Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession)

Page 373 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 7, 2010
1,247
0
0
Race Radio said:
Lance is re-launching the Lance Armstrong Foundation. Will focus on research this time.....instead of parties and selling Nike

Co-chaired by Victor Conte and Dr. Patrick Arnold. Focusing on donation enhancement.
 
Scott SoCal said:
It will fail.

Don't be so sure.

"fail" as in not actually provide research funding? Probably.
"fail" as in raise money or hide his money? Probably not.

One of the guy's peculiar talents is making people "believe." That will make lots of money come in.

His philanthropy record is untouched outside a forum thread or two filled with comments from anonymous w@nkers doubting the legitimacy of the .com/.org setup.
 
Nov 7, 2013
146
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
Don't be so sure.

"fail" as in not actually provide research funding? Probably.
"fail" as in raise money or hide his money? Probably not.

One of the guy's peculiar talents is making people "believe." That will make lots of money come in.

His philanthropy record is untouched outside a forum thread or two filled with comments from anonymous w@nkers doubting the legitimacy of the .com/.org setup.

And you have no problem with a foundation that constantly told everyone about how much it was contributing to research but had essentially reduced its research contributions to zero after the first few years? All its efforts were on the vague "cancer awareness" goal. A vague goal allows for money to go to vague places

Also, here is a fine example of Lance Armstrong's philanthropy record.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-860283
 
There will always be the folks that are hangers-on that look for approval from aggressive braggarts like Lance..
and sad ones that have no life of their own or self-pride that will gravitate to "wonder boy the awesome"
..and for those reasons it might possibly gain some traction.

He's grasping...
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
Don't be so sure.

"fail" as in not actually provide research funding? Probably.
"fail" as in raise money or hide his money? Probably not.

One of the guy's peculiar talents is making people "believe." That will make lots of money come in.

His philanthropy record is untouched outside a forum thread or two filled with comments from anonymous w@nkers doubting the legitimacy of the .com/.org setup.


I just don't see it.

Corporate donations are what make these charities hum. Margarita Texas isn't that big.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Alpe73 said:
Now that's a Gold Standard piece of journalism!

Glad someone is up and at em late ... to sleuth this out. The genius of that ...

...way to be on top of a piece that most of us read almost two years ago...hey, did you know Hugo Chávez won a third term too!!

Somebody's gotta' be a fraud apologist. You seem well suited for the task. Keep up the good work!
 
ChewbaccaD said:
...way to be on top of a piece that most of us read almost two years ago...hey, did you know Hugo Chávez won a third term too!!

Somebody's gotta' be a fraud apologist. You seem well suited for the task. Keep up the good work!

Ah ... the Life of Riled ... ain't it beautiful ... especially with the big chain ring biting thrown in. You're the best, Chewy.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Alpe73 said:
Ah ... the Life of Riled ... ain't it beautiful ... especially with the big chain ring biting thrown in. You're the best, Chewy.

You're welcome.

Hey, I kind of dig the fact that they let you keep your sockpuppet account. We need more people like you around. Congratulations!
 
ChewbaccaD said:
they let you keep your sockpuppet account.

Over four thousand posts ... and whatya got? Battle fatigue and delusions. Walk in a run on 4 pitches ... not even close. If you didn't provide such good Ernest Borgnine, I'd think it sad.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
MonkeyFace said:
And you have no problem with a foundation that constantly told everyone about how much it was contributing to research but had essentially reduced its research contributions to zero after the first few years?

DW aint no armstrong fan and he never said he had no problem.


MonkeyFace said:
All its efforts were on the vague "cancer awareness" goal. A vague goal allows for money to go to vague places

Also, here is a fine example of Lance Armstrong's philanthropy record.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-860283

The clinic has pretty well documented Armstrong's charity fraud.

LAF will be nothing new in regards to lining the pockets of Armstrong.

He is intent on rebranding himself, using the likes of O'Reilly, Mercier and anyone else who he can kid into believing he has changed and is truly repentant for his wrongdoings
 
MonkeyFace said:
And you have no problem with a foundation ...

Me personally? Of course I do. Wonderboy has a lifetime of gaming systems. We know he's not changed. My first wild guess is Wonderboy's "cancer research" is angel funding startups under the disguise of being a non-profit.

What else can I do but look at things like the .com/.org, try to figure out the scam and share the knowledge? Here's some more:

Plenty of fraud going on in the name of cancer research in Texas already.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/poli...d-over-11-million-texas-cancer-fund-grant.ece
$11 million!! Cha-ching!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/us/more-scientists-quit-texas-cancer-research-institute.html?_r=0

It's not a "research" fund. It's a Texas jobs program with cancer pharmaceuticals as the resource.

http://www.cprit.state.tx.us/funding-opportunities/ Company relocation funds is cancer research.

Not entirely though. Some funds are used to provide no-cost public health screenings.
 
DirtyWorks said:
Me personally? Of course I do. Wonderboy has a lifetime of gaming systems. We know he's not changed. My first wild guess is Wonderboy's "cancer research" is angel funding startups under the disguise of being a non-profit.

What else can I do but look at things like the .com/.org, try to figure out the scam and share the knowledge? Here's some more:

Plenty of fraud going on in the name of cancer research in Texas already.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/poli...d-over-11-million-texas-cancer-fund-grant.ece
$11 million!! Cha-ching!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/us/more-scientists-quit-texas-cancer-research-institute.html?_r=0

It's not a "research" fund. It's a Texas jobs program with cancer pharmaceuticals as the resource.

http://www.cprit.state.tx.us/funding-opportunities/ Company relocation funds is cancer research.

Not entirely though. Some funds are used to provide no-cost public health screenings.

Peloton Therapeutics? LOL, sounds like a company the good Dr. Ferrari might have founded.

juanito said:

Wow, still has all the MJs, including ones framed and on the wall.

Still repeats the 500 times myth.

Like this interview better than the one with Oprah. Sounds more relaxed, reflective, honest.

Last question: How would you do in the TDF today? Answer: Not very well, too old. Wish DP had asked him about Horner.
 
Merckx index said:
Peloton Therapeutics? LOL, sounds like a company the good Dr. Ferrari might have founded.



Wow, still has all the MJs, including ones framed and on the wall.

Still repeats the 500 times myth.

Like this interview better than the one with Oprah. Sounds more relaxed, reflective, honest.

Last question: How would you do in the TDF today? Answer: Not very well, too old. Wish DP had asked him about Horner.

Sounds like he 'mellowed' out just a tad, but still comes out as a major d-bag.
 
May 20, 2010
801
0
0
Fausto's Schnauzer said:
Didn't he get promoted to Lieutenant Colonel d-bag? :confused:

DirtyWorks said:
Don't be so sure.

"fail" as in not actually provide research funding? Probably.
"fail" as in raise money or hide his money? Probably not.

One of the guy's peculiar talents is making people "believe." That will make lots of money come in.

His philanthropy record is untouched outside a forum thread or two filled with comments from anonymous w@nkers doubting the legitimacy of the .com/.org setup.

There is always a chance for redemption in the eyes of the flock.
 
Nov 23, 2013
366
0
0
It's funny (sort of) that he still can't recognize that all the stuff he did is how he actually did anything. He says "we still had to do the work"....lmao. No, you didn't Lance...that's the whole point. The doping allowed you a short cut. It made it easier. You absolutely didn't have to the do the work. Try it without doping....sitting at or near the back all the time, where your rightful place would have been. Then and only then would you still have "done the work".
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Energy Starr said:
It's funny (sort of) that he still can't recognize that all the stuff he did is how he actually did anything. He says "we still had to do the work"....lmao. No, you didn't Lance...that's the whole point. The doping allowed you a short cut. It made it easier. You absolutely didn't have to the do the work. Try it without doping....sitting at or near the back all the time, where your rightful place would have been. Then and only then would you still have "done the work".

In a sense he is correct. You don't get better with EPO unless you are training harder than you did previously.

AICAR and GW50516 are the truly "don't do work but still get better" drugs.