Cycle of Lies

[Dave_1]

What practically all riders in every era have faced.

But to your inane and rather puerile inquires, I'd never have done what he did because I'm incapable. Not because I'm holier than though, but simply because I don't have within the type of arrogance, ruthlessness and brazenness needed to do what he did. If anything this was his special talent. And it was no less than cultivating ‘invincibility’ in becoming the mafia boss of cycling, which transcended his status as mere doped athlete in creating an appalling conflict of interests none of his rivals could take advantage of. One by one they were popped, either during or after, except him. That's power, not talent.

Such a power position only multiplied the fraud, beyond all measure. As has been said over and over again, it wasn't just the doping, but the ruthless pursuit of gaining an edge, of unscrupulously eliminating as much as humanly possible all chance of defeat, that didn't involve merely doping, but systemic support. All the while his American fan base and mass media were too stupid and clueless to do anything else but surrender to the fable.

I don’t think any other cyclist had his unique ability to manipulate everything and stack the odds in his favor, for which athleticism played only a relative part. This dialectic goes beyond a mere discussion about activeness vs. passiveness and into the diabolical.

So you would never have doped. You would have walked away. That's fine. How many of you folk on here can HONESTLY say you would have walked away?

 

[blackcat]

So you would never have doped. You would have walked away. That's fine. How many of you folk on here can HONESTLY say you would have walked away?

its a moot question innit?

doping is a significant barrier to entry, but those who choose not to dope, are usually lost to the sport and voiceless. There will be myriad.

And I dont think one can answer that question til they are presented with the choice to, in Matrix metaphor, blue pill versus red pill. i know not which is placebo.

 

[rhubroma]

on the activeness v passiveness @rhubroma

this is reconciled when the individual makes a choice to pursue a professional cycling career.

you have a discreet selective sample in the peloton bloc.

doping is the barrier to entry, and it is not a binary: passive v active.

its a spectrum

Oh, I agree with this. However, that spectrum, as you call it, is a continuum which leads to various operative levels once inside and not just in regards to the praxis of doping.

On a scale of 1 to 25, when all factors are weighed in, let's say LA became a 28. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say so.

 

[rhubroma]

So you would never have doped. You would have walked away. That's fine. How many of you folk on here can HONESTLY say you would have walked away?

Walk away from what? Simple doping or everything else?

If it were just the doping then I doubt many, whereas if it involved the bullying, threatening, buying people off, working the system, various investments, obsession with control, distrust, dissimulation, lying, politicking, etc., then I'd say very, very few.

I think I made it clear that to me this was his special talent.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Precisely. Only in the bowels of the clinic do we hear such 'opinion'. Even Bassons recently was promoting LA's talent, saying he still would've won those tours in a clean peloton.

This is where it all diverges, true? I can think just as little of LA as a person as anybody in here, but I refuse to buy into the pack fodder BS. Or my belief that the powers that be in the sport have a vested interest in no AAFs happening which causes other consternation. How soon we forget the UCI trying to cover up AC's positive, and I am not so naïve to think it didn't happen all the time.

There is another dynamic here however, that being Lance the linebacker classics buffalo versus the transformed Lance GT winner. I've had my stint staying he was a talentless hack, but that was just to p!ss off the natives. He certainly had great talent, but his transformation into a GT contender was a drug fueled change, and was aided by having the best drug taking advice money could buy.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

So you would never have doped. You would have walked away. That's fine. How many of you folk on here can HONESTLY say you would have walked away?

I would have.

its a moot question innit?

doping is a significant barrier to entry, but those who choose not to dope, are usually lost to the sport and voiceless. There will be myriad.

And I dont think one can answer that question til they are presented with the choice to, in Matrix metaphor, blue pill versus red pill. i know not which is placebo.

My circumstances are a bit different considering that I did the dirty with other things and have been clean for 23 years. I would't have stuck a needle in my arm, nor taken any substances that were banned. I know that for a fact. However, at another point in my life, I would have been the first in line...if I had the athletic talent...which I don't.

 

[blackcat]

There is another dynamic here however, that being Lance the linebacker classics buffalo versus the transformed Lance GT winner. I've had my stint staying he was a talentless hack, but that was just to p!ss off the natives. He certainly had great talent, but his transformation into a GT contender was a drug fueled change, and was aided by having the best drug taking advice money could buy.

but he was doping since tri.

no doubt he had talent, even with the roids or testo as a 16yo in triathlon.

but the euros start early too, not like he was having one up on them

 

[ChewbaccaD]

but he was doping since tri.

no doubt he had talent, even with the roids or testo as a 16yo in triathlon.

but the euros start early too, not like he was having one up on them

Maybe he was just doing what everyone else was doing? It does however seem that a transformation took place that was not normal even for dopers...and Chris Froome... Maybe it was just dedication?

 

[Fatclimber]

As great of an assessment as this is:

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.

It is unfair to come to this conclusion:

....

What is perhaps a better indication of "natural ability" can be found in what a rider was capable of in his youth, or in any case the early years of his career at the Tour.

The fact remains that it is all pure speculation as to what would have occured if the peloton was clean. Do you really think a young rider's natural potential can gauged by his (doped or otherwise) results against a doped up field? I don't.

 

[MarkvW]

So you would never have doped. You would have walked away. That's fine. How many of you folk on here can HONESTLY say you would have walked away?

Walked away from doping or walked away from professional cycling?

Or are they just the same thing?

 

[rhubroma]

Let's put it this way: between a level playing field in which everyone is natural and the arms race; I certainly don't think LA would have been nearly the "talented" rider he became under the latter regime, campared with others, if he only had to rely on his natural ability. Those who decided to walk away from the spectrum altogether, whose real abilities will never be known, are the larger mystery though.

Yet this has been said before by many.

 

[MarkvW]

Let's put it this way: between a level playing field in which everyone is natural and the arms race; I certainly don't think LA would have been nearly the "talented" rider he became under the latter regime, campared with others, if he only had to rely on his natural ability. Those who decided to walk away from the spectrum altogether, whose real abilities will never be known, are the larger mystery though.

Yet this has been said before by many.

The system selects for dopers.

 

[Nederick]

He should have been on a better program for his forays into running coz his marathon times weren't overly flash.

 

[Neworld]

Let's put it this way: between a level playing field in which everyone is natural and the arms race; I certainly don't think LA would have been nearly the "talented" rider he became under the latter regime, campared with others, if he only had to rely on his natural ability. Those who decided to walk away from the spectrum altogether, whose real abilities will never be known, are the larger mystery though.

Yet this has been said before by many.

As many rationale posters here know, any GT is about even the smallest scintilla of a %age gain, over about 100hrs.

As more and more books, based on fact and confirmed recurrent points outline (under Oath), LA was always full percentage points above any other rider or tema, even within his own team (more dope, better MDs, UCI, selective riding...we all know the list). These are not delusions, but reality.

Believing that LA was a true champion is about as likely as believing that George H could win the Hors Categorie Pla d'Adet

http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2005/stage-15/results

I love this Header on CN that year...
"Is Hincapie Discovery's future Tour contender?"

Even better was GH's comments after the stage win when asked what he feels like after winning a MTF?
"I was shocked". No *** George, so was everyone else.

 

[del1962]

He should have been on a better program for his forays into running coz his marathon times weren't overly flash.

I don't think there is that great a correlation between being good at running and good at cycling, other than general fitness, it is about different muscle groups and build.

 

[rhubroma]

As many rationale posters here know, any GT is about even the smallest scintilla of a %age gain, over about 100hrs.

As more and more books, based on fact and confirmed recurrent points outline (under Oath), LA was always full percentage points above any other rider or tema, even within his own team (more dope, better MDs, UCI, selective riding...we all know the list). These are not delusions, but reality.

Believing that LA was a true champion is about as likely as believing that George H could win the Hors Categorie Pla d'Adet

http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/tour-de-france-2005/stage-15/results

I love this Header on CN that year...
"Is Hincapie Discovery's future Tour contender?"

Even better was GH's comments after the stage win when asked what he feels like after winning a MTF?
"I was shocked". No *** George, so was everyone else.

Exactly...

 

[Le breton]

Believing that LA was a true champion is about as likely as believing that George H could win the Hors Categorie Pla d'Adet
......
Even better was GH's comments after the stage win when asked what he feels like after winning a MTF?
"I was shocked". No *** George, so was everyone else.

OK guys, have you heard the story as it unfolded told by Oscar Pereiro?
It's really funny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ud6obZ85w

Sound only, no images unfortunately, they would have been priceless.

 

[Jeremiah]

Cover up in cycling?

Yes, cover up in cycling was invented by LA. Just off the top of my hung over head, I remember the 'technicalities' over Delgado's positive in 88.

Think what you want, rubarb. We will not agree; that is why I didn't reply to your last post but you persist on hounding me on this. I know you are probably bored right now but you will need to find a more willing adversary. You also need to get over LA letting your doped up midget hero win on Mont Ventoux in 2000. Take care.

Dude, I don't know what you're on but he covered up in much more than cycling.

He duped medicine, politics, popular culture, industry, the whole planet.

Your point is basically meaningless.

 

[Neworld]

OK guys, have you heard the story as it unfolded told by Oscar Pereiro?
It's really funny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Ud6obZ85w

Sound only, no images unfortunately, they would have been priceless.

No unfortunately. Short summary pls as I am Spanish illiterate.

I do recall that about 2 Kms from the top those 2 were side by side and GH looks over to OP and says something to him (they both speak Spanish)...looked like a good'ole verbal payoff to OP, IMO. Was that in the audio clip?

 

[elizab]

So you would never have doped. You would have walked away. That's fine. How many of you folk on here can HONESTLY say you would have walked away?

Uh, me. No doubt I would've walked away. Believe me?

 

[mewmewmew13]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_1
"So you would never have doped. You would have walked away. That's fine. How many of you folk on here can HONESTLY say you would have walked away?"


I would have also..and I know it for sure.

and yeah I believe Betsy for sure too!

 

[hrotha]

Uh, me. No doubt I would've walked away. Believe me?

You're an exception, though, which is why many people look up to you and to the precious few other genuine good folks in this story. You were there, so your experience was close enough to that of a pro rider to be pretty sure of what you'd have done. Most of us can only guess. I should hope I'd do the right thing and walk away too, but ultimately I don't know. What I do know is that in an environment where something is widespread, guilt and responsibility are diluted. Those who stay away from such corruption are akin to saints, but it's not reasonable to demand sainthood of everybody, because by definition sainthood is extraordinary.

 

[mewmewmew13]

A bit OT but in the same 'vein'…
I just got a recommendation from Amazon for the Pete Rose book…
lol

 

[elizab]

There is another dynamic here however, that being Lance the linebacker classics buffalo versus the transformed Lance GT winner. I've had my stint staying he was a talentless hack, but that was just to p!ss off the natives. He certainly had great talent, but his transformation into a GT contender was a drug fueled change, and was aided by having the best drug taking advice money could buy.

to answer Granville's question, Chewy says it best. I asked Cranky and he said armstrong was a good one day rider but too big to get over the climbs; pre cancer as big as he was there's no way he would've won the Tour.

One thing I'll add is I second blackcat: I too believe the guy was doping since his tri-athlete days. We'll never ever know someone's natural ability when they've been artificially enhanced all their life as a pro. We simply will never know. If you put everyone on the starting line clean, Frankie would never be able to climb but would be strong as an ox; Floyd would be able to climb as well as be strong as an ox; George would've won sprinting stages but not the likes of Cav never ever winning any mountain stages; Tyler, as nice as he is wouldn't have ever made a pro team - the kind that races in Europe. Now that's just my opinion folks. Everything is speculation kinda like, "Hmmm, what kind of Maserati could we have bought had Frankie become a junkie?"

 

[elizab]

You're an exception, though, which is why many people look up to you and to the precious few other genuine good folks in this story. You were there, so your experience was close enough to that of a pro rider to be pretty sure of what you'd have done. Most of us can only guess. I should hope I'd do the right thing and walk away too, but ultimately I don't know. What I do know is that in an environment where something is widespread, guilt and responsibility are diluted. Those who stay away from such corruption are akin to saints, but it's not reasonable to demand sainthood of everybody, because by definition sainthood is extraordinary.

God knows my sins. I'm a pretty ****ty Christian. I try my best to do the right thing but often fail. I can't stand when people use God or cancer to protect and/or rehabilitate their image. Does my calling out hyprocrisy make me hypocritical because I myself am sinful? Maybe. But that's for an entirely different thread. thanks for the kind words, though