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

[blackcat]

If it was the case that the bio-passport was actually used like they sell it, the sport would be in a different place. IMHO, there would be more legitimacy about the fundamental premise of the game.

Ashenden already disabused this preconception on the bp

Implicitly, you are permitting the system to go on in some way such that a doper can remain in the system. This is part of the problem. Little is going to change with the same actors in more powerful roles.

clear, tho ambiguous, and it may be read as such, i do not intend on making an apologia for doping. i am just bringing the devils advocate

To be clear, I'm not asking for contrition. I'm asking for substantial change. We're not going to get it with a large number of these actors in the sport.

and....
i'd have to agree with you DW. but the horse bolted with human nature imo.

 

[blackcat]

This is so true. Many think that underneath the surface a sociopath (or pervers narcissique personality) is a decent person and can be led down the path to goodness. WRONG! If you cross paths with a sociopath you cannot win - run as fast as you can.

no. fight like betsy and get the man by the ball.

betsy WINS.

 

[blackcat]

I give Wonderboy more credit than that. The guy is able to estimate and manipulate/persuade people extremely well. The visibly non-compliant ones got an overwhelming response.

Both sides of that relationship are calculating. Different calculations, goals, and such, but both social/political climbers. Which, is just one reason why I don't fully trust JV's PR.

And Wonderboy doesn't have to change a thing. According to his world view, time has to pass so people just forget. It's their problem, not his. According to him, he's great. In fact, he's the greatest since Merckx.

good post DW

 

[blackcat]

The reason Lance never went after JV is because Lance was barely smart enough to realize that JV would have handed him his remaining nut on a platter. Ever notice that JV seemed to have been spared through most of this.

This remains the case today, and JV could toy with him like a cat playing with a mouse.

It would be fun to see a day where the 'detente' in place collapses, and Lance hops from landmine to landmine while JV laughs like Dr Evil as he gets his pork chops groomed while filleting a Northern Pike with an electric carving knife..

hmmm, not sure about that. Armstrong had quite a stock of intellectual armory in his corner to fight with

 

[blackcat]

I have no idea what Mr. Vaughter's angle is in all this. None at all.

John Swanson

John, the former man known as Armstrong still has a significant and powerful constituency with rubes in Livestrong cloak.

jonny wants me some of that action.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The part of the article (re: Vaughters & Armstrong) that bothered me the most was Mr. Vaughters contention that he and Armstrong entered a pre-existing structure of doping in Europe. To an extent that is true, but it falls apart when you ask "was there also a pre-existing structure of bribery"?

Hold on.
It only "falls apart" if you add that in - JV did not add that in, you did.

Did everybody and know and play the game of "Sysmex donations"? What about intimidation? Was there a well regimented program of discipline and enforcement against those who wanted to ride clean?

From my perspective, Lance managed to create those out of whole cloth. Figuring in Livestrong, his shady financial dealings, and what must have been a sophisticated drug shipment/financing project, I don't think that it's a stretch that he would have created a "structure of doping" even if none had existed.

He was not a victim of circumstance and he did not play the "game" as it existed. He created new rules and used them to crush anyone in his way. In the same article, Vaughters even recalls Armstrong trying to get him ejected from Slipstream!

I have no idea what Mr. Vaughter's angle is in all this. None at all.

John Swanson

Simple answer to this - just read JVs words.

The people with the angle are those who continue to spin and distort what JV said.

Here are 2 excerpts from the 2 articles;
From Velonews:

It’s unfair, the perception that Lance is the one that started the [doping] arms race. He may have perfected it, and he went way too far in defending his position, and he hurt a lot of people in process, but the culture was in place before he ever raced in Europe.”

original piece in Cyclingnews:

I was absolutely shocked to learn, this morning, that the MPCC, an organization I have been a part of since 2007 and one that I truly believe in, is thinking about suing Lance Armstrong. Yes, it is his fault, a 100+ year history of doping problems in cycling can be remedied by extracting financial damages from Lance Armstrong.
All the while, this organization, of which I am member, is chaired by someone who once tested positive, and whose members have a rich and varied history ranging from Festina to Puerto to USPS to CERA to Corticoid investigations. And our solution to protect cycling’s image is to sue Lance Armstrong? I truly hope they don't sue anyone. Maybe I need to attend the next meeting? Maybe a bit of introspection is needed here? Maybe a better way would be to sue myself and give the damages to someone like Danny Pate? But this seems to be the mentality entrenched in cycling, blame the other guy to fix the problem. Put it on his plate.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Did everybody and know and play the game of "Sysmex donations"? What about intimidation? Was there a well regimented program of discipline and enforcement against those who wanted to ride clean?

The doper's story is told mostly the same way, some variation of the 'bad athlete' when in fact, per the examples given in your post, the corruption is an essential part of the way the sports federation operates.

The bottom line: Corruption at the UCI/IOC level never gets the traction of "bad athlete" stories. I've never understood why.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Hold on.
It only "falls apart" if you add that in - JV did not add that in, you did.



Simple answer to this - just read JVs words.

The people with the angle are those who continue to spin and distort what JV said.

Here are 2 excerpts from the 2 articles;
From Velonews:



original piece in Cyclingnews:

If you don't make an example of Armstrong... Who do you make an example of? He's not just a "doper" on par with those of the last 100+ years of riders, is he?

John Swanson

 

[ScienceIsCool]

The doper's story is told mostly the same way, some variation of the 'bad athlete' when in fact, per the examples given in your post, the corruption is an essential part of the way the sports federation operates.

The bottom line: Corruption at the UCI/IOC level never gets the traction of "bad athlete" stories. I've never understood why.[/QUOTEead the

Which is why a "truth and reconciliation" whatever/anything is meaningless. We know that Verbruggen and McQuaid are corrupt past all sense of morality. Yet McQuaid will most certainly lead the UCI for the foreseeable future, possibly until he retires and hands off to a hand-picked successor.

Like raising cancer awareness, what does raising UCI corruption awareness do? Does it change anything? We already know that cancer kills and that the cycling mafia kills clean sport. Hardly a cure, is it?

John Swanson

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If you don't make an example of Armstrong... Who do you make an example of? He's not just a "doper" on par with those of the last 100+ years of riders, is he?

John Swanson

What?

No-one has suggested LA was just a doper.
No-one has suggested he not be made an example of.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

The reason Lance never went after JV is because Lance was barely smart enough to realize that JV would have handed him his remaining nut on a platter. Ever notice that JV seemed to have been spared through most of this.

This remains the case today, and JV could toy with him like a cat playing with a mouse.

No, that is not my recollection. If you can post a single instance of JV toying with Lance, I would sincerely appreciate it. You sound somewhat sycophantic.

Here's where my source of JV vs LA history comes from: JV's own words.

Sounds like JV did whatever Lance wanted him to. Don't see a whole lot of toying going on from JV.

Just sayin'.

 

[frenchfry]

no. fight like betsy and get the man by the ball.

betsy WINS.

I am not sure if we asked Betsy if she considered herself a "winner" that she would answer in the afirmative. I think she would prefer to never have crossed paths with Armstrong. Even now that the myth has been exploded and the truth is out, it is at best a bittersweet consolation for those who suffered.

No winners, only losers.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

I am not sure if we asked Betsy if she considered herself a "winner" that she would answer in the afirmative. I think she would prefer to never have crossed paths with Armstrong. Even now that the myth has been exploded and the truth is out, it is at best a bittersweet consolation for those who suffered.

No winners, only losers.

I submit that framing the argument in the context of winners and losers is too simplistic. I suspect Betsy does not think in these terms. While I suspect she would have preferred Armstrong tell the truth and not have attacked her and Frankie, I also suspect she drew considerable strength for sticking to the truth and not caving to LA's insidious intimidation and bullying. In my eyes at least that makes her a winner.

 

[blackcat]

I am not sure if we asked Betsy if she considered herself a "winner" that she would answer in the afirmative. I think she would prefer to never have crossed paths with Armstrong. Even now that the myth has been exploded and the truth is out, it is at best a bittersweet consolation for those who suffered.

No winners, only losers.

right. my conversations with betsy. she does not think of this as a game and a winner and loser. she knows what her family lost to be on the wrong side of armstrong.

 

[frenchfry]

I submit that framing the argument in the context of winners and losers is too simplistic. I suspect Betsy does not think in these terms. While I suspect she would have preferred Armstrong tell the truth and not have attacked her and Frankie, I also suspect she drew considerable strength for sticking to the truth and not caving to LA's insidious intimidation and bullying. In my eyes at least that makes her a winner.

The subtle difference is between the adjective "winner" which Betsy certainly is, and the verb "win" which is much more difficult to evaluate in this case.

And blackcat, your intention was good I just wanted to add a bit of depth to your initial comment. When dealing sociopaths there are no winners - only losers.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Yes, perhaps 'toying' was an overstatement. I do however believe that JV has done better than all other 'associates' and was an authentic threat to Armstrong based on having a less assailable past, and far fewer lies in circulation.
I believe this was an effective deterrent, and in spite of his efforts to have him removed from Slipstream, he managed to build himself into an effective manager, clean sport advocate, and a respected rider advocate.
And I still think that 'minus the Armstrong lawyers and advisers' he can handle himself more than adequately.

 

[ChrisE]

right. my conversations with betsy. she does not think of this as a game and a winner and loser. she knows what her family lost to be on the wrong side of armstrong.

Cry me a river, but please don't do it on CNN.

What does a conversation in 1996 have to do with SCA? I haven't seen her SCA testimony....did she spill all the beans that she spilled in the USADA affidavit? If not, why not?

If 1996 was so traumatic why did she still hang around with LA up until the time FA got sacked?

Whatever hardship she has endured was her choice.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Cry me a river, but please don't do it on CNN.

What does a conversation in 1996 have to do with SCA? I haven't seen her SCA testimony....did she spill all the beans that she spilled in the USADA affidavit? If not, why not?

Hi Chris,
Perhaps you should read the SCA testimony and case - and instead of calling it a conversation use the word confession. Then you should (finally) get it.

If 1996 was so traumatic why did she still hang around with LA up until the time FA got sacked?

Whatever hardship she has endured was her choice.

Have you anything to support your theory that she "hung around" with LA after 96 and until FA got "sacked"? Take your time

 

[ChrisE]

Hi Chris,
Perhaps you should read the SCA testimony and case - and instead of calling it a conversation use the word confession. Then you should (finally) get it.


Have you anything to support your theory that she "hung around" with LA after 96 and until FA got "sacked"? Take your time

PM me the link to her SCA testimony. I said I don't have it, and I have googled it before.

As for the second, I don't care to go back and re-read her USADA affidavit to prove you wrong, not do I care to play your games. If you want to think that LA was shunned by her since 1996 that is your prerogative.

Send me the SCA link and then we can go from there.

In the meantime, why don't you tell me what doping in 1996 had to do with SCA paying up for winning TdF's that started in 1999. Take your time.

 

[frenchfry]

Cry me a river, but please don't do it on CNN.

What does a conversation in 1996 have to do with SCA? I haven't seen her SCA testimony....did she spill all the beans that she spilled in the USADA affidavit? If not, why not?

If 1996 was so traumatic why did she still hang around with LA up until the time FA got sacked?

Whatever hardship she has endured was her choice.

That is a totally contemptuous statement, and completely disregards the damage sociopaths do to upstanding people.

Are you suggesting that Emma O'Reilly, Mike Anderson, and the many others that Armstrong and his paid thugs trampled and attempted to destroy were asking for it?

Betsy did nothing other than stand up for the truth when she could have played the omerta and personal gain cards like so many others. She didn't go looking for trouble, it was shoved on her with a brutal force that I hope you won't ever have to experience yourself.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

PM me the link to her SCA testimony. I said I don't have it, and I have googled it before.

As for the second, I don't care to go back and re-read her USADA affidavit to prove you wrong, not do I care to play your games. If you want to think that LA was shunned by her since 1996 that is your prerogative.

Send me the SCA link and then we can go from there.

Hi Chris.
It is all in the USADA report, including the SCA testimony. As you could not be bothered to read it, then there is little point in me linking to it.

In the meantime, why don't you tell me what doping in 1996 had to do with SCA paying up for winning TdF's that started in 1999. Take your time.

Hi Chris,
If SCA had been aware that LA had been doping throughout his career they would not have insured or bet against him winning any races.

 

[D-Queued]

Cry me a river, but please don't do it on CNN.

What does a conversation in 1996 have to do with SCA? I haven't seen her SCA testimony....did she spill all the beans that she spilled in the USADA affidavit? If not, why not?

If 1996 was so traumatic why did she still hang around with LA up until the time FA got sacked?

Whatever hardship she has endured was her choice.

The Pedestrian chose to cross the road.

The car's driver deliberately chose to disobey the traffic laws and struck the pedestrian.

The pedestrian deserved it?

Your love for Lance has affected your judgement.

Dave.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

The subtle difference is between the adjective "winner" which Betsy certainly is, and the verb "win" which is much more difficult to evaluate in this case.

And blackcat, your intention was good I just wanted to add a bit of depth to your initial comment. When dealing sociopaths there are no winners - only losers.

I see Betsy more in the terms of the noun winner! Cheers.

 

[arthurvandelay]

And now for something completely different...

Just to take everyones attention away from arguing about angels dancing on the head of a pin, I offer up this tidbit about Lance.

Be warned, it is quite gross. It does confirm my long held opinion of him as a bizarro, disgusting man.

Link below: (NSFW)

http://dlisted.com/2013/05/21/time-lance-armstrong-asked-comedian-april-macie-eat-his-***-out

 

[Granville57]

I offer up this tidbit about Lance.

Lemme guess. This story?

http://www.examiner.com/article/april-macie-lance-armstrong-asked-me-to-perform-analingus-on-him

Granville57 has provided you with a link to a link that actually works.