• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Lance Is A Thief (If He Doped)

Aug 2, 2010
214
0
0
Seems as if the fan boys have split into two groups: the Ostriches and the Rationalizers. The Ostriches don't want to know anything. The Rationalizers say things like this letter writer did to the New York Times today:

----

"Assume for the sake of argument that Lance Armstrong is guilty of systematic doping. Who cares? He has done a lot of good. Armstrong has raised money for cancer research, and stands as an inspiration for many cancer survivors. He will continue to do good unless he falls victim to an inquisition."

Lee Fineman
Burbank, Calif.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/sports/08inbox.html?_r=1
----

How do you counter this? Simple. Point out that systematic doping is thievery, plain and simple. If Lance doped, he stole. Period. Millions from SCA. Possible scores of millions more from sponsors (depending on how the contracts were written). You don't even need to get into perjury, possible bribery, conning the cancer community, etc. Keep it simple. Lance stole millions if he doped.

Fraud is an abstract word and allows fanboys to hide in its fog. Stealing, on the other hand, is concrete. Everybody knows what stealing means.

If Lance doped, he stole millions. That's what this Grand Jury investigation is all about.
 
Jul 6, 2009
6
0
0
More than a thief!

Many Lance supporters say, "so what if he doped-so did the rest." The fact is that Lance's rivals were busted by "operacion Puerto", sanctioned and banned. Ullrich, Basso, and the rest. So- if it is true Lance doped, it means his biggest rivals were neutralized, while he had the races to himself as chief doper! Like I said, more than a thief!
 
May 5, 2009
674
1
0
it's part of the strategy of many wicked thiefs and fraudsters to have some charity or holy image campaigns running and televise and capitalise on every good thing they do in order to distract from their dark sides.

It's a bit like the mafia bosses killing, stealing and violating all week long and then going to church every Sunday and leave some healthy donation.

Siccccckkk.

If everybody was honest and fair, no stealing, no cheating, no fraudstering, there would not be much left to do for charities, because wealth would be balanced, all people had enough food and misery and diseases would be substantially lower if not even disappear with the time.

But as humanity continues its selfish, greedy egoistic path, things get worse. No wonder Lance has discovered the dynamics of his growing potential to profiteer from. 28m and growing...

But then again (sorry, now going very far away for a cycling forum ;) ), the world in seven to ten years from now will look differently... completely differently (for the better!) as it seems we are moving closer to the extreme side before the pendulum wipes back... :)

Btw, what "good" has LA been doing? And if someone does good, how much crimes, cheating or fraud will it justify? Imagine Bernie Madoff had been running a charity for cancer or whatever disease and people would then come and say, yes he cheated, but he has dones so much good, etc. etc..

ridicolous.

follow the path of truth, honesty and fairness. it will pay out in the long run.

c'mon Lance, take your chance, don't miss it, it's not too late yet!
 
Aug 2, 2010
214
0
0
velocodger said:
Many Lance supporters say, "so what if he doped-so did the rest." The fact is that Lance's rivals were busted by "operacion Puerto", sanctioned and banned. Ullrich, Basso, and the rest. So- if it is true Lance doped, it means his biggest rivals were neutralized, while he had the races to himself as chief doper! Like I said, more than a thief!
I agree with you. I'm only suggesting that the shortest, best comeback to the NON-cycling fans who wonder whether Lance's doping even matters:

Yes. Cuz if he doped, he stole millions. That's why we need a Grand Jury.

If I were on the other side of Public Strategies, I would keep the explanation very simple. (Never impugn the feelings of cancer survivors. That's a PR loser. Let the cancer community decide about Lance on their own time. If they come to see him as a thief, which he surely is if he doped, they'll come around.)

Keep it on Lance and the fact he stole millions if he doped.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,169
0
0
just for info and later comparison ;)

Who dopes, must not be a cheater

"Investigations have shown over 21 months: Ullrich has doped."

"Against payment of a six-figure sum, the Bonn prosecutor for fraud investigation against Radstar Jan Ullrich finished. The "criminal energy" of the Tour de France winner was low - given the already doping polluted cycling."


http://www.spiegel.de/sport/sonst/0,1518,547253,00.html
http://www.spiegel.de/sport/sonst/0,1518,547185,00.html


Interesting/Funny:
It was said, that Ullrich got payoff 250.000 € from T-Mobile after OP (for his silence about Freiburg) and than he (had to) pay 250.000 € for this fraud-investigation.

But Ullrich´s lonely race against his many pursuers STILL continues....for 4! years now.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,169
0
0
Page Mill Masochist said:
I agree with you. I'm only suggesting that the shortest, best comeback to the NON-cycling fans who wonder whether Lance's doping even matters:

Yes. Cuz if he doped, he stole millions. That's why we need a Grand Jury.

If I were on the other side of Public Strategies, I would keep the explanation very simple. (Never impugn the feelings of cancer survivors. That's a PR loser. Let the cancer community decide about Lance on their own time. If they come to see him as a thief, which he surely is if he doped, they'll come around.)

Keep it on Lance and the fact he stole millions if he doped.
You make it very easy for yourself. So do I. :D
Lance is a cashcow that is/was milked by a lot of people and companies.
Lance and Ullrich were the main cycling-cashcows for nearly a whole century and many people benefited from them, including themselfes.
Millions of people enjoyed the duel that was "served".

Will anyone doubt that ?

And given the doping polluted cycling, I think Lance´s criminal energy is low, too :D
 
Aug 6, 2009
1,926
0
0
First of all his "work" in the cancer field is incredibly overblown. It has been from day one.

He does not "inspire millions" with his message of hope. There is as much proof of this as he being the most tested athlete on Earth.

If his comeback were about that, he would have raced to race, not to target the Tour and then bag the rest of the season like he did during his seven year reign as Tour winner.

His sponsors are going to want some explanations. The Bristol-Myers Squibb pharmaceutical company are going to wonder how to reconcile their sponsorship of a PED abuser, which in a most egregious way contradicts the very message they paid him to espouse.
 
Jun 17, 2009
9
0
0
The real question!

The real question is not if Lance has doped or not, it is if he´s going to get caught or not !!! No way a clean guy would beat doped Bassos or Ullrichs without some juice! Can´t believe someone believes that!
 
Page Mill Masochist said:
"Assume for the sake of argument that Lance Armstrong is guilty of systematic doping. Who cares? He has done a lot of good. Armstrong has raised money for cancer research, and stands as an inspiration for many cancer survivors. He will continue to do good unless he falls victim to an inquisition."

Lee Fineman
Burbank, Calif.
to Lee Fineman (if that's his real surname), if you think LA is an inspiration for many cancer survivors, then I give you: Jane Tomlinson
Truly an inspiration and to more than just cancer victims...
 
Apr 19, 2009
189
0
0
velocodger said:
Many Lance supporters say, "so what if he doped-so did the rest." The fact is that Lance's rivals were busted by "operacion Puerto", sanctioned and banned. Ullrich, Basso, and the rest. So- if it is true Lance doped, it means his biggest rivals were neutralized, while he had the races to himself as chief doper! Like I said, more than a thief!
Get your facts straight;

Ulrich and Basso were busted in June/July of 2006. Armstrong retired in 2005 and Ulrich and Basso were on the podium with him at the TDF.

I think you need to get more details and truly understand how widespread doping was. Once you do i think you will see that you would probably have to go 50 deep to find someone who didn't dope during that era. Doesn't make it right but it was the culture.
 
Feb 2, 2010
11
0
0
The statement that "Lance is a thief (if he doped)" seems very general and simplistic and to be fair could be applied to a significant number of the Peloton in the early nineties up until recently. Like most on the forum, I am an avid fan of cycling, professional racing, all the classics, tours etc and to be honest am no fan of LA, in fact I think one relentless winner of any event makes the event uninteresting and tedious and in general I think his dominance and in my opinion arrogance has been bad for cycling, but I think to classify LA as a thief, then you need to apply it fairly across the board to other riders.

The culture of doping was certainly ever present in the sport during that era, but to many Lance has now become a poster boy for all that is or was bad with the sport which I think is a bit harsh - I would blame a lot of the DS’s before blaming Lance. In life people need a figure head to love or hate, some see him as a saviour, others see him as the propagator of the evils of doping.

What I have picked up on my travels with reading the forum, books, interviews etc.. is that when the doping culture was trying to be removed or minimised from the sport, people like LA (according to the IM between Vaughters and Andreau in Lance to Landis) was taking the doping up to a new level in terms of preparation etc.. and that the recent Landis revelations certainly support this. When I was racing, the best way to get into form was to do more races (within reason), I could never understand why the lads went to “special” training camps and only raced a few number of days or so before the tour.

I could not give a rashers about how many bracelets he sells, how many world cancer conferences he hosts or whether or not he will become the next Governor of Texas. I think the whole “foundation” business (and it is a business) is a clever mechanism to shelter earnings etc.. like most US athletes, they all seem to have some foundation or other supporting hip replacements, sick kids, illiterate inner communities etc.. in order to avoid tax, its just that LA’s hit the jackpot as his foundation has such an emotive and polarising effect on a lot of people. People seem to think that if you do good in one part of your life, then you must be a saint in the other parts of your life. Clearly this is not true.

My beef is not that he allegedly doped whilst everyone else was doping, nor is it that he or his supportors reiterate at an annoying rate the quote of never testing positive or being the most tested athlete in the world (according to him), what really gets to me is that he had an obligation like other people at the top of the sport of helping the sport in a positive way by advocating clean racing etc.. but they were only interesting in milking the sport dry for their own financial ends and in doing so helped damage a sport I love.

So is Lance a thief? If he is, then a lot others were too at the time. I think the more pertinent question is, Did Lance (and his team) help in propagating the culture of doping and in so robbing a lot of young clean riders of a future? So maybe he is not a thief in terms of winning races, but of stealing the futures of other riders, i.e. Christophe Basson - in my opinion yes.

Intothe12
 
Mar 24, 2010
34
0
0
Page Mill Masochist said:
Seems as if the fan boys have split into two groups: the Ostriches and the Rationalizers. The Ostriches don't want to know anything. The Rationalizers say things like this letter writer did to the New York Times today ...
For me, it's simple: Cheating is wrong. Whether it's cheating in school, in business, or in sports, it's just wrong. If we teach our kids not to cheat, then we shouldn't condone it in cycling, right?

I'm aware that cycling has a history of cheating that goes all the way back to beginning of the sport. Cycling is an endurance sport and all kinds of "stuff" have been used to survive long races. It's unfortunate that cheating will almost always happen in cycling.

The email in the NY Times from the "rationalizer" is sad. People would rather have a cheater get away with it because he cares about cancer? Everyone wants a cure for cancer. Lance isn't the only one who cares. Lance's contributions to cancer research are admirable. But that doesn't justify taking EPO or blood doping so you can win races, make money, get famous, and then start a foundation.
 
Aug 2, 2010
214
0
0
intothe12 said:
I think to classify LA as a thief, then you need to apply it fairly across the board to other riders.
Ah, but no other biker comes close to LA's scale of fraud/thievery. Only LA has defrauded sponsors and insurers to the tune of scores of millions of dollars.

You and some others misread the intention of my original post. What I am trying to do is one simple thing: provide a quick soundbite that destroys the Rationalizer's argument as captured by Lee Fineman's comment to the NYT: If Lance doped, who cares?

To that, my one soundbite would be:

"We must care, because if Lance doped, he is also a major criminal thief. He stole many millions of dollars by way of fraud."
 
Jul 22, 2009
106
0
0
intothe12 said:
The statement that "Lance is a thief (if he doped)" seems very general and simplistic and to be fair could be applied to a significant number of the Peloton in the early nineties up until recently. I think to classify LA as a thief, then you need to apply it fairly across the board to other riders.

I would blame a lot of the DS’s before blaming Lance.

So is Lance a thief? If he is, then a lot others were too at the time. I think the more pertinent question is, Did Lance (and his team) help in propagating the culture of doping and in so robbing a lot of young clean riders of a future? So maybe he is not a thief in terms of winning races, but of stealing the futures of other riders, i.e. Christophe Basson - in my opinion yes.
I tend to agree with this, and have mixed feelings about this situation.

While I'm not even close to being a fanboy, I have trouble going along 100% with the arguement that LA stole money from his sponsor's, etc, by doping.


Did he take money from sponsor's, etc, and use it to dope and win races, probably so.

But the sponsor's raked up in the process too!

Lance was like the golden cash cow for years for these guys and lifted cycling from a mostly upper-class sport in America to almost a mainstream sport.

How many bikes do you think Trek sold due to Lance???

How much did the Postal Service's business benefit from Lance winning all those tours???

Sure he probably cheated, and it was wrong, but like Landis said, 'if Lance hadn't have won those tours, someone else doped would have.'

Just saying, I have trouble feeling sorry for Lance's sponsors at the moment because he's been the best thing that ever happened to most of them.

Now if this stuff falls apart, and he's demonized, that's a whole other story....
 
Aug 2, 2010
214
0
0
tockit said:
I have trouble going along 100% with the arguement that LA stole money from his sponsor's, etc, by doping.
If LA doped to win his TdFs, he surely defrauded SCA Promotions out of $5 million plus lawyer fees.

I don't know whether his other sponsorships included contract breakers for doping. If they did, and Lance lied about his doping, he stole money. I don't know how this could be more evident.

This, IMO, is why Lance is stuck in his lies in a way no other biker is stuck. Admitting the truth would cost him tens of millions. Civil suits would keep him occupied for years. A huge chunk of Lance's $150m to $200m net worth would be at risk it is proved he knowingly doped.

The money angle is why Lance is playing a winner takes all game.
 
Jul 22, 2009
106
0
0
Page Mill Masochist said:
If LA doped to win his TdFs, he surely defrauded SCA Promotions out of $5 million plus lawyer fees.

I don't know whether his other sponsorships included contract breakers for doping. If they did, and Lance lied about his doping, he stole money. I don't know how this could be more evident.

This, IMO, is why Lance is stuck in his lies in a way no other biker is stuck. Admitting the truth would cost him tens of millions. Civil suits would keep him occupied for years. A huge chunk of Lance's $150m to $200m net worth would be at risk it is proved he knowingly doped.

The money angle is why Lance is playing a winner takes all game.
I agree that Lance is most likely a pathelogical liar, pompous a$$, he doped, and admitting it would cost him a ton of money and his reputation.

I also agree that he screwed the riders who raced against him clean.

I go along with all that 100%! No question about it.


But, as far as the sponsors go, they put money behind him to endorse their products and the guy won 7 TDF's. They made out like bandits (especially with the cancer/comeback story, etc).

How did they lose?


Now, if this case does lead to charges against LA and company, his image is tarnished, etc, etc, this all becomes a mute point and changes everything.

Although, at this moment in time, I don't see where the sponsor's have lost anything.....
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,169
0
0
sashimono said:
Congratulations to Lance and Jan for 100 years of cycling excellence!
Oh sorry. Meant a decade - but you know that.
But anyway, I am happy, because it seems to be the only thing you have to critizise.

pea counter
 
Aug 17, 2009
4,124
0
0
la.margna said:
it's part of the strategy of many wicked thiefs and fraudsters to have some charity or holy image campaigns running and televise and capitalise on every good thing they do in order to distract from their dark sides.

It's a bit like the mafia bosses killing, stealing and violating all week long and then going to church every Sunday and leave some healthy donation.

Siccccckkk.

If everybody was honest and fair, no stealing, no cheating, no fraudstering, there would not be much left to do for charities, because wealth would be balanced, all people had enough food and misery and diseases would be substantially lower if not even disappear with the time.

But as humanity continues its selfish, greedy egoistic path, things get worse. No wonder Lance has discovered the dynamics of his growing potential to profiteer from. 28m and growing...

But then again (sorry, now going very far away for a cycling forum ;) ), the world in seven to ten years from now will look differently... completely differently (for the better!) as it seems we are moving closer to the extreme side before the pendulum wipes back... :)

Btw, what "good" has LA been doing? And if someone does good, how much crimes, cheating or fraud will it justify? Imagine Bernie Madoff had been running a charity for cancer or whatever disease and people would then come and say, yes he cheated, but he has dones so much good, etc. etc..

ridicolous.

follow the path of truth, honesty and fairness. it will pay out in the long run.

c'mon Lance, take your chance, don't miss it, it's not too late yet!
Sorry this rant sounds anti- semitic. Lance ain't Jewish he is an agnostic. Cut it out with the Adolf H. line.
 
"Assume for the sake of argument that Lance Armstrong is guilty of systematic doping. Who cares? He has done a lot of good. Armstrong has raised money for cancer research, and stands as an inspiration for many cancer survivors. He will continue to do good unless he falls victim to an inquisition."


I'm really bothered by the new PR approach to sort of portray him as a "contemporary Robin Hood" whose crimes are forgotten in order to help the ones in need AKA the Cancer community.....
As far as I remember, Robin Hood gave everything to the poor & never retained any money for himself-- whereas LA has enriched himself by cheating & has utilized a foundation to shield his wrongdoings...
 
Aug 17, 2009
4,124
0
0
Lance has entertained me for years. Call him anything you like. Cannot take the fun I have had watching him, his team, his organization, the worldwide attention he has brought on the sport of cycling. Plus getting the newbies to become involved in cycling. Even this investigation is a good thing. Hopefully it will disuade other teams from chosing the less than honest methods of winning.

I am sorry if you all do not believe in miracles. I see no shame in Lance, I see some teaching for us all to learn in.
 
Aug 2, 2010
214
0
0
tockit said:
How did they lose?
You're forgetting the SCA Promotions vs. Tailwind arbitration in 2005, which went Lance's way to the tune of $5 million plus lawyers fees. If Lance doped, he defrauded SCA, pure and simple.

Now, supposing Trek, Oakley, Nike and other LA sponsors had similar contract phrasing. These would be an interesting cases, I agree. Lance clearly helped Trek sell bikes. But at the same time, if he doped, Trek would have a right to get its money back if that is how the contract was written. (Again, my assumption is that Trek had contract escape hatches in the event of Lance's proven doping. I don't know this to be true. Just assuming.)

SCA will clearly want its money back. Trek and Nike may not want the hassle of going after Lance.

However, since Nike is a publicly traded company, what if Nike shareholders decided to sue Nike and Lance to get their money back?

The possibility for such civil are endless. This is why Lance will deny, deny, deny till the very end.
 
Apr 19, 2009
277
0
0
flicker said:
Lance has entertained me for years. Call him anything you like. Cannot take the fun I have had watching him, his team, his organization, the worldwide attention he has brought on the sport of cycling. Plus getting the newbies to become involved in cycling. Even this investigation is a good thing. Hopefully it will disuade other teams from chosing the less than honest methods of winning.

I am sorry if you all do not believe in miracles. I see no shame in Lance, I see some teaching for us all to learn in.
He taught me to ride with a high cadence. No joke. Spin baby spin, which in itself is a miracle.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
flicker said:
Lance has entertained me for years. Call him anything you like. Cannot take the fun I have had watching him, his team, his organization, the worldwide attention he has brought on the sport of cycling. Plus getting the newbies to become involved in cycling. Even this investigation is a good thing. Hopefully it will disuade other teams from chosing the less than honest methods of winning.

I am sorry if you all do not believe in miracles. I see no shame in Lance, I see some teaching for us all to learn in.
Yeah Flick baby, i know what you mean. i get the same entertainment from watching those pixar movies, ya know where everything kind of looks real but you know its not. great aren't they. I think lance is Mr Incredible.....:D
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts