• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Armstrong's comeback reasons reviewed by Walsh/Ballester

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 1, 2009
1,488
0
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
Elapid it's not about the "good" the foundation is doing, and in any case there are many ways to help the cancer community besides Mr. Armstrong's thing. The American Cancer Society for one, or directly funding research institutions like the universities. No it's about supporting a campaign which has made a tool of the cancer community to advance the persona of a liar and charlatan. Armstrong's a sporting fraud and a chronic liar. That's the truth. And he is laughing at the Truth and will also be at History, which he, through the impact of Livestrong on public opinion, has falsified. Thus Livestrong, which does not save lives, is merely a propaganda machine to manipulate public opinion in regards to a man who is a liar and a fraud. And may, as if that were'nt enough, open up a portal to a promising political career! It's just obscene. That's what critically the issue is really about, because in supporting Livestrong we all become complices in Armstrong's lies and falsifications. And Armstrong is not a servant of the cancer communtiy. To the contrary, it is serving him. The cancer community through Livestrong, has become a formidable ideological shield against his falsified career, and, at the same time, a springboard to launch a possible future political career; where the stupid yellow wristbands become the identifying brand of a mass movement, which in reality has practically nothing to do with the fight against cancer and certainly won't save a single life. Rather they become a pledge of loyalty to a man who has public ambitions. Believe me that's what this is all about.

No, no breaks for Armstrong. Especially since he is one who has shown no mercy toward any collegue who has in the least criticised him, or left his squadra, or dared to shed light on how advanced doping was conected to a medic with whom he had sporting relations for years. And anybody from Texas who has political ambitions and is a noted friend of a certain Texan, represents a figure who needs to be exposed as the fraud he is. And defeated, once and for all in the public sphere. Plain and simple.

+1.........
 
May 14, 2009
151
0
0
Visit site
elapid said:
I am not a Lance fan, but give the guy a break. He is an inspiration for cancer sufferers and his Livestrong foundation does a good job in supporting people through their treatment. If he can build hospitals to help cancer sufferers, then good on him.

You should be able to separate the obnoxious, arrogant personality and doped, omerta-enforcing cyclist from the person that does do some good for the community. His personal and cycling traits shouldn't prevent someone from being inspired by his survival and comeback and using this to strive for their own survival. And no matter what you say and how it was achieved, it is still an inspiring story.

Yes, he makes money from the foundation and the percentage of money donated that goes towards charitable causes is relatively low, but he is still doing something about cancer and people who suffer from the various forms of this disease.
Sorry, there is a lot of people more honest and as inspirating than Lance that can speak for cancer without the fear that a disgusting background were found.
To promote fraud like Armstrong is not a good choice, people promoting cancer have been abused earlier... and now they seems to have no choice to continue to promote a lie.
 
Jun 9, 2009
1
0
0
Visit site
Cycling Fun

Reading this thread has really opened my eyes about Lance Armstrong. If he has gotten away with what is being claimed then I'm in awe at his achievements. His past is so dodgy if goes in to politics he could be the new J.F.K.

To think of all those cancer sufferers who have so mistakenly been inspired during their illness, I bet they wish they had just laid down and died. And the organisations he has brow beaten into doing something, the money could have gone on executive bonuses instead.

Frankly I blame him for people getting interested in cycling when it should just be left to us true fans.

And I despise the fact that despite all the money he has made for himself, in the greater scheme of things he has done more good than me.
 
Nameofuser said:
Frankly I blame him for people getting interested in cycling when it should just be left to us true fans.
I give him unequivocal credit for this: I feel safer on the roads, as a cyclist in the USA. He has raised the profile of cycling immesureably in the USA, in the eyes of the average joe driver. Even if every other accusation is 100% true.
.
And what the hell is wrong with more people actually considering trying cycling....?
.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
Visit site
Wow. I'm taking heat on this one!

First of all, let me state categorically that I do not like Lance the man or the cyclist. I have written on this forum before that Armstrong basically ruined the innocence of cycling for many people, me included, because of his documented doping and enforcement of the omerta when he was in a position to do the exact opposite. I do not like his control of the media and his twittering gives me the ****s. I also do not care what his political aspirations are and how he achieves them. If he became a politician, then I can think of no more worthy profession to suit his personal characteristics.

As I have also stated on previous threads, there are many more worthy cancer foundations to donate money to, especially if you want your money to contribute to cancer research and want more of your money to count. But Livestrong still has a role which many other organizations do not fill. You have no idea how many people blindly accept what their oncologist tells them just because they are the specialist. However, like this forum, there are more than one opinion and, for cancer patients, there are different treatment options and also trials available. As my old boss used to say "if you cannot be your own advocate, get someone that will be your advocate". Livestrong does the latter - it acts as people's advocate and tries to make sure that they get the best possible information about their disease and treatment for their cancer.

But ... I also treat cancer patients. I hear the stories of how he has inspired people. If it makes them feel good and gives them the impetus to fight harder to live a cancer-free life, then I'm not going to be the one to take that away from them. I am well aware of the lack of integrity and honesty of Lance because I have followed professional cycling for a while and have read most of the recent books published on professional cycling or by professional cyclists. But to those that either don't follow or don't read about professional cycling, Lance is still a source of inspiration rather than scorn and derision.
 
Mar 11, 2009
165
0
0
Visit site
If it helps, seperate the cyclist from the myth.

As a rider he blacklisted journalists, promoted the omerta and worked with the likes of Dr Ferrari.

If you have a mythical idea in your mind of a heroic figure coming back from illness to give hope to lots of ill people, let them enjoy it.

But like many myths, closer inspection reveals things aren't always as they seem. This is a cycling website, not an oncology forum though so debate of his riding, who coached him and more is obviously relevant stuff.
 
Mar 12, 2009
21
0
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
Elapid it's not about the "good" the foundation is doing, and in any case there are many ways to help the cancer community besides Mr. Armstrong's thing. The American Cancer Society for one, or directly funding research institutions like the universities. No it's about supporting a campaign which has made a tool of the cancer community to advance the persona of a liar and charlatan. Armstrong's a sporting fraud and a chronic liar. That's the truth. And he is laughing at the Truth and will also be at History, which he, through the impact of Livestrong on public opinion, has falsified. Thus Livestrong, which does not save lives, is merely a propaganda machine to manipulate public opinion in regards to a man who is a liar and a fraud. And may, as if that were'nt enough, open up a portal to a promising political career! It's just obscene. That's what critically the issue is really about, because in supporting Livestrong we all become complices in Armstrong's lies and falsifications. And Armstrong is not a servant of the cancer communtiy. To the contrary, it is serving him. The cancer community through Livestrong, has become a formidable ideological shield against his falsified career, and, at the same time, a springboard to launch a possible future political career; where the stupid yellow wristbands become the identifying brand of a mass movement, which in reality has practically nothing to do with the fight against cancer and certainly won't save a single life. Rather they become a pledge of loyalty to a man who has public ambitions. Believe me that's what this is all about.

No, no breaks for Armstrong. Especially since he is one who has shown no mercy toward any collegue who has in the least criticised him, or left his squadra, or dared to shed light on how advanced doping was conected to a medic with whom he had sporting relations for years. And anybody from Texas who has political ambitions and is a noted friend of a certain Texan, represents a figure who needs to be exposed as the fraud he is. And defeated, once and for all in the public sphere. Plain and simple.

you seem rather paranoid, this whole conspiracy bit you're rambling about. jeez man, relax, have a beer and find a hobbie. if he doped and got away w/it, so be it. if he raises awareness and $$ for cancer, good. if he wnts to run for office, who the hell cares? and if a pro athlete wants to return to his sport, who the hell has anything to say about it other than the athlete himself. he is in the ring fighting it out, where are you? oh yeah, learn english if you are going to attempt to communicate in english. ftr: i'm a fan of racing, and thus a fan of racers, la included.
 
Apr 1, 2009
2
0
0
Visit site
mainemike said:
you seem rather paranoid, this whole conspiracy bit you're rambling about. jeez man, relax, have a beer and find a hobbie. if he doped and got away w/it, so be it. if he raises awareness and $$ for cancer, good. if he wnts to run for office, who the hell cares? and if a pro athlete wants to return to his sport, who the hell has anything to say about it other than the athlete himself. he is in the ring fighting it out, where are you? oh yeah, learn english if you are going to attempt to communicate in english. ftr: i'm a fan of racing, and thus a fan of racers, la included.

Wow, get off the dope, dope! Your english isn't too flash either and if your confused english originated from a place called england not good'ol texas. But I'm talking to the educated because I presume with your extensive linguistic skills your fluent in arabic/latin and another 10 lanuguages just like good ol' la - troll!

I'm sorry i shouldn't have bit but *** posts annoy me
 
Mar 13, 2009
2
0
0
Visit site
Of course, Mr.Walsh is supplementing his income by writing another Lance book. I read his previous book, and did not learn anything new. :cool:

lostintime said:
Walsh is doing his usual summer thing ..... write about LA and doping.

It's a great way to supplement the income! It beats selling lemonade I suppose :)

.... and I take it about as seriously:rolleyes:
 

whiteboytrash

BANNED
Mar 17, 2009
525
0
0
Visit site
h90943 said:
Of course, Mr.Walsh is supplementing his income by writing another Lance book. I read his previous book, and did not learn anything new. :cool:

....as is Lance. His new book is coming out in July. Call it even on that front ?

.
 
Apr 1, 2009
5
0
0
Visit site
Mellow Velo said:
Feel free to prove us wrong, Lance, but so far the comeback has been an epic fail on the cycling front and the cancer research front. The only improvement seems to be the size of his wallet.


I must say I disagree with you comments: "An epic fail come back?" wow, if retuning to cycling after 3 years off the saddle and 38 years of age and finishing the Giro on a very desirable 12th place for any cyclist... I personally don't see the failure on that... and you were expecting that cancer cure was going to be found after he crossed the line??? 'come on...
he is already making cancer awareness just by showing up.

for me as a cycling fan, I'd like to see anybody who will actually race hard return and make the tours somewhat exciting... Rasmussen is actually
on my list to kick butts VERY soon.
 
buhote said:
I must say I disagree with you comments: "An epic fail come back?" wow, if retuning to cycling after 3 years off the saddle and 38 years of age and finishing the Giro on a very desirable 12th place for any cyclist... I personally don't see the failure on that... and you were expecting that cancer cure was going to be found after he crossed the line??? 'come on...
he is already making cancer awareness just by showing up.

for me as a cycling fan, I'd like to see anybody who will actually race hard return and make the tours somewhat exciting... Rasmussen is actually
on my list to kick butts VERY soon.

"Very desirable 12 place"?! Come on now, for any cyclist, even an amateur, 12th place is absolute garbage. "any cyclist" considers anything outside of the top 10 a complete failure and really is only slightly happy with something in the top 3.
 
Apr 1, 2009
5
0
0
Visit site
BikeCentric said:
"Very desirable 12 place"?! Come on now, for any cyclist, even an amateur, 12th place is absolute garbage. "any cyclist" considers anything outside of the top 10 a complete failure and really is only slightly happy with something in the top 3.

"if any cyclist" would consider complete failure not getting in the top 3, the grave yards would be filled with thousands of us who love to race, just by feeling such "failure"... racing is not only for the top 3 my dear.
 
BikeCentric said:
"Very desirable 12 place"?! Come on now, for any cyclist, even an amateur, 12th place is absolute garbage. "any cyclist" considers anything outside of the top 10 a complete failure and really is only slightly happy with something in the top 3.
I had a GREAT time racing for percentage placing in the early day of MTBs. If I crack the top 25% it was awesome.... or the top 10%. Later I got a bunch of top 3 and top 5, but in 10 years of racing I won exactly.... ONE race.
.
Of course I had different goals for the whole experience than the pros do.
.
 
dgodave said:
I had a GREAT time racing for percentage placing in the early day of MTBs. If I crack the top 25% it was awesome.... or the top 10%. Later I got a bunch of top 3 and top 5, but in 10 years of racing I won exactly.... ONE race.
.
Of course I had different goals for the whole experience than the pros do.
.

Clarification: I did not mean to sound like an elitist *** there although I probably did. I have never won a race either despite 3 2nd's and 5 3rd's lol!

However, it is my experience though that most roadies consider a placing outside of the top-10 to be pretty much "blah" and I am talking my own amateur experience here.

Now when you are pro riding for GC in a stage race, 12th is most definitely NOT desireable.

And that is not to bag on Lordstrong either, he rode pretty well in the Giro.
 
buhote said:
"if any cyclist" would consider complete failure not getting in the top 3, the grave yards would be filled with thousands of us who love to race, just by feeling such "failure"... racing is not only for the top 3 my dear.

You're right actually, I worded my response too harshly.
 
May 14, 2009
151
0
0
Visit site
h90943 said:
Of course, Mr.Walsh is supplementing his income by writing another Lance book. I read his previous book, and did not learn anything new. :cool:
He wast not written for people who already know that Lance doped.
 
Mar 11, 2009
74
0
0
Visit site
Indurain said:
The world would have been a better place and the sport probably cleaner if Armstrong had of died from his cancer.

Regardless of anyone's opinion, is a comment like this appropriate? Some people have some serious mental issues.
 
Jun 9, 2009
403
0
0
Visit site
Give me a Break

12th in a grand tour is a pretty good showing for any rider who spent the majority of the three weeks riding in support of a team mate. When you consider that it was his first big test against some of the world's best riders on a parcourse with a grueling time trial and some choppy mountains following a recovery from a fracture and a three year lay-off, well it is simply impressive. All that from a cancer survivor.

As for his doping speculations, here are some facts. He has never tested positive. He has never been sanctioned or fined. He has been tested more than any other cyclist. He still claims to have never doped.

Other legends of the sport and current racers that cannot make those claims include Merckx, Pantani, Theunisse, Zabel, Rasmussen, Miller, Basso, Valverde, Landis, Ricco, Kohl, Riis, Ullrich, Hamilton, Boonen, and many others.

It is as easy to hate a champion as it is to acknowledge him for his accomplishments. Such is the nature of being a fan of the sport and its athletes. Another fact is that until another rider wins seven tours, he will be deserving of the praise of greatest TDF cyclist in history. Like it or not.
 
mainemike said:
you seem rather paranoid, this whole conspiracy bit you're rambling about. jeez man, relax, have a beer and find a hobbie. if he doped and got away w/it, so be it. if he raises awareness and $$ for cancer, good. if he wnts to run for office, who the hell cares? and if a pro athlete wants to return to his sport, who the hell has anything to say about it other than the athlete himself. he is in the ring fighting it out, where are you? oh yeah, learn english if you are going to attempt to communicate in english. ftr: i'm a fan of racing, and thus a fan of racers, la included.
Well I care. I care about who is running for office. And armstrong may do that some day. I care about Truth and History. Lance is a Fraud and a Liar who annihilates Truth and falsifies History. He is thus one who should be condemned and not praised. And people who respond by saying that he never tested positive are just stupid, also because this too is a lie. He has, in 6 samples with EPO from the 99 Tour. Anyway those people are just stupid and know nothing about the sport. Nothing. And I'm not an ameoba who will just sit back and allow any **** to enjoy himself because of the likes of lazy people like yourself without the capacity to elaborate one critical thought, who have no merit to enjoy the democratic liberties which the constitutions have provided. Because you sustain the omerta, the coruption and allow people who, in the worst cases, should be put behind bars, to enjoy the privledges they do because you sanction them by doing nothing to block their flagrant falsifications. You do nothing to oppose them or, worse, even support their causes or vote for them! Disgusting! It's not about paranoia, it's about oposition.
 
May 26, 2009
502
0
0
Visit site
Eva Maria said:
You failed in your assignment.

Please tell us what W&B have written that is incorrect? You accuse biases but are unable to give one example that proves your point. Read their books and tell us what in them is biased and provided some proof to back up your clams

I appears you did not read the link I provided. The link you reference that claimed "the balance of the appearance fee will be going to the Lance Armstrong Foundation" came from South Australian Premier Mike Rann's media department. Armstrong himself said that this statement was wrong and he was keeping the money for himself

A statement need not be false to be biased. A woman is biased when she talks about equality of sexes. An author is biased if by writing certain things he profits financially. Even if a biased author writes a truth it can be suspected if it is the whole truth, half the truth or only one side of the truth.
 
May 26, 2009
502
0
0
Visit site
BikeCentric said:
Clarification: I did not mean to sound like an elitist *** there although I probably did. I have never won a race either despite 3 2nd's and 5 3rd's lol!

However, it is my experience though that most roadies consider a placing outside of the top-10 to be pretty much "blah" and I am talking my own amateur experience here.

Now when you are pro riding for GC in a stage race, 12th is most definitely NOT desireable.

And that is not to bag on Lordstrong either, he rode pretty well in the Giro.

One correction: he did not ride for the GC, he rode in support for Leipheimer. One can argue that he only became a domestique when he couldn't himself keep up in the first week but nevertheless he lost minutes on the climbs because he wasn't riding for his GC position.

Though that may prove your point that Armstrong himself as a rider didn't value a top-10 placing. I've understood that he's quite competitive and if he would've respected a top-10 place he would probably have ridden for it.
 

Eva Maria

BANNED
May 24, 2009
387
0
0
Visit site
RdBiker said:
A statement need not be false to be biased. A woman is biased when she talks about equality of sexes. An author is biased if by writing certain things he profits financially. Even if a biased author writes a truth it can be suspected if it is the whole truth, half the truth or only one side of the truth.

If you believe there is an alternative side of "The Truth" then what Walsh has written them please provide it.