with Trump :lol:
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,766
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re:

12 Mar 2017 17:01

Benotti69 wrote:Lance better start playing golf with Trump :lol:
But is he smart enough to let him win?
Pazuzu
Member
 
Posts: 339
Joined: 04 Feb 2012 00:52

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

22 Mar 2017 01:09

Not sure if this has been posted already, regardless I'm STILL lmao at his "admiration for non dopers", does he mean like LeMond, who he offered up the princely sum of $300k to anyone who'd say they saw Greg dope too?

Lol! Wonder what Greg would say if he saw that.


http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/lance-armstrong-i-admire-those-people-who-didnt-dope-318715
User avatar 86TDFWinner
Member
 
Posts: 1,656
Joined: 11 Aug 2012 21:10
Location: Southern California

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

22 Mar 2017 01:59

86TDFWinner wrote:Not sure if this has been posted already, regardless I'm STILL lmao at his "admiration for non dopers", does he mean like LeMond, who he offered up the princely sum of $300k to anyone who'd say they saw Greg dope too?

Lol! Wonder what Greg would say if he saw that.


http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/lance-armstrong-i-admire-those-people-who-didnt-dope-318715


Yeah, anti-doping hero Greg is busy lambasting Sky/Wiggins for all their doping to be worried about Lance anymore.... oh wait :cool:
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

22 Mar 2017 03:06

86TDFWinner wrote:Not sure if this has been posted already, regardless I'm STILL lmao at his "admiration for non dopers", does he mean like LeMond, who he offered up the princely sum of $300k to anyone who'd say they saw Greg dope too?

Lol! Wonder what Greg would say if he saw that.


http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/lance-armstrong-i-admire-those-people-who-didnt-dope-318715

No, I think he means the 'admiration' that he showed Bassons...

" . . . and then Lance Armstrong reached me. He grabbed my by the shoulder, because he knew that everyone would be watching, and he knew that at that moment, he could show everyone that he was the boss. He stopped me, and he said what I was saying wasn't true, what I was saying was bad for cycling, that I musn't say it, that I had no right to be a professional cyclist, that I should quit cycling, that I should quit the tour, and finished by saying [*beep*] you. . . " - Bassons,
User avatar Archibald
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,671
Joined: 15 Jun 2009 17:03

20 May 2017 02:20

Here we go! Lance is back, making fun of doping in some HBO comedy about cycling called Tour de Pharmacy. Looks like ****!

https://twitter.com/HBO/status/865597950528901120
blackcat wrote:you must respect the Cobra, a man who can give himself his own nickname. he trancends hubris.
User avatar luckyboy
Veteran
 
Posts: 8,499
Joined: 26 May 2009 21:26

Re:

20 May 2017 04:36

luckyboy wrote:Here we go! Lance is back, making fun of doping in some HBO comedy about cycling called Tour de Pharmacy. Looks like ****!

https://twitter.com/HBO/status/865597950528901120


July 8 ? Mmm ... something else going on in July ... what was it now? ... :D
Kirby, the reason the mute button was invented! :)
LRP - “an angry little man”. “Americanese” - when you want to spread bs
User avatar Robert5091
Member
 
Posts: 871
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56


Re:

19 Jun 2017 21:27

[url][/url]
Benotti69 wrote:Lance better start playing golf with Trump :lol:



I don't think that'll help him at this point.
User avatar 86TDFWinner
Member
 
Posts: 1,656
Joined: 11 Aug 2012 21:10
Location: Southern California

Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

20 Jun 2017 02:48



This is kind of a standard type motion that the feds are likely to win. Floyd's credibility won't be much in issue (because Lance has already admitted to all the juicy doping stuff). No point in wasting time attacking Floyd when Lance has basically agreed with him.

This is a signal to Lance, that he better pony up some real change. The feds have very little to lose taking this to trial. Lance, on the other hand....

Thanks for the link!
User avatar MarkvW
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,116
Joined: 10 Aug 2010 20:13

20 Jun 2017 10:08

So, basically, the feds, they want to be able to say 'LA doped and only LA doped. Boo! Hiss! Hey! You! Stop looking over there at that other doper! Eyes front and center! This is about LA doping! No one else!'

Yeah, right, that sounds like a super strong case...
User avatar fmk_RoI
Member
 
Posts: 1,605
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re:

20 Jun 2017 10:17

fmk_RoI wrote:So, basically, the feds, they want to be able to say 'LA doped and only LA doped. Boo! Hiss! Hey! You! Stop looking over there at that other doper! Eyes front and center! This is about LA doping! No one else!'

Yeah, right, that sounds like a super strong case...


Well yes, it is. They're arguing that LA's lawyers shouldn't be allowed to make moral equivalence arguments in an attempt to deflect and mis-direct.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,262
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

Re: Re:

20 Jun 2017 10:30

King Boonen wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:So, basically, the feds, they want to be able to say 'LA doped and only LA doped. Boo! Hiss! Hey! You! Stop looking over there at that other doper! Eyes front and center! This is about LA doping! No one else!'

Yeah, right, that sounds like a super strong case...


Well yes, it is. They're arguing that LA's lawyers shouldn't be allowed to make moral equivalence arguments in an attempt to deflect and mis-direct.
But LA is arguing that USPS shoulda oughta known he was doping given everyone knew everyone was doping and so being able to point to Flandis and say 'Him too!', well of course that makes sense and isn't just 101 shoot-the-messenger character assassination.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Member
 
Posts: 1,605
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

20 Jun 2017 10:43

fmk_RoI wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:So, basically, the feds, they want to be able to say 'LA doped and only LA doped. Boo! Hiss! Hey! You! Stop looking over there at that other doper! Eyes front and center! This is about LA doping! No one else!'

Yeah, right, that sounds like a super strong case...


Well yes, it is. They're arguing that LA's lawyers shouldn't be allowed to make moral equivalence arguments in an attempt to deflect and mis-direct.
But LA is arguing that USPS shoulda oughta known he was doping given everyone knew everyone was doping and so being able to point to Flandis and say 'Him too!', well of course that makes sense and isn't just 101 shoot-the-messenger character assassination.


Did you read the article?

... But the federal government doesn’t want a jury to hear about the latter description as it pursues a $100 million civil lawsuit against Armstrong, Landis’ former teammate. The government is asking a judge to forbid issues about Landis' character and motivation from being part of the trial in November.


That's the second paragraph. (less first sentence that refers to the first paragraph).
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,262
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

Re: Re:

20 Jun 2017 11:11

King Boonen wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:So, basically, the feds, they want to be able to say 'LA doped and only LA doped. Boo! Hiss! Hey! You! Stop looking over there at that other doper! Eyes front and center! This is about LA doping! No one else!'

Yeah, right, that sounds like a super strong case...


Well yes, it is. They're arguing that LA's lawyers shouldn't be allowed to make moral equivalence arguments in an attempt to deflect and mis-direct.
But LA is arguing that USPS shoulda oughta known he was doping given everyone knew everyone was doping and so being able to point to Flandis and say 'Him too!', well of course that makes sense and isn't just 101 shoot-the-messenger character assassination.


Did you read the article?

... But the federal government doesn’t want a jury to hear about the latter description as it pursues a $100 million civil lawsuit against Armstrong, Landis’ former teammate. The government is asking a judge to forbid issues about Landis' character and motivation from being part of the trial in November.


That's the second paragraph. (less first sentence that refers to the first paragraph).
Hey, I even made it past the part where they whined about it being "unfairly prejudicial, and will mislead and confuse the jury" - doesn't mean I accept without question the motivation of their motion and I'm shocked - shocked! I tell you - to think that you do. Come on, pointing out that Flandis doped, profited from doping, lied about doping and now stands to profit from LA's doping, of course that's gonna weaken the Federal case so of course they want to deep six it.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Member
 
Posts: 1,605
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

20 Jun 2017 11:49

fmk_RoI wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:
King Boonen wrote:
fmk_RoI wrote:So, basically, the feds, they want to be able to say 'LA doped and only LA doped. Boo! Hiss! Hey! You! Stop looking over there at that other doper! Eyes front and center! This is about LA doping! No one else!'

Yeah, right, that sounds like a super strong case...


Well yes, it is. They're arguing that LA's lawyers shouldn't be allowed to make moral equivalence arguments in an attempt to deflect and mis-direct.
But LA is arguing that USPS shoulda oughta known he was doping given everyone knew everyone was doping and so being able to point to Flandis and say 'Him too!', well of course that makes sense and isn't just 101 shoot-the-messenger character assassination.


Did you read the article?

... But the federal government doesn’t want a jury to hear about the latter description as it pursues a $100 million civil lawsuit against Armstrong, Landis’ former teammate. The government is asking a judge to forbid issues about Landis' character and motivation from being part of the trial in November.


That's the second paragraph. (less first sentence that refers to the first paragraph).
Hey, I even made it past the part where they whined about it being "unfairly prejudicial, and will mislead and confuse the jury" - doesn't mean I accept without question the motivation of their motion and I'm shocked - shocked! I tell you - to think that you do. Come on, pointing out that Flandis doped, profited from doping, lied about doping and now stands to profit from LA's doping, of course that's gonna weaken the Federal case so of course they want to deep six it.


Well now you're making a more nuanced argument and shifting the goalposts.

They can still point out FL doped, along with everyone else if they want, the Feds aren't complaining about that. They are saying that FL's motivations for coming forward are irrelevant. Whether he stands to make money or not doesn't matter because LA has admitted to what FL claims, so attempts to paint FL as a liar can only be seen as prejudicial.

Of course, Armstrong's lawyers can argue against this. Not sure they'll win though.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,262
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

Re: Re:

20 Jun 2017 12:09

King Boonen wrote:Of course, Armstrong's lawyers can argue against this. Not sure they'll win though.
This and LeMond/Betsy presenting evidence...
User avatar fmk_RoI
Member
 
Posts: 1,605
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

20 Jun 2017 13:51

I'm not sure if anyone has seen this video...pretty funny, may the USPS lawyers could use it...

its especially funny near the end when some fellow cyclists are chanting "USA! USA! USA!"

https://youtu.be/QwD22vX9KSY

or

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRToKld5FTc
User avatar Neworld
Member
 
Posts: 796
Joined: 27 Jan 2010 01:17
Location: Canada

20 Jun 2017 16:17

I find the whole case baffling on a number of fronts - US Postal must have known about the doping culture in cycling and in the wash up got great value for their sponsorship - Strange no action taken by Discovery Channel with their sponsorship in 2005 - I am unaware of an other companies suing teams/riders for doping - What does the US Government gain by their action ? This is a typical case of American bullying whether it be their citizens or non-citizens.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,726
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re:

20 Jun 2017 16:55

yaco wrote:I find the whole case baffling on a number of fronts...

What I find the most baffling aspect of the case is that as a European, my impression is that Armstrong's impact on the public image of the Post Office has been roughly this:

Pre-1999 public image of the USPS:
https://youtu.be/nuKwpkUNNrA?t=16s

Post-1999 public image of the USPS:
https://youtu.be/uVB9wFFat24?t=2m30s
User avatar Aragon
Junior Member
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 17:44
Location: Finland

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 16 guests

Back to top