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

Page 477 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
blackcat said:
And yes, this assumes to the 2008 stockmarket bust. I have no doubt it would have wiped out some of his investments. But the SP500 have recovered, and he would have had opportunities to get out, before, when most were completely wiped out.

Hence Comeback 2.0 aka Stockmarket recovery initiative.
 
That's more like it...

Former Discovery Channel and Team Sky sporting director Sean Yates tells BBC South East Today that disgraced cyclist and former team-mate Lance Armstrong has been unfairly treated.

American Armstrong, 43, was stripped of his record seven Tour de France titles and banned from sport for life by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) in August 2012 following a doping scandal.

Yates rode with a young Armstrong at Motorola and, after moving into coaching, was reunited with the American at Discovery in 2005, when Armstrong won the last of his seven now rescinded titles.

The duo also worked together in 2009 at Astana.

Yates says Armstrong was "a stand-out figure" who was "hunted down" and "took the brunt of the blame" in the drugs scandal of 2012.

Yates, 54, will return to the Tour de France in 2015 after he joined Tinkoff-Saxo as a sports director.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/cycling/31454928
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Unlike certain members here, I don't define whether I think Armstrong was a scapegoat based on whether someone from Sky says something or not. He was not a scapegoat <full stop>

Good post Chewie!
 
Memo to Sean Yates:

Lance Armstrong used his cancer charity in an attempt to destroy USADA.

He also refused to participate in the process that could have led to a different result.

Just why didn't he deserve what he received?
 
frenchfry said:
Memo to Sean Yates:

Lance Armstrong used his cancer charity in an attempt to destroy USADA.

He also refused to participate in the process that could have led to a different result.

Just why didn't he deserve what he received?

good post ff!


Yates shows his lack of brains
 
frenchfry said:
Memo to Sean Yates:

Lance Armstrong used his cancer charity in an attempt to destroy USADA.

He also refused to participate in the process that could have led to a different result.

Just why didn't he deserve what he received?

Simple Hater/Anti-Fanboy argument.

Why should a doping ban hinge on whether or not a rider "used his cancer charity in an attempt to destroy USADA?" Should the length of doping bans be increased for riders who hit their wives or girlfriends? Should doping bans be extended for riders who are unscrupulous in their business practices?

The lifetime ban for doping was warranted because Lance was the leader of an organized sports doping ring.

Yates is just reaffirming his bona fides as a member of the omerta club in good standing. He is actually giving us good information. He is telling us that nothing is changing in professional cycling. We should listen to him.
 
Mar 10, 2009
4
0
8,510
how about a little cheese to go with your whine?

Yes, Sean, of course you're going to go on a whine-fest about your former crony Lance. What more could we really expect from you? It's not only sad that you really don't get it, but rather pathetic sounding as well. Btw, why is crap like this even being reported as news now?
 
Feb 22, 2014
779
0
0
MarkvW said:
Simple Hater/Anti-Fanboy argument.

Why should a doping ban hinge on whether or not a rider "used his cancer charity in an attempt to destroy USADA?" Should the length of doping bans be increased for riders who hit their wives or girlfriends? Should doping bans be extended for riders who are unscrupulous in their business practices?

The lifetime ban for doping was warranted because Lance was the leader of an organized sports doping ring.

Yates is just reaffirming his bona fides as a member of the omerta club in good standing. He is actually giving us good information. He is telling us that nothing is changing in professional cycling. We should listen to him.

Strong post. Leinders was always a decoy. Sky fell apart when Yates was sacrificed.

Sean Yates has said he still believes Lance Armstrong was a phenomenal athlete, despite the Texan's confession to doping, describing him as 'the biggest engine ever to get on a bike, apart from maybe Chris Froome."
...
“To be brutally honest, there is no one at Sky who knows much about bike riding."
 
thehog said:
Sean just drove the car....

Like he did at Sky :rolleyes:

He is in good company at Oleg's. Apart from Jullich there's another DS, Patxi Vila who tested positive for testosterone in 2008 during his illustrious career and Daniel Healey former BMC who was "head of nutrition from 2008 to 2012 for New Zealand's high-performance sports system". A quick google search reveals this:

The head of a flawed, multi-million dollar elite athlete supplement deal operated by the New Zealand Academy of Sport has resigned.

And, government sports body Sparc, which annually fund the academy with millions in taxpayer dollars, has commissioned a heavyweight international lawyer to independently investigate the programme exposed by the Sunday Star-Times.

Peter Pfitzinger, the Academy of Sport's North Island boss confirmed director of nutrition Daniel Healey "stood down" during the past week as leader of the Integria supplement programme.

Over the past two weeks a Star-Times special investigation has revealed how the programme has allowed the nation's champion athletes, and their coaches, to order hormonal and metabolic-altering supplements.

The supplements are considered positive doping risks by experts around the world.

Oleg will kick some Sky a** this year.
 
MarkvW said:
Simple Hater/Anti-Fanboy argument.

Why should a doping ban hinge on whether or not a rider "used his cancer charity in an attempt to destroy USADA?" Should the length of doping bans be increased for riders who hit their wives or girlfriends? Should doping bans be extended for riders who are unscrupulous in their business practices?

The lifetime ban for doping was warranted because Lance was the leader of an organized sports doping ring.

Yates is just reaffirming his bona fides as a member of the omerta club in good standing. He is actually giving us good information. He is telling us that nothing is changing in professional cycling. We should listen to him.
His behaviour should preclude any apologist drivel, that is what I meant.

Sometimes the bare truth is simple, and can be effective in countering the smoke and mirrors kind of crap idiots like Yates put forth.
 
Feb 22, 2014
779
0
0
frenchfry said:
His behaviour should preclude any apologist drivel, that is what I meant.

Sometimes the bare truth is simple, and can be effective in countering the smoke and mirrors kind of crap idiots like Yates put forth.

Please stop these disgusting smears on a person just because of how he speaks. The man knows more about cycling than 99.99% of posters here.
 
Coldfoot said:
Yes, Sean, of course you're going to go on a whine-fest about your former crony Lance. What more could we really expect from you? It's not only sad that you really don't get it, but rather pathetic sounding as well. Btw, why is crap like this even being reported as news now?

Just two posts so far, and right to the heart of it!

I like.

Ventoux Boar said:
Please stop these disgusting smears on a person just because of how he speaks. The man knows more about cycling than 99.99% of posters here.

You are probably right, he probably does. Here is something about cycling for beginners:

http://www.steroid.com/beginner-steroid-cycles.php

Yates's knowledge likely extends well into advanced cycling with steroids and other PEDs, though.

Dave.
 
Ventoux Boar said:
Please stop these disgusting smears on a person just because of how he speaks. The man knows more about cycling than 99.99% of posters here.

When one's ideology overtakes one's expertise it pretty much invalidates and negates any knowledge said person (in this case, Sean Yates) can impart.

There is absolutely nothing a PED abuser can teach a young rider if the rider in question is not under the influence of PEDs because one cannot perform like the other, and should not be expected to.
 
Feb 22, 2014
779
0
0
Berzin said:
When one's ideology overtakes one's expertise it pretty much invalidates and negates any knowledge said person (in this case, Sean Yates) can impart.

There is absolutely nothing a PED abuser can teach a young rider if the rider in question is not under the influence of PEDs because one cannot perform like the other, and should not be expected to.

Sir. I was refering to the poster's use of the word "idiot". Are you trying to make my point, or what?