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

Page 12 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Microchip

Microchip

Jul 23, 2010
1,695
0
10,480
Microchip said:
Speaking of "favours", how possible would it have been to "fudge" the times in the 1999-2005 Tours? You know, add a few seconds onto a rider's time, and subtract a few from another. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

DirtyWorks said:
IMHO, that's not worth the scandal. The UCI picking winners is about right. The only thing left for the TdF is, when did ASO know? Is the Giro for sale over at the RSO?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Only just saw this reply!!

What did you mean by 'it isn't worth the scandal'?

I'm thinking that when the UCI decided on picking Lance to win so-and-so many Tours, they would have to keep close watch on the riders' times. Sure, Lance was using performance enhancing stuff, but things could still have happened out on the road for 3 weeks. Posted times at the end of each stage would have to be carefully managed, not so? Or is the technology too reliable? I'd like to know more about this.
 
DirtyWorks

DirtyWorks

Feb 10, 2010
10,645
20
22,510
Microchip said:
Only just saw this reply!!

What did you mean by 'it isn't worth the scandal'?

I'm thinking that when the UCI decided on picking Lance to win so-and-so many Tours, they would have to keep close watch on the riders' times. Sure, Lance was using performance enhancing stuff, but things could still have happened out on the road for 3 weeks. Posted times at the end of each stage would have to be carefully managed, not so? Or is the technology too reliable? I'd like to know more about this.
Click to expand...

Two things:

1. Fudging times would be noticed moments after results are posted.
2. The timing stuff is a black box one buys/rents/leases and these days very sophisticated. Each bike has a transponder that is tracked when they cross some of those inflatable banners across the road. Very nice use of technology!

Historically, the race commisars have been known to forgive time limits for various reasons. But that's at the "lantern rouge" end of the race.

There have been at least one modern battle between the ASO and the UCI. They do not cooperate unless both are getting paid. So, ASO will not let the UCI fudge times. What the UCI did creating the Wonderboy myth left the ASO more or less unable to do anything about it. IMHO, they repeated this with Sky in 2012. Wade through the Sky thread for more suspicions and my own crackpot theory.
 
Microchip

Microchip

Jul 23, 2010
1,695
0
10,480
DirtyWorks said:
Two things:

1. Fudging times would be noticed moments after results are posted.
2. The timing stuff is a black box one buys/rents/leases and these days very sophisticated. Each bike has a transponder that is tracked when they cross some of those inflatable banners across the road. Very nice use of technology!

Historically, the race commisars have been known to forgive time limits for various reasons. But that's at the "lantern rouge" end of the race.

There have been at least one modern battle between the ASO and the UCI. They do not cooperate unless both are getting paid. So, ASO will not let the UCI fudge times. What the UCI did creating the Wonderboy myth left the ASO more or less unable to do anything about it. IMHO, they repeated this with Sky in 2012. Wade through the Sky thread for more suspicions and my own crackpot theory.
Click to expand...

Like this, then. (From a web page written 9 years ago.)

4845397085341518.JPG


Changing bikes after a crash would have to be fast.
 
Microchip

Microchip

Jul 23, 2010
1,695
0
10,480
No, I'm not correct, what is called a FinishLynx camera system is what determines the timing of the peloton as they cross the line. I thought the camera was only in place for the first several places of the stage win.
 
Briant_Gumble

Briant_Gumble

Aug 18, 2012
1,171
0
0
Don't see Lance taking this to be honest, it forces him to reassess to soon and he's still ****ed with Tygart.

I'd love to see him take it though and expose Hein, Pat, Weisel and others.
 
W

webvan

Mar 11, 2009
4,887
87
15,580
Oh no, don't give him a deal, that's what he's banking on, stopped doping in 2005 so with 8 years he's in the clear. He's lied under oath before, he'll lie under oath again. And anyway can it have any legal repercussions to lie under oath to the USADA?
 
N

northstar

Nov 27, 2012
327
0
0
Microchip said:
Armstrong has until February 6th to testify under oath. If he fails to do so, his lifetime ban will be irreversible.
Click to expand...

Watching this Armstrong story unfold is like watching a soap opera on a rollercoaster. Lots of highs and lows and the drama never ends!

I wonder why there's a 2 week window of opportunity for the tell all confession. What's coming up? Maybe Bruyneel's hearing has a bearing on this? Either way, it will be interesting to see what happens next.
 
Microchip

Microchip

Jul 23, 2010
1,695
0
10,480
That's 12 days.

If he doesn't do it, he'll have to make a deal with Hein, Weisel & Company to offload some money as he's going to need money to live for the rest of his life. I wonder how much it would take?
 
Briant_Gumble

Briant_Gumble

Aug 18, 2012
1,171
0
0
One thing is for sure, Lance will be discussing tirelessly with his lawyers what he could talk about under oath, how much USADA know, what aces they have up their sleeve and what he could get away with lying under oath again about.
 
Microchip

Microchip

Jul 23, 2010
1,695
0
10,480
Briant_Gumble said:
One thing is for sure, Lance will be discussing tirelessly with his lawyers what he could talk about under oath, how much USADA know, what aces they have up their sleeve and what he could get away with lying under oath again about.
Click to expand...

I hope Tygart sweetened the deal and offered to reduce the ban to 2 years, starting in 2012. :D
 
G

ggusta

Jul 26, 2009
1,597
7
10,495
Microchip said:
Well, he's caught between numerous rocks and a hard place.
Click to expand...

He is a victim of his own tactics. Now that the first lie is admitted to, everything else he says (and I am not talking about here but in the court of pubic opinion) is looked at like 'yeah, right!'

The lying about not doping after 2005 is already widely acknowledged to be yet another lie in the interview where he says he is coming clean, so even his tell-all interview is tainted so what little mercy that exists out there for him is really just coming from his looney kool aid drinkers who look more and more isolated with each revelation.
 
MarkvW

MarkvW

Aug 10, 2010
6,285
2
17,485
hrotha said:
LA can't possibly admit to lying to Oprah, unless he absolutely has to. He can't make any deals with USADA if he wants to salvage what's left of his public image.
Click to expand...

I can't believe that Lance lied to Oprah--again. While the odds of gaining anything from a halfway-confession were small, the odds of gaining anything from lying to Oprah were nonexistent. He has a right to remain silent and he really should STFU.
 
mewmewmew13

mewmewmew13

Aug 9, 2010
6,255
2
17,485
Even crazier I think is the fact that Armstrong called Travis a liar by denying that he ever offered USADA the 'donation'.

Wtf is he thinking ....?...as Travis holds the cards to a possible reduction for the @ssh@!e
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom