• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

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

Page 589 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Digger said:
fmk_RoI said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
The UCI, Verbruggen, and McQuaid are the reason Floyd was not able to return to European racing.
Pretty much the same story as with Michael Rasmussen. Yet we're supposed to applaud him for turning on Armstrong instead of McQuaid.

TBH, I'm not sure how much Landis has been driven by an anti-doping agenda. Most of what he says seems to be about painting everyone as bad as he was, both then and now. Like many a doper before him, he needs to show he's no different from anyone else.

So you missed the part about him being sued by Hein for calling the UCI corrupt. :rolleyes:
That was the one he ran way crying from, wasn't it? Really stuck the knife in, so he did...
 
Re:

rick james said:
LOL, Now Betsy is the enemy

No, not really. I’m not sure what she is. Her recent Facebook post around Lance was that he referred to his fiancée as his wife and this wasn’t in line with gods principles! Taking issue with his children born out of wedlock is right up their with the rightest of right wing republicans. Stirring stuff.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
The UCI, Verbruggen, and McQuaid are the reason Floyd was not able to return to European racing.
Pretty much the same story as with Michael Rasmussen. Yet we're supposed to applaud him for turning on Armstrong instead of McQuaid.

TBH, I'm not sure how much Landis has been driven by an anti-doping agenda. Most of what he says seems to be about painting everyone as bad as he was, both then and now. Like many a doper before him, he needs to show he's no different from anyone else.

No, he doesn’t need to anything. The fact that he moved on is enough rather than going down the “Lance is responsible for all evil in this world route” that others have taken.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
fmk_RoI said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
The UCI, Verbruggen, and McQuaid are the reason Floyd was not able to return to European racing.
Pretty much the same story as with Michael Rasmussen. Yet we're supposed to applaud him for turning on Armstrong instead of McQuaid.

TBH, I'm not sure how much Landis has been driven by an anti-doping agenda. Most of what he says seems to be about painting everyone as bad as he was, both then and now. Like many a doper before him, he needs to show he's no different from anyone else.

No, he doesn’t need to anything. The fact that he moved on is enough rather than going down the “Lance is responsible for all evil in this world route” that others have taken.
But he hasn't moved on. He's still out there, instaquoting on the latest controversy, showing today's bad boys are just as bad as he was, page 94 of the Doper's PR Handbook - if everyone's as bad as you were then you weren't so bad. Moving on would be ... well, moving on.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
thehog said:
fmk_RoI said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
The UCI, Verbruggen, and McQuaid are the reason Floyd was not able to return to European racing.
Pretty much the same story as with Michael Rasmussen. Yet we're supposed to applaud him for turning on Armstrong instead of McQuaid.

TBH, I'm not sure how much Landis has been driven by an anti-doping agenda. Most of what he says seems to be about painting everyone as bad as he was, both then and now. Like many a doper before him, he needs to show he's no different from anyone else.

No, he doesn’t need to anything. The fact that he moved on is enough rather than going down the “Lance is responsible for all evil in this world route” that others have taken.
But he hasn't moved on. He's still out there, instaquoting on the latest controversy, showing today's bad boys are just as bad as he was, page 94 of the Doper's PR Handbook - if everyone's as bad as you were then you weren't so bad. Moving on would be ... well, moving on.

Hmmm, one article since settlement. Think you’ve misread the situation. Not unexpected but you’ve missed the mark by a long way.

Whether someone is a good person or a bad person is a really silly debate, right up there with Betsys recent Facebook rants, perhaps you could review those for your next blog post? :cool:
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Digger said:
fmk_RoI said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
The UCI, Verbruggen, and McQuaid are the reason Floyd was not able to return to European racing.
Pretty much the same story as with Michael Rasmussen. Yet we're supposed to applaud him for turning on Armstrong instead of McQuaid.

TBH, I'm not sure how much Landis has been driven by an anti-doping agenda. Most of what he says seems to be about painting everyone as bad as he was, both then and now. Like many a doper before him, he needs to show he's no different from anyone else.

So you missed the part about him being sued by Hein for calling the UCI corrupt. :rolleyes:
That was the one he ran way crying from, wasn't it? Really stuck the knife in, so he did...

Look it’s not my fault you’re wrong here. He refused to apologise and continued to taint pat and hein in many ways, from interviews to emails he later published.
He specifically called them corrupt in his emails. I know you like to be contrary but you’re so far wrong it’s amusing. Like your claim Floyd won’t be taxed. Considering he doesn’t know this himself that’s quire a claim. Maybe you should be his lawyer. Ditch the book review lark.
Further to this post Floyd has criticized usada and tygart since day one, as well as Steve Johnson. His latest interview is him saying usada haven’t done a thing since 2012 to help matters. He spoke to Travis circa 2011 and begged him to not make this just about lance. You can ignore this but that’s the truth.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
thehog said:
Hmmm, one article since settlement. Think you’ve misread the situation.
You're the one reading it as moving on since settlement - I'm saying he has never moved on, he has always been there for an instaquote.

Yes, we know that’s what you are saying and it’s not correct, considering he wasn’t able to comment on aspects of the case for a long period of time. But again, you should make it in to a blog post or something :cool:
 
Humor .... Incoming:

DB!

Dan!

BENSON!!!!

Can you throw a mop down here, please!!!

There's so much frickin EGO on the floor here, this morning ... don't know how many people have slipped and bonked their elbows.

How we spost to get our work done, man!?! We're right in the middle of breaking camp.

Thanks in advance, man.

Cheers
 
I read Betsy’s Facebook posts just now. Jesus.

I know she likes to think anyone who criticizes her is doing lance’s Work for him and most be trying to impress lance but I’ve never followed lance nor has he ever followed me. I also don’t follow Johan or vice versa. Lance reminds me of a robot who has to ask himself how a normal human being should react in this situation.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
rick james said:
LOL, Now Betsy is the enemy

No, not really. I’m not sure what she is. Her recent Facebook post around Lance was that he referred to his fiancée as his wife and this wasn’t in line with gods principles! Taking issue with his children born out of wedlock is right up their with the rightest of right wing republicans. Stirring stuff.

Rancor and a supple rosary ... is another nasty cocktail ... really nasty.
 
Re: Re:

Alpe73 said:
thehog said:
rick james said:
LOL, Now Betsy is the enemy

No, not really. I’m not sure what she is. Her recent Facebook post around Lance was that he referred to his fiancée as his wife and this wasn’t in line with gods principles! Taking issue with his children born out of wedlock is right up their with the rightest of right wing republicans. Stirring stuff.

Rancor and a supple rosary ... is another nasty cocktail ... really nasty.

Who knows what its all supposed to mean. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but...... sheesh :)
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

thehog said:

Take Team Sky, from Manchester, England. “Team Sky looks exactly like what we were doing—exactly,” Landis said, referring to its current dominance of the cycling world. “So they were able to do that without drugs, but we weren’t? People haven’t evolved over the last eight years.” Sky has won five of the last six Tours, but the legitimacy of its champions has come under scrutiny.

From the Landis article, the Sky comments are interesting. Glad he can call a spade a spade which Armstrong can’t or won’t do on Sky.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

thehog said:
thehog said:

Take Team Sky, from Manchester, England. “Team Sky looks exactly like what we were doing—exactly,” Landis said, referring to its current dominance of the cycling world. “So they were able to do that without drugs, but we weren’t? People haven’t evolved over the last eight years.” Sky has won five of the last six Tours, but the legitimacy of its champions has come under scrutiny.

From the Landis article, the Sky comments are interesting. Glad he can call a spade a spade which Armstrong can’t or won’t do on Sky.

Article is a piece of romantic shyte ... Clinic has an appetite for sugared donuts. Keeps confirmation bias chubby as she goes.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

Alpe73 said:
thehog said:
thehog said:

Take Team Sky, from Manchester, England. “Team Sky looks exactly like what we were doing—exactly,” Landis said, referring to its current dominance of the cycling world. “So they were able to do that without drugs, but we weren’t? People haven’t evolved over the last eight years.” Sky has won five of the last six Tours, but the legitimacy of its champions has come under scrutiny.

From the Landis article, the Sky comments are interesting. Glad he can call a spade a spade which Armstrong can’t or won’t do on Sky.

Article is a piece of romantic shyte ... Clinic has an appetite for sugared donuts. Keeps confirmation bias chubby as she goes.

That’s one way to look at it but it’s a lot more than that, I think you know that but you have your style to maintain.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

Mike McCann, SI's legal analyst, had a lot of articles on LA preceding and right after the Reasoned Decision. Here's his take on the settlement:

No matter the rebuttals Armstrong raised, he knew that the government usually wins its false claim cases or at least negotiates a settlement in which the defendant must pay a great deal of money. According to one recent analysis of false claim cases where the government has intervened, approximately 95% lead to a favorable judgment or settlement. These realities likely played a motivating force in Armstrong’s decision to settle in spite of his rebuttals and in spite of the fact that so few qui tam defendants possess the level of resources necessary to retain a legal team of top attorneys as Armstrong had assembled.

For its part, the Justice Department also had plenty of reason to settle after six years of going after Armstrong. As explained above, the government’s case was by no means airtight, particularly in regard to proving that Armstrong harmed USPS. A de facto loss in a trial this fall would have been a setback for the federal government. After all, the government had pursued Armstrong to stress that those who do business with the federal government must fulfill the contractual obligations. Losing to Armstrong would have sent the wrong message in a high-profile trial.

https://www.si.com/cycling/2018/04/21/lance-armstrong-settled-us-government-lawsuit