Cycle of Lies

[blackcat]

That is the understatement of the century. His friend John Korioth was bang on when he stated to Lance, @ p. 394

"Yep, you are a really good liar, but you're horrible at telling the truth"

you mean "friend".

An expedient individual who has anti-social personality disorder, has no friend.

ergo, Armstrong has no friends. I would dare say, those who have got close to him in a professional and business relationship, are cut from a similar cloth, and are there to get what they can out of the product that was the lance armstrong brand.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

you mean "friend".

An expedient individual who has anti-social personality disorder, has no friend.

ergo, Armstrong has no friends. I would dare say, those who have got close to him in a professional and business relationship, are cut from a similar cloth, and are there to get what they can out of the product that was the lance armstrong brand.

100% bang on

 

[ChrisE]

I have just finished reading Cycle of Lies. Before this I had read most of the books about Armstrong and doping in cycling, and the Reasoned Decision. I never liked Armstrong from the get go, not because of his suspected doping but because of his arrogant, obnoxious and bullying behaviour.

So I read Cycle of Lies with the perspective of being relatively well informed about the doping on USPS, on other teams, in the peloton generally and by specific cyclists. I understand the mob mentality to doping, omerta and the abject negligence of the UCI.

My conclusion is that rarely in the world do you come to see so clearly what a despicable human being is Lance Armstrong. I am also blown away by the lengths the people in his entourage would go to, to defend his lies, fraud and cheating. That too is despicable.

In my opinion Armstrong is not capable of redemption, because he has no redeeming qualities. In my opinion he is a pathetic psychopath, who is so deluded by the illusory script he has concocted in his mind about his unfair treatment, that he is out of touch with reality.

Armstrong's own words in the context of his never having sought out his family perhaps sums it up best, @ p. 404,

"The follow up is maybe that means I'm just extremely fu@!ed up, I don't know." (Spelling for censorship purposes)

That is the understatement of the century. His friend John Korioth was bang on when he stated to Lance, @ p. 394

"Yep, you are a really good liar, but you're horrible at telling the truth"

Somebody as bad as you are claiming would not have waited for JU in 2001.

I read the book a couple of weeks ago in one setting of 7 hours. Your take is the same as mine; I cannot fathom somebody actually being this type of person and achieving anything. I don't see him ever being 'rehabilitated' either.

I never really thought deeply about him as a person except my aversion to the way he used cancer. I always defended him in a sporting context, and have pointed out the hypocrisy I see in some of the players of this soap opera and from some of the posters in here.

But, he can't even control himself to Macur and get across a positive message, however insincere. It also makes me ask WTF about the people in his life that put up with this shyt. The thought comes to mind when his little innocent ex-wife was gushing over him in that interview years ago, after the divorce. Sheryl Crow, who could have just about anybody, gets engaged to him. His mother making up her sob story for profit. Makes me want to puke.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

Somebody as bad as you are claiming would not have waited for JU in 2001.

I read the book a couple of weeks ago in one setting of 7 hours. Your take is the same as mine; I cannot fathom somebody actually being this type of person and achieving anything. I don't see him ever being 'rehabilitated' either.

I never really thought deeply about him as a person except my aversion to the way he used cancer. I always defended him in a sporting context, and have pointed out the hypocrisy I see in some of the players of this soap opera and from some of the posters in here.

But, he can't even control himself to Macur and get across a positive message, however insincere. It also makes me ask WTF about the people in his life that put up with this shyt. The thought comes to mind when his little innocent ex-wife was gushing over him in that interview years ago, after the divorce. Sheryl Crow, who could have just about anybody, gets engaged to him. His mother making up her sob story for profit. Makes me want to puke.

He is not worth wasting a barf bag!

 

[D-Queued]

Somebody as bad as you are claiming would not have waited for JU in 2001.

I read the book a couple of weeks ago in one setting of 7 hours. Your take is the same as mine; I cannot fathom somebody actually being this type of person and achieving anything. I don't see him ever being 'rehabilitated' either.

I never really thought deeply about him as a person except my aversion to the way he used cancer. I always defended him in a sporting context, and have pointed out the hypocrisy I see in some of the players of this soap opera and from some of the posters in here.

But, he can't even control himself to Macur and get across a positive message, however insincere. It also makes me ask WTF about the people in his life that put up with this shyt. The thought comes to mind when his little innocent ex-wife was gushing over him in that interview years ago, after the divorce. Sheryl Crow, who could have just about anybody, gets engaged to him. His mother making up her sob story for profit. Makes me want to puke.

Kudos to you for that.

Looks like he finally wore you down, though.

As for the JU thing, isn't it kind of like the cancer shield in that it helps provide a redeemable narrative? And, doesn't it also underscore how completely in control Lance was?

When you know you have the outcome completely covered - either through doping, UCI fixing, or even paying off the other guy - you can afford to 'look' sporting. Don't know if a pay off ever happened with Ulrich, but the Basso situation sure looked like Lance paid him out.

I may have posted this before, long, long ago but it is notable again in this context.

Someone who was able to witness some of the inside noted to me that the team and associated support people were able to monitor Armstrong's power numbers through the Tour.

This person found it notable and surprising that Lance's power output went up as the Tour progressed.

Even more notable and surprising for them, however, was that Basso's and Ulrich's numbers went down as the Tour progressed. You know, kind of what you should expect. That added notability and surprise deserves two of these:

Dave.

 

[ChrisE]

Maybe instead of writing 'defended', I should have written 'will defend'. I do not buy into your constant memo about LA having no talent.

Let's say his numbers did go up over the course of a tour and the others went down. The very first mountain stage is usually where he made his mark, so that kinda shoots a hole in that when everybody should have been fresh. And, you can't tell me that those riders he beat by minutes in the early mountain stages that were closer to him in the end, had a wider performance gap in week 3. Nice narrative, Dave, but the facts don't support it. Tell your inside buddies there is at least one crazy person out there that doesn't buy their story. Also, take it up with noted LA enemies TH and FL, who went out of their way to not diminish LA's talent and in fact showed it respect.

And, it is ludicrous to think that LA had exclusive arrangement with the UCI. As I have stated many times, it does him no good if his competition is getting busted. It does the sport no good if dopers are busted. There is much more incentive to cover up AAF's than expose them. JU himself and others have admitted doping during those years. I even got banned recently for some reason for pointing out to vortex that he has come around to this same conclusion, and his argument with me years ago has turned 180.

I can separate the person from his achievements, and still have the same answer when questioned about my position on his talent. An equally good question is why you like 'I only intended to dope' Basso so much, who still lies to this day.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Somebody as bad as you are claiming would not have waited for JU in 2001.

I read the book a couple of weeks ago in one setting of 7 hours. Your take is the same as mine; I cannot fathom somebody actually being this type of person and achieving anything. I don't see him ever being 'rehabilitated' either.

I never really thought deeply about him as a person except my aversion to the way he used cancer. I always defended him in a sporting context, and have pointed out the hypocrisy I see in some of the players of this soap opera and from some of the posters in here.

But, he can't even control himself to Macur and get across a positive message, however insincere. It also makes me ask WTF about the people in his life that put up with this shyt. The thought comes to mind when his little innocent ex-wife was gushing over him in that interview years ago, after the divorce. Sheryl Crow, who could have just about anybody, gets engaged to him. His mother making up her sob story for profit. Makes me want to puke.

Chris..we agree!
yep..and this is why I could never like him in a sporting context either..
his personality was just fukced..a miserable human.

tbh he reminded me exactly of an old short-lived boyfriend I once had..no upper lip, close-set small eyes..pathological liar..
I spotted Lance a mile away

 

[ChrisE]

Chris..we agree!
yep..and this is why I could never like him in a sporting context either..
his personality was just fukced..a miserable human.

tbh he reminded me exactly of an old short-lived boyfriend I once had..no upper lip, close-set small eyes..pathological liar..
I spotted Lance a mile away

You draw conclusions about character from physical features? How perceptive.

I once dated a girl with a cat, and she was a loon but wild in bed. I refuse to draw conclusions about girls with cats from that. You know what I mean?

 

[mewmewmew13]

You draw conclusions about character from physical features? How perceptive.

I once dated a girl with a cat, and she was a loon but wild in bed. I refuse to draw conclusions about girls with cats from that. You know what I mean?

Why don't you post a pic of your face here and we can experiment with responses from the forum posters..
you know what I mean?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/mind/articles/emotions/faceperception1.shtml

 

[Neworld]

And, it is ludicrous to think that LA had exclusive arrangement with the UCI. As I have stated many times...

Yes, because Lance and his acerbic posse are so egalitarian and above board, and, everyone else paid off the UCI and held the financial assets of the uCI prez's. You are on an island without soil. I think the labyrinthine map on the back cover of "Wheelmen" illustrates how massive and widespread the gang of LA cheats were infiltrating the multiple levels of US cycling, the UCI, teams, sponsors....and how ludicrous you above statement is.

I can separate the person from his achievements, and still have the same answer when questioned about my position on his talent.

No one said he wasn't good, just far from great. Hell, Landis, CVDV, DZ were all genetically more gifted.

 

[achenk01]

doping, only ruin the spirit of professionalism

 

[Granville57]

tbh he reminded me exactly of an old short-lived boyfriend I once had..no upper lip, close-set small eyes..pathological liar..

Look, mew. If you dated Lance in the past, just come clean with us. God knows, you wouldn't have been the first...or the last.

It's a new era. Everyone is confessing their past sins. Join the "in crowd." We won't tell anyone.

[edit]
Wait a minute. "Short-lived."
So...you killed him?!


Btw, I finished the book this afternoon. Curious to read the details of this thread now.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Look, mew. If you dated Lance in the past, just come clean with us. God knows, you wouldn't have been the first...or the last.

It's a new era. Everyone is confessing their past sins. Join the "in crowd." We won't tell anyone.

[edit]
Wait a minute. "Short-lived."
So...you killed him?!


Btw, I finished the book this afternoon. Curious to read the details of this thread now.

I 'got rid of him'

 

[Granville57]

Maybe instead of writing 'defended', I should have written 'will defend'. I do not buy into your constant memo about LA having no talent.

Also, take it up with noted LA enemies TH and FL, who went out of their way to not diminish LA's talent and in fact showed it respect.

I can separate the person from his achievements, and still have the same answer when questioned about my position on his talent.

No one said he wasn't good, just far from great. Hell, Landis, CVDV, DZ were all genetically more gifted.

That depends on your definition of "wasn't good." I could easily retrieve multiple posts from this forum where people have described Lance's natural abilities (whatever those might be) as little better than a local cat 1 racer. Maybe not using those exact words, but there has always been a temptation to paint Lance with the brush of untalented loser on two wheels. But as Chris has pointed out above, and I have referenced the very same in the past, Floyd and Tyler (who we all love to quote) held Lance in pretty high regard when it came to his cycling skills. As I mentioned specifically, and quite recently, the term Floyd used was, "kick a$$." Is that meant to mean only when dope was part of the equation? I've no idea. But for those who raced alongside Lance, I've yet to see them attempt to diminish whatever innate talent he may have had.

This would be an excellent topic for Betsy to chime in on. If only she knew someone who she could trust that actually rode with Lance.

Bring it on, Betsy. Bring it on!

 

[rhubroma]

Maybe instead of writing 'defended', I should have written 'will defend'. I do not buy into your constant memo about LA having no talent.

Let's say his numbers did go up over the course of a tour and the others went down. The very first mountain stage is usually where he made his mark, so that kinda shoots a hole in that when everybody should have been fresh. And, you can't tell me that those riders he beat by minutes in the early mountain stages that were closer to him in the end, had a wider performance gap in week 3. Nice narrative, Dave, but the facts don't support it. Tell your inside buddies there is at least one crazy person out there that doesn't buy their story. Also, take it up with noted LA enemies TH and FL, who went out of their way to not diminish LA's talent and in fact showed it respect.

And, it is ludicrous to think that LA had exclusive arrangement with the UCI. As I have stated many times, it does him no good if his competition is getting busted. It does the sport no good if dopers are busted. There is much more incentive to cover up AAF's than expose them. JU himself and others have admitted doping during those years. I even got banned recently for some reason for pointing out to vortex that he has come around to this same conclusion, and his argument with me years ago has turned 180.

I can separate the person from his achievements, and still have the same answer when questioned about my position on his talent. An equally good question is why you like 'I only intended to dope' Basso so much, who still lies to this day.

You are being deliberately specious. He didn't always make his mark only in the first mountain stages, at least not after the beginning of his streak, which as far as Basso goes is significant. I'd say in 4 of the 7 he was way ahead of the game, whereas in the others he was just ahead.

In fact the year Basso beat him in an early MTF, Lance was able to outgun the Italian in the end who JB nervously admitted was stronger after that stage. The plans needed to be rethought. His last Tour, however, he won so easily with strong performances throughout that it was downright farcical.

Lance had a superior program, had the UCI on his side and a wide range of commercial interests with it.

I don't defend Basso, however, if doping ever falsified an athlete's natural capacity in ways that vivify human potential, then it was with LA.

He was no real champion, but purely a chemical and blood manipulated fabrication, who had the best that money could buy and so was able to stay far ahead in the arms race. Period.

 

[Nicko.]

...
But as Chris has pointed out above, and I have referenced the very same in the past, Floyd and Tyler (who we all love to quote) held Lance in pretty high regard when it came to his cycling skills.
...

It could be that Floyd and Tyler (and JV for that matter) used that language to disarm the counterattacks from the twit and his media machine.
Think about it, what is the one thing he yearned for from his collegues? Respect (or fear).
Vouch for his "bad-as$-ness" in public to defuse the situation. The legal machine moves on, the twit loses his laser-like focus and the hordes of fanboys get their pacifier. "See, he was the best"

Come to think about it, maybe this was orchestrated by JV...

 

[Dave_1]

You are being deliberately specious. He didn't always make his mark only in the first mountain stages, at least not after the beginning of his streak, which as far as Basso goes is significant. I'd say in 4 of the 7 he was way ahead of the game, whereas in the others he was just ahead.

In fact the year Basso beat him in an early MTF, Lance was able to outgun the Italian in the end who JB nervously admitted was stronger after that stage. The plans needed to be rethought. His last Tour, however, he won so easily with strong performances throughout that it was downright farcical.

Lance had a superior program, had the UCI on his side and a wide range of commercial interests with it.

I don't defend Basso, however, if doping ever falsified an athlete's natural capacity in ways that vivify human potential, then it was with LA.

He was no real champion, but purely a chemical and blood manipulated fabrication, who had the best that money could buy and so was able to stay far ahead in the arms race. Period.

Given what an arms race it was, my question is, what should Lance Armstrong have done differently as regards the decision to join or not join the arms race? Not asking for opinions re his bullying and lies (and why I feel he really deserved all 7 wins taken off him)...just want your honest opinion on what else he should have done on turning pro

Secondly, you guys would be lost if Lance's story was not here...I actually think we all pretty much enjoy following his story and the car crash it's become

 

[ebandit]

crash

Secondly, you guys would be lost if Lance's story was not here...I actually think we all pretty much enjoy following his story and the car crash it's become

oh yes! i have very much enjoyed the 'car crash'

after enduring watching lance crush his opponents in the tdf and in every other area of his life it's good to see the bully receive just deserts

a learning curve to make him a better man

Mark L

 

[Dave_1]

oh yes! i have very much enjoyed the 'car crash'

after enduring watching lance crush his opponents in the tdf and in every other area of his life it's good to see the bully receive just deserts

a learning curve to make him a better man

Mark L

From Macur's book, I fear LA is totally a lost cause, incapable of learning. He's just too damaged or done too many drugs. Whatever, his tirade to Macur shows the Oprah stuff and apology tour were blatant manipulation.

 

[blackcat]

Secondly, you guys would be lost if Lance's story was not here...I actually think we all pretty much enjoy following his story and the car crash it's become

i would not be lost. I am a man, and unlike women, i have a fine sense of direction.

we would just be somewhere else in another unedifying pursuit, but atm, this is fine fine splendid entertainment. better than Petrus or d'Yquem

 

[Race Radio]

From Macur's book, I fear LA is totally a lost cause, incapable of learning. He's just too damaged or done too many drugs. Whatever, his tirade to Macur shows the Oprah stuff and apology tour were blatant manipulation.

Agreed, it is clear the apologies were nonsense.

What is surprising is that he thinks that using the tactics that got him into this mess will work to get him out of it. Smearing Frankie, Betsy, LeMond and crying that he is a victim is not going to work.

 

[ChrisE]

You are being deliberately specious. He didn't always make his mark only in the first mountain stages, at least not after the beginning of his streak, which as far as Basso goes is significant. I'd say in 4 of the 7 he was way ahead of the game, whereas in the others he was just ahead.

In fact the year Basso beat him in an early MTF, Lance was able to outgun the Italian in the end who JB nervously admitted was stronger after that stage. The plans needed to be rethought. His last Tour, however, he won so easily with strong performances throughout that it was downright farcical.

Lance had a superior program, had the UCI on his side and a wide range of commercial interests with it.

I don't defend Basso, however, if doping ever falsified an athlete's natural capacity in ways that vivify human potential, then it was with LA.

He was no real champion, but purely a chemical and blood manipulated fabrication, who had the best that money could buy and so was able to stay far ahead in the arms race. Period.

Deliberately specious? If I am specious it is purely accidental.

I was responding to Dave's predictable absoluteness of all things LA performance related, with the ever so predictable 'opinion' of LA talent = pack fodder. He says he has inside info that LA's power numbers went up over the GT, while others went down. I am just pointing out some issues with that. LA's could have gone up, but who is to say others went down? I am only pointing out that his competition, IN GENERAL, seemed to recover from the early onslaught. Let's take 2000 for example. Was JU weaker on Jaux Plane than on Hautacam, and LA vice versa? The question is stupid with such an obvious answer.

Of course, tactics play a part in a lot of this and we are talking about humans who have good days and bad days, so nothing is absolute. So, we are back to opinions and trying to piece together what is plausible. At least that is what I tend to do since I don't have super duper secret inside info that bolsters my prejudices. I look at results.

And, WTF are you talking about? Is that pain medicine causing some cloudiness? LA didn't make his mark on the first MTF in his early wins? Sestriere, Hautacam, AdH? Hello? BTW, I haven't posted in your get well thread, but I hope you are doing well and are healed soon.

So, you pick one year that Basso nipped LA on the first MTF finish in 2004 I believe, then pull some quote out from somewhere about JB's concern. I believe that was the tour LA won like 5 stages, and in fact beat Basso by 2 mins I believe on the AdH TT (which does support him getting stronger and Basso getting weaker, BTW, I admit). Anyway, you got me with that zinger, rubarb. Everything else in the saga must be discounted.

Finally, I really do envy your conviction about who did and didn't have talent during that time, or any time in the last XX years for that matter, in cycling. I envy your knowledge about the effects of PED's on one rider vs another. I'm sure you have it all figured out which of the PED users would have won if everybody was clean, and of course you know they would be Italian.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

i would not be lost. I am a man, and unlike women, i have a fine sense of direction.

I would not be lost. I am a man, and like the cliche of women, I have no sense of direction.

But I do have a GPS.

You are smoking something very strong, Dave_1, registered in 2009 and a whopping 12 posts per year, if you truly believe what you just wrote.

 

[rhubroma]

Deliberately specious? If I am specious it is purely accidental.

I was responding to Dave's predictable absoluteness of all things LA performance related, with the ever so predictable 'opinion' of LA talent = pack fodder. He says he has inside info that LA's power numbers went up over the GT, while others went down. I am just pointing out some issues with that. LA's could have gone up, but who is to say others went down? I am only pointing out that his competition, IN GENERAL, seemed to recover from the early onslaught. Let's take 2000 for example. Was JU weaker on Jaux Plane than on Hautacam, and LA vice versa? The question is stupid with such an obvious answer.

Of course, tactics play a part in a lot of this and we are talking about humans who have good days and bad days, so nothing is absolute. So, we are back to opinions and trying to piece together what is plausible. At least that is what I tend to do since I don't have super duper secret inside info that bolsters my prejudices. I look at results.

And, WTF are you talking about? Is that pain medicine causing some cloudiness? LA didn't make his mark on the first MTF in his early wins? Sestriere, Hautacam, AdH? Hello? BTW, I haven't posted in your get well thread, but I hope you are doing well and are healed soon.

So, you pick one year that Basso nipped LA on the first MTF finish in 2004 I believe, then pull some quote out from somewhere about JB's concern. I believe that was the tour LA won like 5 stages, and in fact beat Basso by 2 mins I believe on the AdH TT (which does support him getting stronger and Basso getting weaker, BTW, I admit). Anyway, you got me with that zinger, rubarb. Everything else in the saga must be discounted.

Finally, I really do envy your conviction about who did and didn't have talent during that time, or any time in the last XX years for that matter, in cycling. I envy your knowledge about the effects of PED's on one rider vs another. I'm sure you have it all figured out which of the PED users would have won if everybody was clean, and of course you know they would be Italian.

WTF am I talking about, um precisely what I said: namely that he didn't only leave his mark on the first MTF stage. In most of those Tours he either kept his level up, or progressed, usually winning the last TT is merely a case in point. What the others did I have no way of knowing, other than their performances, which didn’t witness any great increase toward the end.

And I wasn't taking access to a quote "out from somewhere," but something that JB actually said about his concern over LA's margin of superiority on the climbs after that stage in the Tour. As it turned out JB's concern was not to be translated into any real danger for Armstrong in winning that Tour, as in fact he got better. When was it in 2003 when Ulrich placed him in difficulty on the Tourmalet, only to have Lance turn the tables over at Hautecam? A remarkable feat given that he sucked in the previous TT and was recovering from dehydration.

Don't envy me over anything, especially not right now (oh, by the way, thanks for posting in my get-well thread ), but just look at all the evidence and what people far more qualified than myself have said about his natural ability. I never said he was without any raw talent besides, however, as regards his 'natural' numbers for Grand Tours, without super drugs and blood transfusions, he was a relative donkey - a rider more suited to one day events and short stage races. Once he got re-hooked up with Ferrari post-cancer, at which time he was being allowed to take substances for his health that normal riders weren't, and once the powers that be in the sport designated him as their new Wonderboy and a story to sell to the global market; his ascension to superstardom was perhaps more synthetic than any other athlete in the history of professional sport. His “natural ability,” though, had nothing to do with it.

A number of experts have stated that without all the inertia, he never would have been anything more than a top 30 Tour finisher.

Granted he still had to train the way he did, however, with all that in his favor the results were still as artificially enhanced as people are saying. This was my point, as I have already stated: the Armstrong case allows us to perceive how artificial enhancement can vivify human potential, though only in its most falsified and grotesque aspects.

 

[blackcat]

the problem is we can never know the counter-factual and hypothetical. he had doped since he was a triathlete as a teenager.

I think if there was never doping, Armstrong would have still been a champion in cycling. p'raps, not a mature triathlon competition, he got on an upswing of a nascent sport. The new triathlon champions, all have a physique like the shlecks.

But he would have been a champion in cycling.

He might have podiumed in a clean sport, he might not have. But 131313 made a good post about 18 months back on Armstrongs rising career before cancer. he was starting to become a player and competitor (podium/win) in the one week Tours, and he had the punch to win Ardennes and maybe even Flanders, like Bartoli