Lance Armstrong popularity check

[Benotti69]

Lance may have been able to keep some wins, but he refused to cooperate and said he was done with it.

Armstrong has refused to deal with it. The obvious thought was to distance him from the process in order to avoid the idea at all that he cheated. He and his people did not expect such a fallout from the media, they totally misread the situation having had the media fawn at their feet previously.

But he got what he deserved and anything else that comes his way will be more than deserved. He was more than a doper.

 

[B_Ugli]

I think that you could argue that Lance Armstrong is indicative of a generation of sports people, politicians and celebrities in the western world who simply believe that they are above the law and who believe they will be "protected".

Whilst a lot of anger towards him is justified I think people genuinely feel cheated by many of those in authority/prominence.

When you look at Armstrong in the context of Politicians such as Bush and Blair for every Lance Armstrong there are plenty of others who have slipped the net and gone on to enjoy enormous financial benefits having done so.

 

[ebandit]

tough

Lance may have been able to keep some wins, but he refused to cooperate and said he was done with it. I think Lance didn't fully realize that the hammer was going to come down on him.

lance did not have opportunity to co-operate after sworn testimony that he never doped + making promises to cancer victims etc

hence his last ditch attempt to derail the process and change of direction to
'done fighting' once the games was lost

no sympathy at all lance played the game fully enriching himself

 

[ebandit]

?

I think that you could argue that Lance Armstrong is indicative of a generation of sports people, politicians and celebrities in the western world who simply believe that they are above the law and who believe they will be "protected".

Whilst a lot of anger towards him is justified I think people genuinely feel cheated by many of those in authority/prominence.

When you look at Armstrong in the context of Politicians such as Bush and Blair for every Lance Armstrong there are plenty of others who have slipped the net and gone on to enjoy enormous financial benefits having done so.

we don't look at lance 'in context of politicians'.............

...this is a cycling forum............lance cheated in sport

and was sanctioned losing his wins.....simples!

 

[manafana]

Lance Armstrong now as popular as a fart in an elevator going up.

 

[mountainrman]

Lance may have been able to keep some wins, but he refused to cooperate and said he was done with it. I think Lance didn't fully realize that the hammer was going to come down on him.

People should consider the reality of this situation - not the hype.

Hincapie is not a "good person" - he did what he had to do in legal pragmatism , and so is armstrong silent for the very same reason..

The reason armstrong refused to cooperate is unlike others on the team he was not granted federal immunity by the grand jury.

My view is - Armstrong realised the hammer WAS going to come down, and in that context the worst thing he could do is place himself in a position of potential subpoena under oath.

So he followed the legal imperative and pragmatics of the situation - to say nothing.

People should also consider the reality of such as Hincapies postion.

Far from helping the sport, he was put in a position of being given immunity in federal grand jury. In case anyone is unfamiliar with that - once granted immunity you cannot take the fifth amendment. You tell the complete truth or
If you stay silent you got to jail - As in Anderson case in the bonds trial
If you fail to tell the truth you go to jail. As in marion jones case.

So Hincapie told the truth as legal pragmatism and imperative forced him to - and for the very same reason Lance kept quiet. Hincapie would not have confessed EVER either with the potential for conspiracy to defraud still possible for him. Take that away with immunity, and only then can you judge Lance on the basis of whether he owns up or not.

Once owning up in grand jury it was probably apparent that sooner or later the truth would come out by either leak or as part of a hearing, so rather than be trapped in a lie, hincapie owned up the minimum , to get off scott free with Tygart - even allowed to ride the TdF after clearly owning up! (otherwise why was he dropped from the olympic team?)

So before anyone vindicates Hincapie this "nice guy" - consider - he saw what was done to betsy and emma , and said nothing, did nothing , he did not exercise his duty to speak, and his conscience was not upset enough to move on because of integrity- he carried on to help lance to more wins both knowingly and willingly and making a lot of money in the process. Conspiracy during and after the fact. An entire career doping, and is allowed to retire with his illgotten gains.

In summary Cycling scapegoat lynching needs replacing with euqitable justice by an organisation that knows what that word means - and that discounts all of the current organisations involved. Most of all UCI.

6 month bans? 2 year bans? 4 year? life? - whatever - provided the justice is handed out impartially - the tarriff can be what you like. Although - WADA are right in saying shorter punishments are more likely to roll back omerta. BUt that means shorter for EVERYONE or NOONE. not just "nice" people.

 

[mountainrman]

.lance cheated in sport and was sanctioned losing his wins.....simples!

Like Riis you mean? - er no , not like Riis - who kept his title despite admitting doping on that same tour so not so simples.

So it must be only really bad people who have titles taken away like Rasmussens KoM 2005 title
. er no - not like Rasmussen because his KOM title of 2005 was removed for no legal reason at all (that anyone has ever managed to find)

So even less simples.

So it must be down to whether they "like" you - since it clearly has nothing to do with rules or cheating. That is simples - ask Pat Mcqquaid - scapegoats rule! anything to deflect criticism of UCI!

Excuse me, if I do not share this enthusiasm for cycling non justice.

 

[Big Doopie]

Can't really fault someone for feeling sorry for him at some point.

but why feel sorry for someone who is literally incapable of empathy or compassion?

it is wasted energy. armstrong doesn't care so why should anyone else?

should we feel sorry for hurricane sandy because it eventually petered out and died?

no. we should only feel sorry for the victims who suffered the devastation in her path.

personally, i won't feel justice is served until armstrong is in prison where he belongs.

 

[jamiephillips]

I actually prefer Lance now he hasn't won the Tour 7 times.

 

[Wolves-Lower]

Like Riis you mean? - er no , not like Riis - who kept his title despite admitting doping on that same tour so not so simples.

So it must be only really bad people who have titles taken away like Rasmussens KoM 2005 title
. er no - not like Rasmussen because his KOM title of 2005 was removed for no legal reason at all (that anyone has ever managed to find)

So even less simples.

So it must be down to whether they "like" you - since it clearly has nothing to do with rules or cheating. That is simples - ask Pat Mcqquaid - scapegoats rule! anything to deflect criticism of UCI!

Excuse me, if I do not share this enthusiasm for cycling non justice.

I have to agree with mountainrman.
The Clinic has been living in a vaccum to long and needs to be objective.
But of course if there is debate, then you are a troll.

To the OP.
No I don't feel bad for Lance at all. It is a good thing it has come to this, and he deserves to be stripped.
But for this sport to move forward not only does it need to address the past, but it needs to look into the future. Yep some guys just are not nice (Lance) and some are nice (Hincappie), but ultimately they are both doppers.

 

[manafana]

i did a piece on my blog on all this after it came out "lance fallout" really will make a great movie

 

[blackcat]

6 month bans? 2 year bans? 4 year? life? - whatever - provided the justice is handed out impartially - the tarriff can be what you like. Although - WADA are right in saying shorter punishments are more likely to roll back omerta. BUt that means shorter for EVERYONE or NOONE. not just "nice" people.

offered clarity yes, Hincapie took the only expedient escape on offer.

But re: the universality axiom, you note. Armstrong does receive a bad finding re: sporting dope, in one POV. In an interpretation re: corrupt and fraud manipulation of results and competition/races, ok, he can be held to task there. But all of that, would be absolved when you premise cycling is cycling, doping is doping, and they are one and the same. So, Armstrong's manipulation is invalidated. Hence, he has been hard done by.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Can you read?

Nowhere have I supported Armstrong either by implication or fact.
I am just not one of the clinics braindead lynch mob - I am interested in the future of cycling not the enjoyment of the Deserved come uppance of Armstrong

I can read fine, thanks.

There are wider implications for both justice and cycling, and kangaroo courts that play favourites with no sentence at all for people they like, and vilifying and scapegoating those who are not liked is just more of the same for cycling - it is part of the reason why the sport wide problem has never been tackled.

What part of "hincapie was a whole career doper who contributed as much as anyone else to the doping conspiracy that took 7 tdf titles, so deserves the same treatment as the other participants" do you not understand? Were this a real legal process instead of a mockery his " nazi defence" of I was not the boss, so am not really to blame would be laughed out of court and would be met with the same sentence for conspiracy.

Cycling has learned nothing, other than how to scapegoat a few (again) and say it is clean ( again) . Till the next time that is.

See, the highlighted is just plain wrong.

How did USADA pick "favorites" - was it how many friends the riders have on Facebook, how many 'likes' their fotos received.
Why did the Lance not get off with over 4 million twitter followers?

Is Hincapie equal to in popularity with DaveZ, Levi, Barry etc - because they all the same sentence? ( we will ignore the removed results, as you conveniently ignore it too)
Please let me know how we can get over this terrible injustice.

 

[MarkvW]

Putting aside the coarser hater drivel for a moment . . .

One thing that has amazed me is the incredibly easy ride that the Livestrong brand has gotten following Lance's downfall. It's obvious that Lance Armstrong knows that his popularity is down the tube, so he is trying to save the Livestrong brand. Heck, I've seen a Livestrong ad on this website.

In the US, the First Amendment permits all kind of fair comment, even regards commercial speech. Why am I not seeing DopeStrong, FraudStrong, CheatStrong, and LieStrong apparel in the familiar black and yellow layout? I don't get it. There's money to be made here and I want my DopeStrong Jersey!

 

[blackcat]

Like Riis you mean? - er no , not like Riis - who kept his title despite admitting doping on that same tour so not so simples.

So it must be only really bad people who have titles taken away like Rasmussens KoM 2005 title
. er no - not like Rasmussen because his KOM title of 2005 was removed for no legal reason at all (that anyone has ever managed to find)

So even less simples.

So it must be down to whether they "like" you - since it clearly has nothing to do with rules or cheating. That is simples - ask Pat Mcqquaid - scapegoats rule! anything to deflect criticism of UCI!

Excuse me, if I do not share this enthusiasm for cycling non justice.

give Chicken back his title. He won that year. 2007 I think,

 

[ebandit]

simples

Like Riis you mean? - er no , not like Riis - .

no....not like riis...not like big george....not like alberto...or anyone

else....take it to the relavent thread

lance was correctly busted....no sympathy here!

 

[86TDFWinner]

Like Riis you mean? - er no , not like Riis - who kept his title despite admitting doping on that same tour so not so simples.

So it must be only really bad people who have titles taken away like Rasmussens KoM 2005 title
. er no - not like Rasmussen because his KOM title of 2005 was removed for no legal reason at all (that anyone has ever managed to find)

So even less simples.

So it must be down to whether they "like" you - since it clearly has nothing to do with rules or cheating. That is simples - ask Pat Mcqquaid - scapegoats rule! anything to deflect criticism of UCI!

Excuse me, if I do not share this enthusiasm for cycling non justice.

What exactly is a "simples"?

 

[thehog]

The distancing of those associated with Lance Armstrong continues, even here in Jacksonville.

The Women’s Board of Wolfson Children’s Hospital said Tuesday it has agreed to cancel Armstrong’s appearance as a speaker for its 2012-13 Florida Forum. The series, which raises money and awareness for the hospital, is organized by the board.

Chuckles

 

[Hugh Januss]

I feel so stupid today, and not just because I have read some of mountainrman's posts, but more for the fact that I had thought once the evidence was out and it was clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that Armstrong was indeed the biggest fraud in sporting history (not mention charities history) that that would be the end of it. But now here they come again, and the only course they have left is to complain about how the evidence came to light. I guess I just give some people way too much credit for rational thought.

 

[Benotti69]

I have to agree with mountainrman.
The Clinic has been living in a vaccum to long and needs to be objective.
But of course if there is debate, then you are a troll.

To the OP.
No I don't feel bad for Lance at all. It is a good thing it has come to this, and he deserves to be stripped.
But for this sport to move forward not only does it need to address the past, but it needs to look into the future. Yep some guys just are not nice (Lance) and some are nice (Hincappie), but ultimately they are both doppers.

Where has the clinic being living in a vacuum?

There are threads on nearly every DS, Rider, Doctor, and others in the sport.

Sky and JV are currently bigger topics than Armstrong.

Just because big baby MountianRMouse cant deal with the reality that his boy has his last ball lopped off he is constantly crying about others who doped and are still in the sport!

Riis aditted to doping. Armstrong didn't.

There is no comparison to anyone in sport with the level of fraud committed by Armstrong.

Most people in here want to see those who enabled that fraud thrown out of the sport, along with those still enabling doping.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I feel so stupid today, and not just because I have read some of mountainrman's posts, but more for the fact that I had thought once the evidence was out and it was clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that Armstrong was indeed the biggest fraud in sporting history (not mention charities history) that that would be the end of it. But now here they come again, and the only course they have left is to complain about how the evidence came to light. I guess I just give some people way too much credit for rational thought.

Well you obviously don't care about the future of cycling.

Did you miss that it was a kangaroo court and George had a gun and a picture of Marion Jones placed in front of him.
The issue is not about if Lance doped - we all knew that since Sestriere - but why is Riis allowed retain his tainted title and Lance not (obviously we look past the fact that Riis admitted after SOL and was not part of a conspiracy that involved bribery, bullying, aiding & abetting etc)

 

[ebandit]

plural

What exactly is a "simples"?

plural of simple.............ie very simple

sorry! i introduced that word into discussion

 

[autologous]

Right now it is a laughing stock, that makes a mockery of "Justice"

I think you mis-typed

Right now I am a laughing stock, that makes a mockery of "Intelligence"

glad to help

 

[silverrocket]

give Chicken back his title. He won that year. 2007 I think,

He didn't even finish the 2007 race, never mind win, so there was no title to take away.

Besides, mountain man was referring to the 2005 KOM title which Chicken DID win.

 

[blackcat]

He didn't even finish the 2007 race, never mind win, so there was no title to take away.

Besides, mountain man was referring to the 2005 KOM title which Chicken DID win.

and Im talking 2007. He won that Tour.