Official "be nice" Lance Armstrong thread

[ThisFrenchGuy]

It's worse than that. LA an JB are running the cycling equivalent of the BO Chicago machine in the White House. They are corrupt and pander to the cannotabes. AC can, and Astana sheeples are way below him physically, emotionally and intellectually. It doesn't matter AC's IQ, he is principaled--think Joe the Plumber, if you are not one of the communists ruining America. And one more thing all male posters have missed...AC is gorgeous. Lance is, well, toned, but ugly. A (riding) woman senses Lance's jeolousy for a young, beautiful, talented, young Spanish rider.

I speculate nothing would have changed. At one point Contador would have attacked, maybe under the guise of following A.Schleck, maybe not. All hell would have broken loose on cycling forums about the "bad teammate", but Contador was the only realistic chance of a win from Astana above the Luxemburg rider.

 

[Jonathan]

It's worse than that. LA an JB are running the cycling equivalent of the BO Chicago machine in the White House. They are corrupt and pander to the cannotabes. AC can, and Astana sheeples are way below him physically, emotionally and intellectually. It doesn't matter AC's IQ, he is principaled--think Joe the Plumber, if you are not one of the communists ruining America. And one more thing all male posters have missed...AC is gorgeous. Lance is, well, toned, but ugly. A (riding) woman senses Lance's jeolousy for a young, beautiful, talented, young Spanish rider.

They're just opposites. Armstrong isn't too fond of religion, Contador is apparently a pious catholic.

 

[ggusta]

You missed all the fun - I am pretty sure it was covered in the day afters stage or on the 'old' Lance thread.

I figured it had prolly been hotly debated - is anything in an online message board NOT debated as such?

No prob, when I am bored (in about 20 minutes) I'll check it out.

 

[Cobber]

As much as I enjoy a sensible debate about LA - I think bringing in his family in to the discussion is 'out of bounds' - it also has a lot to do with why the previous thread was closed.

The only reason to discuss his family and personal life is in the context of AC's comment.

My relationship with Armstrong is none-but independent from his personality, he's a great champion, has won 7 tours and done a great job in this one, but on a personal level(referring to his personality) I haven't had a great admiration towards his, and never will, but again-as a rider-he's a great champion.

I don't profess to know the truth behind any of what has been reported in the media, but Armstrong's personal life over the last 10+ years has been a little sensational. Contador's comment might have had something to do with the fact that Armstrong has been with many different women, and had children with 2 of them. He reportedly broke up with Sheryl Crow because she wanted kids, then has a child with someone after her. He also broke up with her just as she was diagnosed with cancer. He broke up with the girl he was with during his battle with cancer after he got better and she had stuck by him through it. Contador, on the other hand, has reportedly had the same girlfriend for quite a long tome (8 years or so).

What's not to admire?!

 

[thehog]

The only reason to discuss his family and personal life is in the context of AC's comment.

I don't profess to know the truth behind any of what has been reported in the media, but Armstrong's personal life over the last 10+ years has been a little sensational. Contador's comment might have had something to do with the fact that Armstrong has been with many different women, and had children with 2 of them. He reportedly broke up with Sheryl Crow because she wanted kids, then has a child with someone after her. He also broke up with her just as she was diagnosed with cancer. He broke up with the girl he was with during his battle with cancer after he got better and she had stuck by him through it. Contador, on the other hand, has reportedly had the same girlfriend for quite a long tome (8 years or so).

What's not to admire?!

I'm not sure where this information came from. Armstong has only been with one woman all his life - Linda Armstrong.

 

[TRDean]

I'm not sure where this information came from. Armstong has only been with one woman all his life - Linda Armstrong.

What? Don't forget the little Olson girl.

 

[ggusta]

I think I hear admins coming down the whole with their thread locking keys. I have something to say about this aspect of Lance but if I don't choose words carefully I'll inadvertently lock up another one. Maybe later. Busy today. Sorry.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Stick to the cycling aspects, please.

Susan

 

[richwagmn]

Just read that Lance has a book coming out detailing his comeback. (comeback 2.0). Be interesting to see what he says about Astana and AC.

 

[pedaling squares]

Just read that Lance has a book coming out detailing his comeback. (comeback 2.0). Be interesting to see what he says about Astana and AC.

Maybe he should hold off until he accomplishes something worthy of a book. Now, I happen to think that 3rd in the TDF after a 3 yr layoff is incredible, but the majority of his book-buying public are there only because he hit the top rung 7 yrs running. So far all we have is some sketchy riding in the ATOC, a broken clavicle, a fair effort at the Giro, and a TDF that was rife with strange behaviour and stories more suited to People magazine than the bestseller list.

 

[No_Balls]

Remember back in 1999 when i in fact supported Armstrong. I thought he was a refreshing sight because i didn´t liked Ullrich back then (i do now). Then over the years a started to grow tired of him since he didnt act as classy as he should have. Back then, we had Indurain as the benchmark and role model. But he came away with a lot since i admired the history of Lance fighting cancer and all (but that is just crap i know that now it was his way of getting the attention). The we had the doping issues, Dr Ferrari, Buying domestiques whom had later felled into the doping trap, the american pointing fingers at the french, his behavior against Lemond to make him a court material. Doubt had already risen against him at that point from my side.

The three plus years off with him sniping the peloton ("This sucks"). And of course the return a la biggest drama queen ever. Lance Armstrong stepped back getting attention, claimed leadership after four years because everyone one year earlier "sucked", and when he didn´t get what he wanted he started to behave like a friggin mobster against Alberto Contador, the supposed dram queen. This Twit-**** figure maybe reason that whatever stirs up a drama causes people attention and, of course you cant deny that, it does on a short term. But it makes people also dislike the common lack of moral and cycling has survived before, with its moral intact.

Lance Armstrongs attitude stinks and whatever dignity Twit-**** has had it is now down to a minimum. Every people with common sense realise what kind of a hell this young lad AC had gone trough, a supposed captain who were challenged by a 40 year-old baby. Off in the cold when grandpa was with his old buddies again cheering and celebrating memories. Playing the "bad teammate"-card when everything he could possibly have done was to sink Contador in the first place and when AC reacted to it, Twit-**** were the drama queen once more: "Ohh, no! You cant say that, you cant do that. You are a baaadd teammate."

I am furious because i have had my fair chair of this people like Armstrong before and i absolutely hate it. I am pleased to see AC could more then handle it, not everyone is, and the angered created withing Armstrong, a fresh taste of sweetness.

To sum it up: Armstrong is a jackass and Twit **** shall be my nickname to him.

 

[Murray]

... i admired the history of Lance fighting cancer and all (but that is just crap i know that now it was his way of getting the attention).

Umm... I find pretty unlikely that almost dying of cancer was a way to get attention.

 

[ggusta]

Umm... I find pretty unlikely that almost dying of cancer was a way to get attention.

I think you have to go a long way to miss his point. To be equally obtuse, I have never heard of anyone intentionally getting cancer to begin with.

I would assume from the rest of the post, that the use of cancer by him after coming back from it has always been a way for him (and his sycophantic worshippers?) to deflect any rightful criticism of him. It was a great a story; it might serve him well to show some humility, but he is congenitally incapable of doing that sincerely.

And when his worshippers fall for his phony media image....well then you end up with threads that go on for thousands of posts....

 

[ThisFrenchGuy]

Does cancer is even that relevant to the discussion? Some postulates that being a survivor modeled his rage to win, or explains how he morphed into a GT rider, well OK. I'm pretty sure being nice (or not) has not a lot to do with his fight against the disease. I do not think it is a factor when one wants to form an opinion on his recent actions as well.

 

[clearhop]

Hurrah!

I finally got to the end of 27 pages! I can finally make my point! Only i've kinda forgotten it...

So, another point, on the day AC attacked AK and the Schlek's, JB was annoyed because had they stayed together, AK could have not only helped AC get to the end of the stage (the downhill bit), but also one of them could have got the stage win. Rather than AC attacking for 30m, dropping his teammate, then stopping for two of his opponents to catch up. I know he apologised for it afterwards, but it seemed fairly stupid to me. Either don't attack, and keep your team mate with you, or attack and drop the other two guys as well, and go on to a glorious victory...

Tactically, either would have made sense, but to do what he did was a mistake, albeit a fairly meaningless one in the end.

Am i missing something here. I usually do...

Sorry to chat cycling again, but 27 pages made me a little woozy.

 

[No_Balls]

Umm... I find pretty unlikely that almost dying of cancer was a way to get attention.

Nah, it was not "almost dying" it was a 50/50 as the doctors said. He still had a fair chance. Reports given that he doesn´t care **** about cancer (he left a girlfriend suffering from it) unless he could benefit from it. Thats twitters way.

The industry selling this image though. Now t w i t t w at can act like he want given this benefited support (hello Phil Ligget!)

 

[pedaling squares]

Nah, it was not "almost dying" it was a 50/50 as the doctors said. He still had a fair chance.

I think debating how bad his cancer was is pretty silly. None of us was his oncologist. The man had a bad dose of cancer, no doubt. Brain surgery is no walk in the park. Why drag ourselves into the gutter by suggesting that it was some form of charade? LA has done plenty of things to put himself in the gutter, no need for us to lower this forum into a "cancer ain't so bad" thread. Now, missing that dinner... that is prattish behaviour. There, back on track.

 

[richwagmn]

I think debating how bad his cancer was is pretty silly. None of us was his oncologist. The man had a bad dose of cancer, no doubt. Brain surgery is no walk in the park. Why drag ourselves into the gutter by suggesting that it was some form of charade? LA has done plenty of things to put himself in the gutter, no need for us to lower this forum into a "cancer ain't so bad" thread. Now, missing that dinner... that is prattish behaviour. There, back on track.

+100. Plenty to discuss with his actions in the Peloton.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I finally got to the end of 27 pages! I can finally make my point! Only i've kinda forgotten it...

So, another point, on the day AC attacked AK and the Schlek's, JB was annoyed because had they stayed together, AK could have not only helped AC get to the end of the stage (the downhill bit), but also one of them could have got the stage win. Rather than AC attacking for 30m, dropping his teammate, then stopping for two of his opponents to catch up. I know he apologised for it afterwards, but it seemed fairly stupid to me. Either don't attack, and keep your team mate with you, or attack and drop the other two guys as well, and go on to a glorious victory...

Tactically, either would have made sense, but to do what he did was a mistake, albeit a fairly meaningless one in the end.

Am i missing something here. I usually do...

Sorry to chat cycling again, but 27 pages made me a little woozy.

Welcome newcomer. If you only read the previous 27 pages and not all the other threads where the same agruments were wound around and around, you would not have noticed how thoroughly to death they have beat this question (among many). One point that I didn't ever see anyone else make and so I'll do now, since you asked, is this. Contador's little 10 second attack may have actually helped limit the time that Armstrong eventually lost on the stage. Now I'll tell you why. The Schlecks were powering along with Contador on their wheels, working as hard as they could to make time on all the other rivals. They weren't gonna shake AC, they knew that, but as long as they rode the rest out of contention and didn't lose any time to AC it was win/win for them. As soon as AC attacked that changed a little bit even though they were able to neutralize it pretty quick. If you are riding with a non working passenger and you know he is just going to follow then you will go all out. But an attack will disrupt that a bit because all of a sudden you don't know when he might attack again and you begin to save a little strength for that possibility. So you see AC's attack at that point was good for LA. You could say he did it all for Lance.

 

[Azdak6]

And when his worshippers fall for his phony media image....well then you end up with threads that go on for thousands of posts....

And when the hateboys fall for an equally phony image of their own creation....well then you end up with threads (or individuals sometimes) that go on for thousands of posts......

 

[padyakpinoy]

Welcome newcomer. If you only read the previous 27 pages and not all the other threads where the same agruments were wound around and around, you would not have noticed how thoroughly to death they have beat this question (among many). One point that I didn't ever see anyone else make and so I'll do now, since you asked, is this. Contador's little 10 second attack may have actually helped limit the time that Armstrong eventually lost on the stage. Now I'll tell you why. The Schlecks were powering along with Contador on their wheels, working as hard as they could to make time on all the other rivals. They weren't gonna shake AC, they knew that, but as long as they rode the rest out of contention and didn't lose any time to AC it was win/win for them. As soon as AC attacked that changed a little bit even though they were able to neutralize it pretty quick. If you are riding with a non working passenger and you know he is just going to follow then you will go all out. But an attack will disrupt that a bit because all of a sudden you don't know when he might attack again and you begin to save a little strength for that possibility. So you see AC's attack at that point was good for LA. You could say he did it all for Lance.

I think the opposite happened, because from what I saw on TV, SB (Saxo Bank, or Schleck Brothers) got a lot of motivation when they (after AC's attack) dropped AK, and they learned that they were distancing on LA. Thus the lead went up to 3 minutes.

It was pretty obvious that AS and FS worked together to extend their lead to LA, AK, and BW. It was only LA's determination to limit his losses that he tried to go solo ahead and catch up with AK.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I think the opposite happened, because from what I saw on TV, SB (Saxo Bank, or Schleck Brothers) got a lot of motivation when they (after AC's attack) dropped AK, and they learned that they were distancing on LA. Thus the lead went up to 3 minutes.

It was pretty obvious that AS and FS worked together to extend their lead to LA, AK, and BW. It was only LA's determination to limit his losses that he tried to go solo ahead and catch up with AK.

We'll agree to disagree then, because I saw them gaining time at a slower rate after AC's little move.

 

[padyakpinoy]

We'll agree to disagree then, because I saw them gaining time at a slower rate after AC's little move.

Yup, we'll agree to disagree, but you also said it, they were still gaining time, and that was all the motivation that SB needed at that crucial point.

I know, it's still up for debate and different interpretations for a long time, and no one will ever find out the answer.

 

[No_Balls]

I think debating how bad his cancer was is pretty silly. None of us was his oncologist. The man had a bad dose of cancer, no doubt. Brain surgery is no walk in the park. Why drag ourselves into the gutter by suggesting that it was some form of charade? LA has done plenty of things to put himself in the gutter, no need for us to lower this forum into a "cancer ain't so bad" thread. Now, missing that dinner... that is prattish behaviour. There, back on track.

I didnt wished to debate about cancer in the first place. It was the french guy whom lifted it up to begin with. My point was that the twitter uses his authority in the cancer-foundations by creating the saga and myth around him. No one seems to notice the fact AC laid in coma in (what 10 days?) because of cerebral cavernoma and he for sure doesnt exploit it. And no one makes out cries about this. Much of the english-speaking world (am a swede myself) is so much up Armstrongs *** that the light they see could possibly coming from the mouth.

The twitter exploits some other things though, as has been rolling up in front of our very eyes during three weeks.

 

[Boeing]

I rate lance is 2 categories.

Lance on the bike and Lance off the bike. In both he is a Monster.

Love a monster on the bike.

Off the bike well I am just not interested in the dude put it that way