Interesting piece on Livestrong

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't think that I have a problem. I'm just focusing on cycling issues on a cycling forum. Lance's cancer career only relates to Lance's moral qualities, and that doesn't have anything to do with his cycling career (unless we're going to start factoring morality points into bike races).

Hi Mark - isn't that exactly what you did in this post a few weeks ago.

I agree with you, but I honestly can't say Armstrong was any worse than Vino or Ullrich, for example. Both led dirty, dirty teams. And Vino is as morally repugnant as Lance.

I don't know that there is any hope for pro cycling to ever be "clean". I think that the Armstrong cycle, or lesser variations of it will play out over and over again. That's what I mean with the disease analogy. Today Lance version 1.0, five years from now Lance version 2.0. I don't mean to minimize Lance's bad behavior, just emphasize that the "Lance Effect" (in the worst sense) is a perpetual curse on a dirty sport.

Sooner or later (if not already) the cyclists are going to start gambling with undetectable genetic treatments that will put their health at great risk. Too bad.

 

[MarkvW]

Hi Mark - isn't that exactly what you did in this post a few weeks ago.

I don't think so. I said that I don't think Lance was any worse than any other team leaders. I don't think he was. He was a better doper and a more organized doper, but I don't think he was any worse than any other doper. I don't feel like comparing the smell of one sewer to another.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

I don't think so. I said that I don't think Lance was any worse than any other team leaders. I don't think he was. He was a better doper and a more organized doper, but I don't think he was any worse than any other doper. I don't feel like comparing the smell of one sewer to another.

Vino is an atheist who posed as "HOPE rides again" and runs a charity preying on the desperation of gravely ill people, to shield himself from civil and criminal charges?

 

[MarkvW]

Vino is an atheist who posed as "HOPE rides again" and runs a charity preying on the desperation of gravely ill people, to shield himself from civil and criminal charges?

Vino buys races.

 

[Oldman]

I don't think so. I said that I don't think Lance was any worse than any other team leaders. I don't think he was. He was a better doper and a more organized doper, but I don't think he was any worse than any other doper. I don't feel like comparing the smell of one sewer to another.

Then get your nose out of the sewer. You acknowledge you're not a "fan". If you're just a critical voyeur and have never competed you don't even know what the sport is. The degrees of degredation you find common seems to get more widespread with each post and farther from the "focus" on what the real race is.

Did you race against drugged riders?

 

[MarkvW]

[/B]

Then get your nose out of the sewer. You acknowledge you're not a "fan". If you're just a critical voyeur and have never competed you don't even know what the sport is. The degrees of degredation you find common seems to get more widespread with each post and farther from the "focus" on what the real race is.

Did you race against drugged riders?

The sport "is" what the sport does. And pro cycling is a doped up circus. But the races are a fun spectacle to watch, and I enjoy watching the circus. What's the difference between a "critical voyeur" and a "fan?" Suspension of disbelief? Willful blindness?

By the way, my criticism is not aimed at amateur racers.

 

[rata de sentina]

Here is "the look."

I respectfully disagree, that's the sook.

 

[HL2037]

Vino buys races.

Didn't Lance try to buy the Tour de France once? But the bitter haters wouldn't sell!

 

[Benotti69]

Remember this quote from Bill Stapleton of CSE to Texas Monthly in 2001?

Which suggests that he is as much a puppet to Stapleton, Weisel and others. When is he gonna wake up to that, when his under the wheels of the bus i suppose a split second before he gets crushed?

 

[pmcg76]

Vino buys races.

I think you really need to stop as you are just embarrasing yourself now. The buying and selling of races has occured in pro cycling for as long as doping
has been around. If you think Vino is the only rider who ever tried to buy a race shows how little you really know or understand.

I guess you never heard the stories surrounding Armstrong's triple crown in 1993 when there was $1 million on the line.

 

[doolols]

I guess you never heard the stories surrounding Armstrong's triple crown in 1993 when there was $1 million on the line.

That's an interesting story.

 

[Anonymous]

I see Outhouse is getting it handed to him again. For someone who doesn't care about any of this, and isn't a fan of Armstrong, he sure does write a lot of posts on the subject...

Either way, people always want to point out that those of us who want to seem him suffer the consequences of his actions are only concentrated on Armstrong, and wonder why our attention is more focused on him. I wonder if they recognize the relationship Armstrong has with the media and the fact that he is the one that placed himself on the pedestal. He is the one who held the press conferences proclaiming the righteousness of his training. He is the one that made commercials showing suffering cancer patients and proclaiming that calling him a "doper" and "cheat" was wrong because he rides for them (while putting his face on all of the marketing materials). He is the one who proclaimed other caught dopers as "donkeys." (turns out that he just thinks they are stupid for not paying the UCI more money). He is the one on the commercials talking about busing his *** 6 hours on the bike, never letting on the number of hours he spent in Ferrari's camper. They PRETEND that Armstrong is just another doper now, never recognizing that HE placed himself above everyone else with HIS words and actions (and books and stationary trainers and diet plans and elliptical trainers and shoes and singlets and more shoes and more shoes and shorts and more shoes). To wonder why anyone is more focused on his downfall is just stupid. Simply idiotic. He made himself the biggest name in sports (and "cancer awareness"), not me. He also made himself the biggest fraud in sporting history because he just couldn't keep his massive ego and mouth in check. He had to rub everyone's nose in how clean he was (when he was a junkie freak), and how abhorrent it was to question a man who only wants to help cancer patients, etc, etc, etc.

Then people like Outhouse come along and play this game where he is not a fan of the sport but likes the "circus" and is not a fan of Armstrong, but defends him and berates anyone who questions Armstrong. He plays the legal fool (the 5th does NOT always apply) often. The smell that emanates from his posts is unmistakeable.

 

[Benotti69]

I see Outhouse is getting it handed to him again. For someone who doesn't care about any of this, and isn't a fan of Armstrong, he sure does write a lot of posts on the subject...

Either way, people always want to point out that those of us who want to seem him suffer the consequences of his actions are only concentrated on Armstrong, and wonder why our attention is more focused on him. I wonder if they recognize the relationship Armstrong has with the media and the fact that he is the one that placed himself on the pedestal. He is the one who held the press conferences proclaiming the righteousness of his training. He is the one that made commercials showing suffering cancer patients and proclaiming that calling him a "doper" and "cheat" was wrong because he rides for them (while putting his face on all of the marketing materials). He is the one who proclaimed other caught dopers as "donkeys." (turns out that he just thinks they are stupid for not paying the UCI more money). He is the one on the commercials talking about busing his *** 6 hours on the bike, never letting on the number of hours he spent in Ferrari's camper. They PRETEND that Armstrong is just another doper now, never recognizing that HE placed himself above everyone else with HIS words and actions (and books and stationary trainers and diet plans and elliptical trainers and shoes and singlets and more shoes and more shoes and shorts and more shoes). To wonder why anyone is more focused on his downfall is just stupid. Simply idiotic. He made himself the biggest name in sports (and "cancer awareness"), not me. He also made himself the biggest fraud in sporting history because he just couldn't keep his massive ego and mouth in check. He had to rub everyone's nose in how clean he was (when he was a junkie freak), and how abhorrent it was to question a man who only wants to help cancer patients, etc, etc, etc.

Then people like Outhouse come along and play this game where he is not a fan of the sport but likes the "circus" and is not a fan of Armstrong, but defends him and berates anyone who questions Armstrong. He plays the legal fool (the 5th does NOT always apply) often. The smell that emanates from his posts is unmistakeable.

I would consider this to be a post where you eloquently handed him his a$$

 

[spetsa]

I see Outhouse is getting it handed to him again. For someone who doesn't care about any of this, and isn't a fan of Armstrong, he sure does write a lot of posts on the subject...

Either way, people always want to point out that those of us who want to seem him suffer the consequences of his actions are only concentrated on Armstrong, and wonder why our attention is more focused on him. I wonder if they recognize the relationship Armstrong has with the media and the fact that he is the one that placed himself on the pedestal. He is the one who held the press conferences proclaiming the righteousness of his training. He is the one that made commercials showing suffering cancer patients and proclaiming that calling him a "doper" and "cheat" was wrong because he rides for them (while putting his face on all of the marketing materials). He is the one who proclaimed other caught dopers as "donkeys." (turns out that he just thinks they are stupid for not paying the UCI more money). He is the one on the commercials talking about busing his *** 6 hours on the bike, never letting on the number of hours he spent in Ferrari's camper. They PRETEND that Armstrong is just another doper now, never recognizing that HE placed himself above everyone else with HIS words and actions (and books and stationary trainers and diet plans and elliptical trainers and shoes and singlets and more shoes and more shoes and shorts and more shoes). To wonder why anyone is more focused on his downfall is just stupid. Simply idiotic. He made himself the biggest name in sports (and "cancer awareness"), not me. He also made himself the biggest fraud in sporting history because he just couldn't keep his massive ego and mouth in check. He had to rub everyone's nose in how clean he was (when he was a junkie freak), and how abhorrent it was to question a man who only wants to help cancer patients, etc, etc, etc.

Then people like Outhouse come along and play this game where he is not a fan of the sport but likes the "circus" and is not a fan of Armstrong, but defends him and berates anyone who questions Armstrong. He plays the legal fool (the 5th does NOT always apply) often. The smell that emanates from his posts is unmistakeable.

The moderators must find it entertaining, because the show goes on...and on...and on

 

[Race Radio]

What does the Cancer Shield look like?

This

http://youtu.be/dI5xSdhwdjY

 

[thehog]

I see Outhouse is getting it handed to him again. For someone who doesn't care about any of this, and isn't a fan of Armstrong, he sure does write a lot of posts on the subject...

Either way, people always want to point out that those of us who want to seem him suffer the consequences of his actions are only concentrated on Armstrong, and wonder why our attention is more focused on him. I wonder if they recognize the relationship Armstrong has with the media and the fact that he is the one that placed himself on the pedestal. He is the one who held the press conferences proclaiming the righteousness of his training. He is the one that made commercials showing suffering cancer patients and proclaiming that calling him a "doper" and "cheat" was wrong because he rides for them (while putting his face on all of the marketing materials). He is the one who proclaimed other caught dopers as "donkeys." (turns out that he just thinks they are stupid for not paying the UCI more money). He is the one on the commercials talking about busing his *** 6 hours on the bike, never letting on the number of hours he spent in Ferrari's camper. They PRETEND that Armstrong is just another doper now, never recognizing that HE placed himself above everyone else with HIS words and actions (and books and stationary trainers and diet plans and elliptical trainers and shoes and singlets and more shoes and more shoes and shorts and more shoes). To wonder why anyone is more focused on his downfall is just stupid. Simply idiotic. He made himself the biggest name in sports (and "cancer awareness"), not me. He also made himself the biggest fraud in sporting history because he just couldn't keep his massive ego and mouth in check. He had to rub everyone's nose in how clean he was (when he was a junkie freak), and how abhorrent it was to question a man who only wants to help cancer patients, etc, etc, etc.

Then people like Outhouse come along and play this game where he is not a fan of the sport but likes the "circus" and is not a fan of Armstrong, but defends him and berates anyone who questions Armstrong. He plays the legal fool (the 5th does NOT always apply) often. The smell that emanates from his posts is unmistakeable.

Agree with all those sentiments – well observed and well written. Categorizing oneself just like every other doper is rich. I think important to mention a couple of other points. Using the anti-French sentiment of the time with the Iraq war etc. was very poor. Cashing in on a political situation and turning it into a Euro vs. USA theme was equally as disgraceful. The latter comment post retirement about the French testing positive for being “a” again lacked class and was typical of Armstrong.

The other point to raise is that by Armstrong doping and winning and by his team dominating and strangling the race to death did one thing. Everyone else had to raise the stakes on doping. That’s why we saw Puerto and the T-Mobile Freiburg fallouts. There were guys not just trying to win but there were guys just trying to keep up and keep a contract for the following year. By USPS pushing 450w-500w at the base of 21km climbs and riding on the front at record speeds day after day pushed the doping arms race further and further along. It was never a level playing field it was race to keep up and keep a job.

 

[BotanyBay]

I think you really need to stop as you are just embarrasing yourself now. The buying and selling of races has occured in pro cycling for as long as doping
has been around..

Much longer than doping itself. As a matter of fact, when I was a young kid first entering the sport, I remember it being very well explained to me the differences between amateur and professional racing realities. Not only were races bought and sold (still are), but there were lots of stories about $1000 water bottles, $500 bananas, people being paid not to chase them down, expensive "blocking" arrangements, etc (IE, Boyer during the Coors Classic final stage). And if you ask Boyer (no need for any jokes, ok), Lemond still owes him quite a bit of money for either the '82 or '83 worlds.

I guess you never heard the stories surrounding Armstrong's triple crown in 1993 when there was $1 million on the line.

I can only imagine. Man, I wish I'd hung around the scene during those years. Instead, I went away to college and actually studied.

But this is an excellent time to discuss this... What's worse, doping, or races that are bought and sold? Are they equally as bad? I know that us old-timers that have known the ropes... We generally knew all about these shady deals, but we generally accepted them as reality. But when doping came along, we got really angry.

Why does doping exist outside our "circle of empathy" and straight-up mainstream fraud still exists within it (or does it still)?

 

[doolols]

What does the Cancer Shield look like?
http://youtu.be/dI5xSdhwdjY

I wish you hadn't posted that. I feel ill now.

 

[Fausto's Schnauzer]

Either way, people always want to point out that those of us who want to seem him suffer the consequences of his actions are only concentrated on Armstrong, and wonder why our attention is more focused on him. I wonder if they recognize the relationship Armstrong has with the media and the fact that he is the one that placed himself on the pedestal. He is the one who held the press conferences proclaiming the righteousness of his training. He is the one that made commercials showing suffering cancer patients and proclaiming that calling him a "doper" and "cheat" was wrong because he rides for them (while putting his face on all of the marketing materials). He is the one who proclaimed other caught dopers as "donkeys." (turns out that he just thinks they are stupid for not paying the UCI more money). He is the one on the commercials talking about busing his *** 6 hours on the bike, never letting on the number of hours he spent in Ferrari's camper. They PRETEND that Armstrong is just another doper now, never recognizing that HE placed himself above everyone else with HIS words and actions (and books and stationary trainers and diet plans and elliptical trainers and shoes and singlets and more shoes and more shoes and shorts and more shoes). To wonder why anyone is more focused on his downfall is just stupid. Simply idiotic. He made himself the biggest name in sports (and "cancer awareness"), not me. He also made himself the biggest fraud in sporting history because he just couldn't keep his massive ego and mouth in check. He had to rub everyone's nose in how clean he was (when he was a junkie freak), and how abhorrent it was to question a man who only wants to help cancer patients, etc, etc, etc.

Thank you TFF for summing up my feelings exactly. I hold the same opinions and thoughts, but just never sat down and let them spill out through the keyboard.

I was once one of Lance's biggest fans----wore the magic yellow bracelet, read the books (I so rarely read fiction), followed his every move and all of that. Then came the Lemond/Ferrari issue....and all of those that followed.

There are those within my circle of cycling friends who still buy into the myth. Others see through yet still mention "level playing field", "done so much good" and the other enabling excuses. I've learned that discussing Lance with them is akin to discussing politics or religion----something best left undone. Perhaps in the future f pressed I'll simply refer them to your post.

Thank you again,
FS

 

[HL2037]

What does the Cancer Shield look like?

This

http://youtu.be/dI5xSdhwdjY

So when you call Armstrong a washed up doper you are preventing the cancer patients from getting better. That is the message of that video. It's like that joke "everytime you (do this or that) a kitten dies". Except this is no joke, those are real people.
Connecting their healing with the succes of a sportsperson is such a strange idea. As if the cells in the tumor will be so scared by Lance's domination of the peloton that they immediately stop acting pathologically. It is wrong on so many levels:

- What if Lance doesn't win? Will the cancer patients not get well then? And is the person who beat Lance to blame?

- What if the patient doesn't get better even if Lance won? Is it then the persons own fault for not believing enough in Lance to fight enough?

When the false premise that the healing of cancer patients is in some way connected to or even dependent on Lance's succes on the road is established, it becomes a sin to criticise him or challenge him in any way. We often hear the Livestrong diciples suggest that Lance's critics deserve to get cancer. As if this serious illness is some sort of punishment for not believing in him, while those whose faith is strong enough will "kick cancer's ***".

That Nike wants to support this kind of blasphemous manipulation of severely diseased people says a lot about the lengths they are willing to go to to make a buck. I guess nothing is sacred except $$.

 

[Velodude]

Gifford has confirmed that he received a 5-page letter from Livestrong legal counsel in relation to the article. Outside will print a reply.

By "Livestrong legal counsel" do you mean the in house general counsel?

Wonder how many foundations the diminutive size of LAF have the need for an in house general counsel plus the use of voluntary legal interns.

In 2009 when she was employed in the newly created position Livestrong must have been anticipating troubled waters ahead. 2009 was the year that the IRS came a knocking.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I said that I think I agree with you about what Armstrong did and what should happen to him.

You want to argue that Lance is "worse" than all the other cheaters. Fine. I'll agree that he's worse. But it doesn't matter. Cycling's a cesspool, and why does it matter which sewer smells worse?

We already know what happens when no one cares that the sport can sicken and kill athletes. It sickens and kills athletes. We're all just supposed to look the other way?

Let's make it personal, if you see someone breaking into your neighbor's home do you just ignore it?
No. You would likely declare your neighborhood is not a cesspool and attempt to eliminate criminal activity. Let's add insult to injury by calling your neighborhood a cesspool. It's fun to drive through and gawk ... We'll all ignore it.

 

[ChrisE]

We already know what happens when no one cares that the sport can sicken and kill athletes. It sickens and kills athletes. We're all just supposed to look the other way?

Let's make it personal, if you see someone breaking into your neighbor's home do you just ignore it?
No. You would likely declare your neighborhood is not a cesspool and attempt to eliminate criminal activity. Let's add insult to injury by calling your neighborhood a cesspool. It's fun to drive through and gawk ... We'll all ignore it.

For it to be equivalent he would have to promote and enjoy the break ins, and justify them. The "neighborhood", as TH described, is constantly trying to beat the tests and share info, and are not happy when one of their own gets popped. The impetous to clean up the sport is mostly coming from the outside.

 

[Oldman]

What does the Cancer Shield look like?

This

http://youtu.be/dI5xSdhwdjY

My Dad would have had something to say to a certain Lance Armstrong if he had seen that commercial and survived his bout with real cancer. Between the riders I know to have been compromised by LA, Weisel, USACycling and this image from Nike supporting the privateering by same; the affect is crystalizing: this is so far beyond sport. The cynicism it takes to be that exploitive is hard to imagine.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

You ever see intervention?

For it to be equivalent he would have to promote and enjoy the break ins, and justify them. The "neighborhood", as TH described, is constantly trying to beat the tests and share info, and are not happy when one of their own gets popped. The impetous to clean up the sport is mostly coming from the outside.

More pointless arguing...