lance interveiw

[Anonymous]

lance interveiw.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/345599/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview.html

Excerpts.

At the Las Vegas press conference, Greg Lemond talked about the carbon monoxide test for autologous blood transfusions. Would you do those?

Sure if the tests work. Don Catlin has been instructed to do everything available. You don’t want to do something thats not scientifically proven.

Are you OK with blood being stored for future testing?

Absolutely

Are you in favour of retroactive testing?

Yes. They give you the option when you are tested – can we use your specimen in the future for experiments? I always check ‘yes’.

Will you open up your blood values record?

That’s for Don Catlin to answer but I’ve told him I’ve got no problem with that.

Have you ever taken EPO?
Yes, during the fall of 1996. Whenever I was ill.
---
But you have other riders who got caught, or admitted it, and came back and rode just as fast, without naming names. Which would lead to the conclusion that it’s not so advantageous, that it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. I don’t know. If I look at guys that were caught and served time and came back and rode just as fast and were just as successful…

Would you use your standing in the cycling world to put pressure on the Spanish authorities to release Operacion Puerto information?

My pressure’s not going to achieve anything.

Would you be outspoken about it?

I’d be outspoken as a cyclist. Whoever is in charge must release all the names. It’s not a cycling list it’s a sports list, so absolutely.


Why have so many ex-US Postal riders tested positive or admitted doping retrospectively?

I don't know. We’re not in charge of them when they leave. They never tested positive under our guidance.

People say they weren’t caught because your methods of covering up were better.

No. That’s not true. We had a lot of good riders. We had a great team, great directors. Simply not true.

2000 is a compelling case, when we had the French investigation. The only conclusion they could draw was that the samples were too clean. Too clean.

What do you want me to say? My record stands.

What other financial interests do you have in cycling?

Ownership? SRAM. Very few shares in Trek. But SRAM was my personal money. An investment.

What’s your standard fee for racing?

I don’t know. I can tell you what my standard speaking fee is. Domestically, 150,000 dollars plus travel. Internationally? More. My race fee varies.

Did you ask for half a million dollars to race in New Zealand, as reported recently?

No, I never even heard of that race
-------
Sometimes people want to say, “Lance, we just want to hear you say you cheated”. But why would I f****** lie? I’m not going to do that. Regardless of how much you stand up and scream and jump around on the table, I’m not going to lie to make you happy. I don’t think somebody should make up some **** just so they can be forgiven.
.

 

[grimpeur]

Sure if the tests work. Don Catlin has been instructed to do everything available. You don’t want to do something thats not scientifically proven.

Great, until he fired Don Catlin from his "independent" testing program. How long did that last? 4-5 months?

Jeez...How many times a week are we going to have to call in Officer Barbrady?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Was he actually "fired"? It was my impression the testing never really got off the ground, for God only knows why, and no one ever really pursued it. Otherwise, I tend to like his answers. It's really quite a shame though. Not because I think he would have been caught, blah, blah, but because I think it would have done his reputation, and the reputation of the sport, good to have Catlin go through with it, including testing such as CO analysis, etc. But it's almost as if because it didn't, the inverse happened.

 

[grimpeur]

To me, the problem is that LA called a big press conference at Interbike, got everyone there to announce that Catlin would be transparently testing him during '09. Went at it with Lemond, and then bailed on the Catlin program. Waste of everyone's time and made a typically unprepared Lemond look bad. PR stunt, nothing more.

 

[tifosa]

They never tested positive under our guidance.

They tested positive because of their guidance, you ***. They learned from the best.

IMHO, of course.

 

[whiteboytrash]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jun/28/lance-armstrong-comeback - Miller's comments re: Contador are interesting. Note: the Catlin testing is spoken of as if it still existed beyond its announcement. I think that was the point of it.

 

[franciep10]

l

Why have so many ex-US Postal riders tested positive or admitted doping retrospectively?

I don't know. We’re not in charge of them when they leave. They never tested positive under our guidance.

People say they weren’t caught because your methods of covering up were better.

No. That’s not true. We had a lot of good riders. We had a great team, great directors. Simply not true.

2000 is a compelling case, when we had the French investigation. The only conclusion they could draw was that the samples were too clean. Too clean.

What do you want me to say? My record stands.


.

These are my two favourites, the samples were too clean lol

 

[whiteboytrash]

These are my two favourites, the samples were too clean lol

Feel sorry for the bus driver who had to p*ss 9 times to provide the clean urine for the riders....

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

The posted interview is from last December.

Susan

 

[Anonymous]

...yawn.......

 

[Parrot23]

Feel sorry for the bus driver who had to p*ss 9 times to provide the clean urine for the riders....

LOL

On the samples being "too clean" business, that has gotta take the cake. ROFLMAO.

---------- [fill in the blank] always self-incriminate at some point. The narcissism become too much to contain, like the bus driver above... Just marking territory that they own the Tour.

 

[Angliru]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jun/28/lance-armstrong-comeback - Miller's comments re: Contador are interesting. Note: the Catlin testing is spoken of as if it still existed beyond its announcement. I think that was the point of it.

Millar's comments regarding Contador were quite stunning to me. Armstrong at his best during his reign was awesome to behold and Millar is saying that in his opinion Contador is just as driven as Armstrong with more talent and is the most talented cyclist he's ever seen. Wow!

 

[Kennf1]

Millar's comments regarding Contador were quite stunning to me. Armstrong at his best during his reign was awesome to behold and Millar is saying that in his opinion Contador is just as driven as Armstrong with more talent and is the most talented cyclist he's ever seen. Wow!

Indeed. Millar certainly doesn't hold back in praising Contador.

 

[Anonymous]

Indeed. Millar certainly doesn't hold back in praising Contador.

It is an interesting article by Millar. He praises Armstrong, but there is an undertone throughout the entire thing that suggests Millar is just placing accolades he must place to remain in good standing with Mr Armstrong. In the end, he kicks his teeth in with the comments about Contador. In a way, I don't respect it because he is too veiled for obvious reasons. He hints here and there, but remains above saying what he really means directly about what they disagree over. In case you guys have not noticed, I don't suffer from that problem. I tend to like bluntness and really detest propriety for the sake of maintaining polite decorum. Say what you mean Millar, because if Mr Armstrong was speaking of you, he would hold no punches.

 

[Angliru]

It is an interesting article by Millar. He praises Armstrong, but there is an undertone throughout the entire thing that suggests Millar is just placing accolades he must place to remain in good standing with Mr Armstrong. In the end, he kicks his teeth in with the comments about Contador. In a way, I don't respect it because he is too veiled for obvious reasons. He hints here and there, but remains above saying what he really means directly about what they disagree over. In case you guys have not noticed, I don't suffer from that problem. I tend to like bluntness and really detest propriety for the sake of maintaining polite decorum. Say what you mean Millar, because if Mr Armstrong was speaking of you, he would hold no punches.

Millar sounds like Leipheimer in his accolades of Armstrong. Simply in complete awe of him in every facet and seemingly scared to death of upsetting him by saying something unflattering. That's the part I can't understand. The fear that so many in and around the sport have of him as if he's a Mafia Don who will have you fitted for cement shoes if you annoy him in the slightest way.
Baffling to me.

 

[Anonymous]

It is an interesting article by Millar. He praises Armstrong, but there is an undertone throughout the entire thing that suggests Millar is just placing accolades he must place to remain in good standing with Mr Armstrong. In the end, he kicks his teeth in with the comments about Contador. In a way, I don't respect it because he is too veiled for obvious reasons. He hints here and there, but remains above saying what he really means directly about what they disagree over. In case you guys have not noticed, I don't suffer from that problem. I tend to like bluntness and really detest propriety for the sake of maintaining polite decorum. Say what you mean Millar, because if Mr Armstrong was speaking of you, he would hold no punches.

Or, he might simply have meant what he said.

You are famous for putting words in peoples mouth that aren't there.

 

[Anonymous]

Millar sounds like Leipheimer in his accolades of Armstrong. Simply in complete awe of him in every facet and seemingly scared to death of upsetting him by saying something unflattering. That's the part I can't understand. The fear that so many in and around the sport have of him as if he's a Mafia Don who will have you fitted for cement shoes if you annoy him in the slightest way.
Baffling to me.

When a man such as that, one who truly does have the ability to focus himself in a way most people do not, decides you are his enemy; it has to be frightening for him to channel that trait into causing you harm financially or professionally. On top of that, he has the financial resources to carry out his threats. The humiliating thing for him must be that because there is sufficient evidence available that he doped to sway any jury in a civil trial, he has had his claws clipped to an extent. He can't just run around suing everyone anymore because the chances he will win are slim.

I too find Millar's reasoning behind his return funny. Mr Armstrong's whole persona is wrapped up in his accomplishments. Family, marriage, and other things that sustain most people are merely a sideshow to his athletic achievement. I understand that there are many who are similar in their pursuit of their vocation, but it should never be misunderstood that it is an asset of character to behave thustly. To all appearances, he is a narcissist, and therefore must continue to remain in the public eye in order to receive the adulation and love he never received from a father in my opinion. Actually, it is an almost classic example from what I see.

Every man must live the life he is given, and I am not the ultimate judge or arbiter of Mr Armstrong's behavior. However, just because he chooses to place himself in the public realm does not mean he gets to control the dialogue regarding his life. I am sure he couldn't care less what any single individual thinks of him, but the combined opinion must remain positive for him to have self worth. I don't choose to be in that herd simply because he has a psychological need.

The tide will turn one day for Mr Armstrong I believe. And when that day comes, it will be ugly for him, while the rest of us will have already attained the disinterest that will undo his idea of who he is and what his life is about. History forgets all of us, and sooner or later that realization comes to everyone.

But hey, maybe he is just misunderstood?

 

[Anonymous]

Or, he might simply have meant what he said.

You are famous for putting words in peoples mouth that aren't there.

And you are famous for lack of reading comprehension, so I guess we have no basis for discussion of this topic.

 

[Angliru]

I think deep down he cares what the public thinks of him that is why he is so obsessed with controlling how he is portrayed by the media. I also think that in part is why he returned to competitive cycling. I think he saw that his time away had caused people to take stock of him in his entirety not just his competitive accomplishments and his philanthropic endeavors. He didn't like what he was seeing being said about himself.

He initially appeared to be trying to portray and kinder gentler version of himself but when things started to spiral out his control and away from the direction that he had planned his overall image to be directed, he resorted to his old controlling obsessed self especially at the Giro. He can't run from what he is deep down.

 

[Anonymous]

must be said, that interview is very very old... almost irrelevant.. any more graves we want to dig up..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2in009/jun/28/lance-armstrong-comeback - Miller's comments re: Contador are interesting. Note: the Catlin testing is spoken of as if it still existed beyond its announcement. I think that was the point of it.

interesting that,. its the condensed version of the same article that was in the observer magazine on sunday.. was just reading it myself (someone dropped the magazine around to the house)..

something intersting from millar is obviuously his comment on contador, but also he almost gives the impression that over the last few years lance one, the rest of the field almost where racing for second and accepted it. .

interesting to compare also the view of the french, with millars comments on how he thinks the french would react if lance was not to win..

 

[Anonymous]

It is an interesting article by Millar. He praises Armstrong, but there is an undertone throughout the entire thing that suggests Millar is just placing accolades he must place to remain in good standing with Mr Armstrong. In the end, he kicks his teeth in with the comments about Contador. In a way, I don't respect it because he is too veiled for obvious reasons. He hints here and there, but remains above saying what he really means directly about what they disagree over. In case you guys have not noticed, I don't suffer from that problem. I tend to like bluntness and really detest propriety for the sake of maintaining polite decorum. Say what you mean Millar, because if Mr Armstrong was speaking of you, he would hold no punches.

im wondering what you wanted david to say..
that lance is a cheating doper, that hes an arrogant twit who thinks of nobody but himeslf, that he uses the facade of the cancer charity to his own end, and that he hates him.. ?

actually david says very little about lance really, and doesnt go out of his way to hype him up, but doesnt bring him down, i think its a pretty honest and accurate summing up to be honest...

 

[Anonymous]

Millar's comments regarding Contador were quite stunning to me. Armstrong at his best during his reign was awesome to behold and Millar is saying that in his opinion Contador is just as driven as Armstrong with more talent and is the most talented cyclist he's ever seen. Wow!

POSSIBLY more talent

amazing what difference a word makes..

 

[whiteboytrash]

All looking good for Lance. The numbers are up and Carmichael is very happy. Its official, Lance is stronger than he was in April. He's going to win the Tour by 10 minutes because CC said so and his hemocrit is bordering on 70%.
___________


Lance Armstrong headed to the mountains around Aspen to do some final high altitude training before heading to France to recon some key stages of the Tour. Coach Chris Carmichael says that he is focusing on climbing efforts that more closely mimic race conditions. Carmichaeal’s tests indicate that Lance has recovered from his efforts at the Giro and that his is producing more watts at his lactate threshold than when he was last tested on April 19th. So far, Armstrong has indicated via his Twitter account that he has ridden the routes for Stages 16 and 17.

 

[Anonymous]

im wondering what you wanted david to say..
that lance is a cheating doper, that hes an arrogant twit who thinks of nobody but himeslf, that he uses the facade of the cancer charity to his own end, and that he hates him.. ?

actually david says very little about lance really, and doesnt go out of his way to hype him up, but doesnt bring him down, i think its a pretty honest and accurate summing up to be honest...

I don't want him to say anything. My point was that since he was choosing to give his opinion, I wish he would have been more forthcoming and honest in regards to what he meant by things like "we agree to disagree."

As to you addressing me, you had me on ignore and I guess curiosity got the best of you. Now, since you have decided to address me directly, be man enough to hang in there and read my responses. You seem quite willing to complain about every little thing that bothers you, so we should generate a nice dialogue.

Or you could just tuck tail and run to your safe little world where nobody disagrees with you.

Toodles

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

On the samples being "too clean" business, that has gotta take the cake..

Anyone remember the pixie dust riders were using in about 2002 or so? They'd put some on their fingers, pee on them, and shazam, their urinalysis would come back with a zero EPO reading. Including no natural EPO! Maybe that's what Lance meant by "too clean"?!

Simply in complete awe of him in every facet and seemingly scared to death of upsetting him by saying something unflattering. That's the part I can't understand.

That's one of the reasons I was a Floyd Landis fan. I liked the way Floyd had enough confidence to stand on his own, and head out on his own. And he rode with a lot more excitement and panache. Real shame that that same competitive spirit came out the way it did in his USADA hearings and he ended up looking worse.

He's going to win the Tour by 10 minutes because CC said so and his hemocrit is bordering on 70%.

That's it?!