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

[ChrisE]

That's it. GL began distancing himself from Wonderboy after he read the article. I think he did have some suspicions beforehand, the article seemed to back those up.

LOL at Walsh calling Captain America an idiot for not realizing it in 1999. First he gets on the Skywagon, now he says Captain America has less than half a brain. Walsh needs to get back on the reservation.

 

[ChrisE]

And about 11 years faster than ChrisE.

I see you're still butthurt after all of these years, to the point that you are making stuff up about me. Isn't it time to let go?

But, if you insist and have time to waste, why don't you dig up some old posts from me where I wrote I believed LA was clean. Take your time, and please ignore any of my posts where I said the opposite (those may make your head hurt). Filtering out info that doesn't support your BS is a breeze with your super duper GL fanboy goggles on.

 

[Race Radio]

I am always amazed at your ability to find almost everything on the net that has something to do with The Lance. Do people talk to you before they put up anything on the interwebs? (genuine question, am not trying to be a wise as$)

Most of the time the author sends me the piece

 

[ChrisE]

Pretty pathetic attempt at revisionist history, ChrisE.

Lemond didn't question Armstrong's accomplishments until it was made public that he was working with Dr. Ferrari.

No ****. That is the point. You say GL didn't pipe up until 2001 while Walsh says one would be a dumbass for not knowing LA doped in 99 real time. Welcome to the thread.

If you care to explain my "revisionist history" inre to Walsh saying it was obvious LA was doping in 99 to anybody with "half a brain", I will be happy to respond. Right now, I am unclear WTF point you are trying to make.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

No ****. That is the point. You say GL didn't pipe up until 2001 while Walsh says one would be a dumbass for not knowing LA doped in 99 real time. Welcome to the thread.

If you care to explain my "revisionist history" inre to Walsh saying it was obvious LA was doping in 99 to anybody with "half a brain", I will be happy to respond. Right now, I am unclear WTF point you are trying to make.

RAGBRAI: Juiced or not juiced?

 

[Race Radio]

David Walsh gets the last laugh. Wonderboy settles for over 1,000,000 pounds

Ouch

 

[heart_attack_man]

David Walsh gets the last laugh. Wonderboy settles for over 1,000,000 pounds

Ouch

Did he get the exclusive interview that he always said was going to be a stipulation for settling? Or has Walsh gone back on his word?

 

[Zweistein]

David Walsh gets the last laugh. Wonderboy settles for over 1,000,000 pounds

Ouch

Pounds? Not dollars. Wow

 

[heart_attack_man]

Also, is that to DW personally, on top of costs, or is that what was awarded to the Sunday Times?

If that's what was awarded to the Sunday Times, then it COST the ST that much in the first place, so it's not really anything... I certainly wouldn't call THAT a victory for the Sunday Times.

DW has stated previously that LA's initial action cost ST over £1M, so if that's all that was awarded here....

 

[Race Radio]

Did he get the exclusive interview that he always said was going to be a stipulation for settling? Or has Walsh gone back on his word?

He never said that an interview would be a stipulation

 

[Race Radio]

DW has stated previously that LA's initial action cost ST over £1M, so if that's all that was awarded here....

Link?

The initial settlement was for 300,000 pounds

 

[Zweistein]

Also, is that to DW personally, on top of costs, or is that what was awarded to the Sunday Times?

If that's what was awarded to the Sunday Times, then it COST the ST that much in the first place, so it's not really anything... I certainly wouldn't call THAT a victory for the Sunday Times.

DW has stated previously that LA's initial action cost ST over £1M, so if that's all that was awarded here....

"Since Armstrong was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and banned from the sport for life last autumn for doping, the Sunday Times has been in touch with his lawyers seeking to recoup the £300,000 contribution it made to his legal costs and its own legal bill of £600,000. It has also added another £100,000 for interest."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jan/22/uk-libel-laws-sunday-times-lance-armstrong

The Sunday Time has recovered cost plus interest and likely more if it is over £1M. Armstrong lost more than he ever got out of the suit. His lawyers don't work for free and it sounds like he is paying on top of interest.

 

[D-Queued]

"Since Armstrong was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and banned from the sport for life last autumn for doping, the Sunday Times has been in touch with his lawyers seeking to recoup the £300,000 contribution it made to his legal costs and its own legal bill of £600,000. It has also added another £100,000 for interest."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jan/22/uk-libel-laws-sunday-times-lance-armstrong

The Sunday Time has recovered cost plus interest and likely more if it is over £1M. Armstrong lost more than he ever got out of the suit. His lawyers don't work for free and it sounds like he is paying on top of interest.

And thus starts the slow death from a thousand £1M (news)paper cuts.

Dave.

 

[heart_attack_man]

He never said that an interview would be a stipulation

Think my memory of it must be mistaken - apologies to DW for my assertion there.

I was sure I remembered reading him suggesting something along those lines, however am unable to find it.

 

[Race Radio]

Also, is that to DW personally, on top of costs, or is that what was awarded to the Sunday Times?

If that's what was awarded to the Sunday Times, then it COST the ST that much in the first place, so it's not really anything... I certainly wouldn't call THAT a victory for the Sunday Times.

DW has stated previously that LA's initial action cost ST over £1M, so if that's all that was awarded here....

ST cost of legal and the settlement were about 900,000 pounds. This is over 1,000,000

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

"Since Armstrong was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and banned from the sport for life last autumn for doping, the Sunday Times has been in touch with his lawyers seeking to recoup the £300,000 contribution it made to his legal costs and its own legal bill of £600,000. It has also added another £100,000 for interest."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jan/22/uk-libel-laws-sunday-times-lance-armstrong

The Sunday Time has recovered cost plus interest and likely more if it is over £1M. Armstrong lost more than he ever got out of the suit. His lawyers don't work for free and it sounds like he is paying on top of interest.

This certainly sets a precedent for other litigation .......keep the checkbook handy dude.....

 

[heart_attack_man]

ST cost of legal and the settlement were about 900,000 pounds. This is over 1,000,000

This from DW (hence my confusion - likely he was just rounding up, which is fair enough really...):

"It did cost the Sunday Times a million pounds, but the newspaper were tremendously supportive as was my sports editor," added Walsh, referring to the out-of-court settlement reached with Armstrong in 2006.

And this from http://www.sport24.co.za/OtherSport/Cycling/Sunday-Times-lambasts-Lance-20130120

"In 2006, after a court ruling that required us to prove his doping rather than being able to ask legitimate questions about whether he was doing it, this newspaper had to pay Armstrong £300 000 in an out-of-court settlement, plus costs that took our legal bill to £1m.

Any idea if it's much over £1M? Were punitive damages (or whatever equivalent) included in the settlement? If ST/DW only received <>£200K it's not exactly giving him the ***-spanking he quite rightly deserves...

 

[D-Queued]

This from DW (hence my confusion - likely he was just rounding up, which is fair enough really...):


And this from http://www.sport24.co.za/OtherSport/Cycling/Sunday-Times-lambasts-Lance-20130120



Any idea if it's much over £1M? Were punitive damages (or whatever equivalent) included in the settlement? If ST/DW only received <>£200K it's not exactly giving him the ***-spanking he quite rightly deserves...

Given the conventional wisdom on his h**kers and blow expenses, this should come as a significant spanking on his cash balance.

He might have to cut back on his Dr. Ferrari payments. Those essential fees that he continues to pay in case some sport somewhere, like Afghan Goat Grabbing, allows him to participate.

Dave.

 

[Race Radio]

http://nos.nl/video/525255-walsh-slaat-terug-in-avondetappe.html

"I can tell you now Armstrong will pay back more then 1,000,000 pounds to the Sunday Times"

 

[Square-pedaller]

http://nos.nl/video/525255-walsh-slaat-terug-in-avondetappe.html

"I can tell you now Armstrong will pay back more then 1,000,000 pounds to the Sunday Times"

Fantastic interview. Well worth listening to. Thanks for posting the link.

 

[Fatclimber]

And thus starts the slow death from a thousand £1M (news)paper cuts.

Dave.

Lol!

I would like to see la's annual expense reports for attorney's fees over the years.

 

[PosterBill]

What the hell are those Dutch journalist upset with Walsh? Walsh has been proven out and validated so many times now ..sheesh..but I don't even get there point?

 

[D-Queued]

Lol!

I would like to see la's annual expense reports for attorney's fees over the years.

One would think that the Times is happy to get their case settled first.

Presumably they might actually see the money.

Dave.

 

[Scott SoCal]

http://nos.nl/video/525255-walsh-slaat-terug-in-avondetappe.html

"I can tell you now Armstrong will pay back more then 1,000,000 pounds to the Sunday Times"

Monkeymouth moments after signing the agreement;

 

[mewmewmew13]

http://nos.nl/video/525255-walsh-slaat-terug-in-avondetappe.html

"I can tell you now Armstrong will pay back more then 1,000,000 pounds to the Sunday Times"

ALRIGHT!!

thnx for posting link