Lemond - Trek lawsuit

[guilder]

Debate 101

Player A : Lemond has made a lot of wild statements.

Player B : Really? Could you quote some.

Player A : Lots and lots.

Player B : Could you give us some examples?

Player A : Mounds of them.

Why not start with anything Lemond says and we'll debate whether it's wild or not?

 

[ggusta]

Why not start with anything Lemond says and we'll debate whether it's wild or not?

Let's start with Greg Strock.

 

[Race Radio]

Why not start with anything Lemond says and we'll debate whether it's wild or not?

You do realize that in order to be taken seriously you need to give us more then "anything Lemond says"

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Why not start with anything Lemond says and we'll debate whether it's wild or not?

"If Armstrong's clean, it's the greatest comeback. And if he's not, then it's the greatest fraud."

Sounds very accurate to me.

 

[ggusta]

You do realize that in order to be taken seriously you need to give us more then "anything Lemond says"

I think it's a diversion rather than a debate. Some folks aren't interested in debating anything. They can't.

The translation is "Let me dig up something Lemond said to make you defend it and keep me from engaging in any intellectual honesty."

If you take the bait, then you become an apologist for Lemond and he will feel justified in his hatred of Lemond. And he has successfully steered it off topic.

 

[JayZee]

As part of the Lance divorce settlement, Kirstin signed a confidendiality agreement....My question is, in a court of law, if she tells the truth about 'secrets' from the marriage, is she cuplable as regards this previous agreement?

Lance would still be able to assert the spousal privilege, which means that he could prevent her from divulging the content of conversations held during their marriage. There are exceptions of course such as if LA put the subject of such conversations at issue in a case. Now with regard to conversations between LA and someone else that she witnessed, there may be no spousal privilege, and would have to rely on the relevance objection, which is what is sounds like her attorney did. If the judge deems the content of the conversations relevant, then it wouldn't matter if there was a confidentiality agreement. If this is the case then I predict settlement to avoid that.

 

[Not Riding Enough]

Mens Journal is not really a tabloid mag. That article did have some good elements, but I wouldn't consider it thorough, by any stretch. It was also written as much to attain viewer interest (talk about the dog, his kids) as anything.

Perhaps not the magazine but as that article headline included " ...whether the former superstar is a crusader out to save cycling or one massively bitter maniac" and then started with his "attack dog" and ended with it kind of attacking his daughter, it did seem like a fairly tabloid article to me.

I got the impression that it was slightly trying to imply the GL was a bit of nut but it didn't really villify him and listed some of his achievments, which may be why sproket01 described it as balanced, which as I said I wouldn't go so far as.

 

[Race Radio]

I think it's a diversion rather than a debate. Some folks aren't interested in debating anything. They can't.

The translation is "Let me dig up something Lemond said to make you defend it and keep me from engaging in any intellectual honesty."

If you take the bait, then you become an apologist for Lemond and he will feel justified in his hatred of Lemond. And he has successfully steered it off topic.

Thank you for proving my point. You have nothing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You may be correct, but I have to wonder, given his iconic stature and the fact that the vast amount of Americans either have no idea what the doping controversy is all about or just want to love Lance for his fairy tale recovery and all of the wonderful Mother Theresa-like good that he showers the world with, that the American public would forgive him as quickly as they forgave Pettite and welcome his honesty.

His name in cycling would be ruined of course, but it's more than half way there already, he has transcended the sport so what does he care about 'us' fans of an almost non-existent sport in American professional sports?

The upshot: I wonder if he can live with himself if he admitted to doping. I think in his mind that no positive test is the same thing as no usage. Besides, like his ex-wife said, epo is a necessary evil, so his achievements exist on a basically level field, ie, a doper vs a doper is the same as a non-doper vs a non-doper. So why should he be singled out?

And no, if you have read more than a couple of my posts, you know exactly where i stand so don't get me wrong.

Excellent post - and in particular the highlighted paragraph above.

As you say Armstrong has transcended the sport of cycling and he is a recognizable brand and personality in the USA. Much of this has been gained by his amazing story as much as his athletic ability. The main stream media have never really questioned or dug deep in to his background.

If Greg continues and does not settle the suit - the spotlight will be placed on Lance and how he achieved his success. If the media do look in to his background I don't think Lance can survive the scrutiny.
As his reputation in the USA is built on favourable media this could ruin his legacy.

 

[suntzulynn]

What seems to be a bitter Lemond

Lemond has shown in previous days he could ride a bike...and very well! "BUT" now it seems that his ability to articulate without going over the bars won't happen! Too bad! I see Treks position, and "it's my opinion" Trek should not have to pay for Lemonds inability to control his ??? jealousy or what ever else irks him, it's way beyond cycling and doping!! Is it more rooted in the fact that someone bettered him?

 

[Race Radio]

Perhaps not the magazine but as that article headline included " ...whether the former superstar is a crusader out to save cycling or one massively bitter maniac" and then started with his "attack dog" and ended with it kind of attacking his daughter, it did seem like a fairly tabloid article to me.

I got the impression that it was slightly trying to imply the GL was a bit of nut but it didn't really villify him and listed some of his achievments, which may be why sproket01 described it as balanced, which as I said I wouldn't go so far as.

Lance sells magazine. If you want him on your cover if helps of you slime his enemies.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Lemond has shown in previous days he could ride a bike...and very well! "BUT" now it seems that his ability to articulate without going over the bars won't happen! Too bad! I see Treks position, and "it's my opinion" Trek should not have to pay for Lemonds inability to control his ??? jealousy or what ever else irks him, it's way beyond cycling and doping!! Is it more rooted in the fact that someone bettered him?

Congratulations you managed to grasp exactly what Armstrong's paid PR hacks want you to. Way to look beneath the surface!

 

[ggusta]

Excellent post - and in particular the highlighted paragraph above.

As you say Armstrong has transcended the sport of cycling and he is a recognizable brand and personality in the USA. Much of this has been gained by his amazing story as much as his athletic ability. The main stream media have never really questioned or dug deep in to his background.

If Greg continues and does not settle the suit - the spotlight will be placed on Lance and how he achieved his success. If the media do look in to his background I don't think Lance can survive the scrutiny.
As his reputation in the USA is built on favourable media this could ruin his legacy.

I don't think his legacy will really ever suffer much damage here, too many other people have a whole lot riding on the brand, they'll spin for him until the public's eyes glaze over. If that (his diminished standing) is what you hope for, please don't hold your breath.

This may hasten his fading, but not really change lots of people's minds.

 

[fatandfast]

Well, I respectfully disagree. And I think the only reason Amstrong hasn't filed his own share of lawsuits is because people are afraid of his legal and PR team. The bottom line is that people have already made up their mind on Lemond and Armstrong. The scene is certainly different than it was 5 years ago, when Lemond would have been blasted out of the water, but now I think there's an equilibrium. People who are Lemond fans will see a settlement as a victory. People who are Armstrong fans will see it as a loss to Greg, and continue to label him a nut.

I am a fan of both guys. I don't think Greg is a nut. I think Armstrong and Lemond are both very lucky guys with long careers and big contributions to racing and cycling in general. I just think that trying to quote or use conversations form Frankie and family is sketchy. I think trying to get Lance's ex to cry and bury the father of her kids is worse.. Lemond could have gone to China and had them tool up for a couple of weeks and put bikes with his name and specs out there,and who knows maybe the limited availability would have played in his favor. People say they have proof that both guys were jacked at one point during their careers,since neither guy got busted it's going to be all he said she said, and maybe some of it will stick. At the end of the day trek is going to settle and ask Lemond to cash his check in silence. The flood of everything Trek and Lance will pay for all this cluster of crap by both sides. It's not about right or wrong, Was Greg an abused kid? I don't know. Did Lance and his pals call Greg and try and shake him down? I don't know. These guys are trying to prove which one is less of a petty DB, in the end both are. I won't buy a Trek off of Craigslist for 10 bucks after this.

 

[Kennf1]

Why not start with anything Lemond says and we'll debate whether it's wild or not?

Anything? Okay, I'll start.

1. EPO use became rampant in the '90s.
2. Michele Ferrari was a notorious doping doctor.
3. Lance Armstrong threatened me to retract my statements about him and Ferrari.
4. Doping remains a problem in the sport.

 

[Race Radio]

I am a fan of both guys. I don't think Greg is a nut. I think Armstrong and Lemond are both very lucky guys with long careers and big contributions to racing and cycling in general. I just think that trying to quote or use conversations form Frankie and family is sketchy. I think trying to get Lance's ex to cry and bury the father of her kids is worse.. Lemond could have gone to China and had them tool up for a couple of weeks and put bikes with his name and specs out there,and who knows maybe the limited availability would have played in his favor. People say they have proof that both guys were jacked at one point during their careers,since neither guy got busted it's going to be all he said she said, and maybe some of it will stick. At the end of the day trek is going to settle and ask Lemond to cash his check in silence. The flood of everything Trek and Lance will pay for all this cluster of crap by both sides. It's not about right or wrong, Was Greg an abused kid? I don't know. Did Lance and his pals call Greg and try and shake him down? I don't know. These guys are trying to prove which one is less of a petty DB, in the end both are. I won't buy a Trek off of Craigslist for 10 bucks after this.

Lemond did not try to get Lance's ex to cry.

Kristen was at the dinner table when Lance announced to everyone that he was going to call Burke and bury Greg. Several other witnesses at the table confirmed this, Kristen had selective amnesia.

Armstrong's doping is central to the case, even the judge agrees to this. Asking Kristen of her knowledge of Armstrong's doping is important to the case. Remember this is somebody who said that EPO was a "Necessary evil" of Pro cycling, someone that Lance was so concerned about that it was rumored that he sent his buddy College to clean the EPO out of the fridge after he dumbed her. While Armstrong's PR firm and legal team has done a great job of painted them as persecuted this couldn't be farther from the case.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't think his legacy will really ever suffer much damage here, too many other people have a whole lot riding on the brand, they'll spin for him until the public's eyes glaze over. If that (his diminished standing) is what you hope for, please don't hold your breath.

This may hasten his fading, but not really change lots of people's minds.

No - actually, I am not bothered by LA one way or the other, I am interested in the sport, not Lance.

As I mentioned earlier I thought Clemens had been convicted - as everyone I asked about the case said he doped. The power of the media in the USA when they go against you can be more damaging then a sporting sanction.

 

[red_flanders]

There are mounds coming exclusively from the mouth of Lemond. It's painful to be reminded.

I guess that means you can't find any.

Seems there is a tinge of excitement from the judge in anticipation over the possible fireworks in a trial. Got to be a change of pace for him.

Quite the opposite, it sounds like he's warning them that a trial may be a really bad idea for one or both. That said, what you posted does not seem to be a direct quote, and there could be editorializing happening. I'd be interested to see the particular language the judge used.

 

[fatandfast]

Anything? Okay, I'll start.

1. EPO use became rampant in the '90s.
2. Michele Ferrari was a notorious doping doctor.
3. Lance Armstrong threatened me to retract my statements about him and Ferrari.
4. Doping remains a problem in the sport.

None of this looks to wild to me,all valid. Is there a solution to any of them.No.
1. cant change history
2. Having a medical advisor that goes hog wild doesn't make you hog wild or guilty
3. Probably happened in match of one upsmanship both guys think they have the other guy dirty, Lance got weak because Lemond came out and said he was abused.
4. No real answer,now they are saying rock climbers,swimmers,tennis players,football,basketball,hockey,rugby. To think that some chemist found a way to help people with blood disorders and recovery and their invention has some Oppenhiemer quality, Good things in the hands of bad people.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Good point Jay. Must be strange living in a world where you have to continue to pay out large sums of money in order to have people sign confidentiality agreements...while saying you have nothing to hide.

NotRidingEnough - Agree, which is why I said while I thought the article wasn't really tabloid, it was written for the masses. Though when articles are written like this, it's often hard to tell what's completely factual, and what is embellished by the author, or in some cases filled with fabrications. The Men's Journal article didn't strike me as being too fabricated, though one might argue embellished some in order to sway thinking a little.

 

[python]

what people think is the probability of settlement ? i even considered starting a poll..

here's my take:

(i) settlement probability - not high may be 20-30% unless trek is backpedaling as we speak
(ii) greg wants a full blown trail because he feels he has an edge, i feel he has cards we haven't yet been let in to
(iii) personally i'd prefer a trial..several reasons mainly because i hope it will expose the facts in the case.

 

[ggusta]

No - actually, I am not bothered by LA one way or the other, I am interested in the sport, not Lance.

As I mentioned earlier I thought Clemens had been convicted - as everyone I asked about the case said he doped. The power of the media in the USA when they go against you can be more damaging then a sporting sanction.

Clemens has not legally been convicted or even charged in a criminal case. There may be a civil trial. I seem to recall him going after McNamee for defamation or whatever.

Yes, the media here (and I assume everywhere) can really shape public opinion, as anyone discussing Lance must know! Clemens name is now mud here. A tremendous collapse from the heights to the depths of public opinion virtually in one day.

 

[ggusta]

what people think is the probability of settlement ? i even considered starting a poll..

here's my take:

(i) settlement probability - not high may be 20-30% unless trek is backpedaling as we speak
(ii) greg wants a full blown trail because he feels he has an edge, i feel he has cards we haven't yet been let in to
(iii) personally i'd prefer a trial..several reasons mainly because i hope it will expose the facts in the case.

If Greg thinks he can win, I doubt he will take a settlement. I don't think this is about money to him.

 

[fatandfast]

Good point Jay. Must be strange living in a world where you have to continue to pay out large sums of money in order to have people sign confidentiality agreements...while saying you have nothing to hide.

NotRidingEnough - Agree, which is why I said while I thought the article wasn't really tabloid, it was written for the masses. Though when articles are written like this, it's often hard to tell what's completely factual, and what is embellished by the author, or in some cases filled with fabrications. The Men's Journal article didn't strike me as being too fabricated, though one might argue embellished some in order to sway thinking a little.

Thanks for including that link. Good article and even better writing style. I remember the days when I used to try and ride with Subaru and Eddy B would tell me to get the F out of there. Couple of their riders got caught for using @caffine supositories. Lance was just a newbie then. I was a small BBQ and met some guys who were really on top and they were all jacked,men and women. Even before camera phones and built ins on your laptop I am sure people were trying to get dirt on each other. It's a funny way of looking at things when you can say to another rider we a both cheating hunks of trash but you are little worse than me and here's why....start the video. Delete the video already

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Unfortunately, most of that linked article is filled with nonsense, made-up by the author.

This thread has now hit 50 pages, nearly 500 posts, and over 12,000 views!