Pazuzu said:The fact that he is still denying he doped during his 2009-2010 comeback, isn't going to help him get into the good graces of the anti-doping authorities anytime soon.
wirral said:He has an army of lawyers advising him and a lot of powerful friends, allies and co-conspirators in the cycling world and beyond. So, this Oprah interview was carefully choreographed in terms of content, key message and omissions.
He would not have done it if it was not the best path for him.
airstream said:I'm satisfied with Lance's confession. No doubt, soon more details to come. Confession was held in a more frank manner than I personally expected. Before the interview I admitted Lance just could say 'yeah, it was' and finish by and large. It didn't happen. His words about talk to his son even touched me. To me Armstrong is an outstanding athlete whose aspiration to fame and control over everything ruined himself. The way people hate him is just direct proportion of his titles period. Sociapath? Calm down. There are a lot of people whom Lance ensured good tidy well-off life and they will always support him.
I don't understand what did you expect from this iron man? Tears and physiognomies you would consider sincere or what?
airstream said:I'm satisfied with Lance's confession. No doubt, soon more details to come. Confession was held in a more frank manner than I personally expected. Before the interview I admitted Lance just could say 'yeah, it was' and finish by and large. It didn't happen. His words about talk to his son even touched me. To me Armstrong is an outstanding athlete whose aspiration to fame and control over everything ruined himself. The way people hate him is just direct proportion of his titles period. Sociapath? Calm down. There are a lot of people whom Lance ensured good tidy well-off life and they will always support him.
I don't understand what did you expect from this iron man? Tears and physiognomies you would consider sincere or what?
compete_clean said:I was stunned he said that. Who in their right mind would believe the story about his ex-wife as being the reason to stop doping. It defies all logic.
movingtarget said:...Armstrong was not a drug lord, forcing others to inject themselves. He was a bully for success.
movingtarget said:From what we know of those years if Armstrong had not doped, another doper would have won.........probably.
Angliru said:Don't you think their willingness to toe-the-Lance-line as he directed them to is the reason they prospered and kept quiet while others ended up as roadkill?
Like any other great champion. Contador prefers to cry. Wiggins says f**k you etc. Being a bully for success is inevitable condition why they are champions.movingtarget said:Riders have their own moral choices to make. Armstrong was not a drug lord, forcing others to inject themselves. He was a bully for success.
As for it, I'm shocked too. Armstrong said he heard 5 out of 200 had been riding clean. I consider this number quite plausible even for 2004-2005, the time I started following. However McEwen said: 'Oh we believed!' How could you believe idiot when even sprinters necessarily doped back then not to mention about GC contenders??! Unbelievable.It is interesting hearing comments from some riders that are still riding who see Armstrong as a some kind of devil where those riders themselves rode on teams with dopers who were caught !
Absolutely. Even today Wiggins and Contador refuse to lay out their GT blood values based on idiotic considerations of confidentiality. We have minimal changes for better, if we really have any...The reactions were much more muted about that. From what we know of those years if Armstrong had not doped, another doper would have won...
3. Basso, Valverde and Contador. One might come back successfully even if one is popped while being a superstar, otherwise one collides with huge problems.How many dopers have returned to the peloton and are now making a good living after two year bans ?
I think bans should be increased up to 4 years. Life time bans can entail extensive ground for diversions and other criminal acts that would be very bad.I think a lifetime ban in all sports is excessive especially while we have people like Riis still involved in the sport. ublic opinion.
airstream said:Like any other great champion. Contador prefers to cry. Wiggins says f**k you etc. Being a bully for success is inevitable condition why they are champions.
Benotti69 said:Can you give examples of Coppi beng a bully, Bartali, Anquetil, LeMond, Indurain, Pantani, Ullrich or Contador?
Otherwise it seems you expect someone who wants to win so bad needs to be a bad person to do it. To me that exposes a flaw in your thought process.
movingtarget said:No but at least four of them are cheats. Anquetil even openly admitted taking amphetamines when he was still racing. Being a bully is secondary.
DirtyWorks said:Sourced, bought controlled substances, shipped them all over the world, uncontrolled human experimentation, evading enforcement efforts. Drug lords would probably be envious.
This is a failed excuse. Is there a Wonderboy excuse regenerator app for your ipad or something? They desperately need to add some carraige returns..
How many others called the "what about the children?" ploy besides me? That's how cornered the terrorist is. He had to use the family as a defense shield. No wonder Hein and Thom loove him so much.
Benotti69 said:Can you list any champions who are bullys from that list?
You have dodged the question, it was not about doping.
You said all champions are inevitably bullies.movingtarget said:No, and ?
Benotti69 said:Can you give examples of Coppi beng a bully, Bartali, Anquetil, LeMond, Indurain, Pantani, Ullrich or Contador?
Otherwise it seems you expect someone who wants to win so bad needs to be a bad person to do it. To me that exposes a flaw in your thought process.
airstream said:It depends on what we imply by bully. It is tough to evalutate Coppi and Bartali - media did not have such a global influence at that times. But everyone remembers Pantani's Giro dismissal I think. That was just a huge grievance to the whole world from him. The same works for Contador. The man imitates tears and threatens to quite the sport if he gets banned. He has no doubt he is right within the limits of current system. Is that bully? To me, for sure. Yes, probably it is not so spectacular like Lance's defiant hyper agression. But by and large there are the same mad egocentrism and intimidation [again, we know only USPS story partially] behind all of this stories. I don't defend Armstrong but there is no doubt other guys' confessions is the matter of the time exceptionally and they will not be lesser liars than Lance. All the more so I'm sure others co-called great ones really admired how Armstrong defended himself during all these years.
There are no true or false accusations. There are ur opinion and mine. I think a certain chunk of work on 'intimidation' is implemented by others as well.Benotti69 said:Fail!
Bully
/ˈbo͝olē/
Noun
A person who uses strength or power to harm or intimidate those who are weaker.
So you are posting false accusations that winners need to be Bullys. A few are but I dont see it as part of the make up of what makes a winner.
airstream said:There are no true or false accusations. There are ur opinion and mine. I think a certain chunk of work on 'intimidation' is implemented by others as well.
Benotti69 said:Can you give examples of other champions intimidating others in a manner that would be considered bullying to back up your post that it is part of what makes a winner.
airstream said:No. Is that so important? It doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Or do you offer to divide cheats on evil dopers (Armstrong) and kind dopers (others)?