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

[ChewbaccaD]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/armstrong-loses-key-ruling-bonus-212059069--spt.html

You hear those footsteps MarkvW? They're coming for your.

 

[poupou]

At the moment we have Lance that had lied during his deposition to rob an insurance company. Now he don't want to give them their money back.

What a crock he still is.

 

[veganrob]

At the moment we have Lance that had lied during his deposition to robb an insurance company. Now he don't want to give them their money back.

What a crock he still is.

Well, he thinks they should have known he was lying. That is his argument with USPS after all.

 

[thehog]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview-part-1

DB: When did you realise that the UCI didn’t give a ****?

LA: I don’t know if they didn’t give a **** or if they just couldn’t, honestly, and I don’t think highly of Pat [McQuaid] or Hein [Verbruggen] today, but what were they going to do? Imagine you’re Hein, and again I’m not defending him, but take yourself to '94 or maybe even '93 or before. He should have known before because high-octane existed in the late '80s and not just in cycling, in other endurance sports. You’re there, you’re the head of the governing body, you’ve got no test, no test at all – what are you going to do? And again, I know those guys are easy to pick on, but it’s 1995 for example, you’re Hein Verbruggen. What the **** are you going to do? Hope someone gets caught at a border? There’s nothing you can do. Maybe they didn’t give a ****, I didn’t ask them, but I do know that they could not do a thing. Just like the head of the IAAF couldn’t do a thing, just like the head of FINA couldn’t do a thing. They just did not have the tools to do anything until maybe 10 years later.

DB: But do you not think they didn’t have even the will?

LA: If they had the scientific data to protect them legally, then yeah, but again I don’t know. Ultimately we end up where we are today where we have a test that works for one compound [EPO] and guys have to decide if they want to dance around that. I’d like to think that there’s a lot less risk taking. But at the time they could only test for what they had a test for. I don’t think it’s right or responsible, and again I’m not defending them because I don’t really care for them, but cycling tried with some pressure to implement things that were just band-aids over the course of time. Whether it was just the 50 per cent rule, which was what it was – it wasn’t perfect but it was a step. But the sport got no credit for it. That led to more things like the off-score, which led to the biological passport and all the while, no credit. And every other sport that has the doping problem is sitting back and laughing, laughing their asses off, getting no attention, no criticism, no exposure and not doing a ****ing thing.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview-part-1

DB: When did you realise that the UCI didn’t give a ****?

LA: I don’t know if they didn’t give a **** or if they just couldn’t, honestly, and I don’t think highly of Pat [McQuaid] or Hein [Verbruggen] today, but what were they going to do? Imagine you’re Hein, and again I’m not defending him, but take yourself to '94 or maybe even '93 or before. He should have known before because high-octane existed in the late '80s and not just in cycling, in other endurance sports. You’re there, you’re the head of the governing body, you’ve got no test, no test at all – what are you going to do? And again, I know those guys are easy to pick on, but it’s 1995 for example, you’re Hein Verbruggen. What the **** are you going to do? Hope someone gets caught at a border? There’s nothing you can do. Maybe they didn’t give a ****, I didn’t ask them, but I do know that they could not do a thing. Just like the head of the IAAF couldn’t do a thing, just like the head of FINA couldn’t do a thing. They just did not have the tools to do anything until maybe 10 years later.

DB: But do you not think they didn’t have even the will?

LA: If they had the scientific data to protect them legally, then yeah, but again I don’t know. Ultimately we end up where we are today where we have a test that works for one compound [EPO] and guys have to decide if they want to dance around that. I’d like to think that there’s a lot less risk taking. But at the time they could only test for what they had a test for. I don’t think it’s right or responsible, and again I’m not defending them because I don’t really care for them, but cycling tried with some pressure to implement things that were just band-aids over the course of time. Whether it was just the 50 per cent rule, which was what it was – it wasn’t perfect but it was a step. But the sport got no credit for it. That led to more things like the off-score, which led to the biological passport and all the while, no credit. And every other sport that has the doping problem is sitting back and laughing, laughing their asses off, getting no attention, no criticism, no exposure and not doing a ****ing thing.

I hate to say it, given that it involves agreeing with Armstrong in a partial defence of Pat and Hein, but there is a very strong element of truth to that. Pre-EPO test, there really weren't a lot of palatable or viable options open to sports administrators in dealing with the arrival and spread of the wonder drug. This doesn't excuse everything else about their approach to dealing with peds, of course. But in the early to mid 90s, there really wasn't much of an effective response available no matter how zealous they had been.

His second point, that cycling is paying for its sins, while the rest of pro sports are not paying for much the same sins is also true. Not that I think cycling should get a pass because others do: the sins are after all, all too real.

 

[webvan]

Wow, a lot of rude language in that interview, who talks like that ?! Anyway what does he mean with "He should have known before because high-octane existed in the late '80s and not just in cycling, in other endurance sports" ? Is he still trying to say that Lemond used EPO ? Naturally DB didn't call him on that comment...

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Wow, a lot of rude language in that interview, who talks like that ?! Anyway what does he mean with "He should have known before because high-octane existed in the late '80s and not just in cycling, in other endurance sports" ? Is he still trying to say that Lemond used EPO ? Naturally DB didn't call him on that comment...

Rumors of blood transfusions have been around for decades.

 

[WinterRider]

Wow, a lot of rude language in that interview, who talks like that ?! Anyway what does he mean with "He should have known before because high-octane existed in the late '80s and not just in cycling, in other endurance sports" ? Is he still trying to say that Lemond used EPO ? Naturally DB didn't call him on that comment...

It is my understanding that athletes in other sports were using EPO as far back as 87. I can recall rumours about the its use in the 88 winter olympics in Calgary.

Once the rumours are out there, any major sports administrator worth their beans should be able to deduce that a portion of their own athletes will attempt to find and abuse this new drug.

I presume that is what LA meant in that answer.

 

[Benotti69]

Boy is he bitter and acting like all he did was dope. Poor little Lance. Still a major a$$hole.

 

[thehog]

Boy is he bitter and acting like all he did was dope. Poor little Lance. Still a major a$$hole.

There's a coded message in this interview.

He's setting it up for his deposition.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

There's a coded message in this interview.

He's setting it up for his deposition.

Ya think...!!

 

[Dazed and Confused]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview-part-1

DB: When did you realise that the UCI didn’t give a ****?

LA: I don’t know if they didn’t give a **** or if they just couldn’t, honestly, and I don’t think highly of Pat [McQuaid] or Hein [Verbruggen] today, but what were they going to do? Imagine you’re Hein, and again I’m not defending him, but take yourself to '94 or maybe even '93 or before. He should have known before because high-octane existed in the late '80s and not just in cycling, in other endurance sports. You’re there, you’re the head of the governing body, you’ve got no test, no test at all – what are you going to do? And again, I know those guys are easy to pick on, but it’s 1995 for example, you’re Hein Verbruggen. What the **** are you going to do? Hope someone gets caught at a border? There’s nothing you can do. Maybe they didn’t give a ****, I didn’t ask them, but I do know that they could not do a thing. Just like the head of the IAAF couldn’t do a thing, just like the head of FINA couldn’t do a thing. They just did not have the tools to do anything until maybe 10 years later.

DB: But do you not think they didn’t have even the will?

LA: If they had the scientific data to protect them legally, then yeah, but again I don’t know. Ultimately we end up where we are today where we have a test that works for one compound [EPO] and guys have to decide if they want to dance around that. I’d like to think that there’s a lot less risk taking. But at the time they could only test for what they had a test for. I don’t think it’s right or responsible, and again I’m not defending them because I don’t really care for them, but cycling tried with some pressure to implement things that were just band-aids over the course of time. Whether it was just the 50 per cent rule, which was what it was – it wasn’t perfect but it was a step. But the sport got no credit for it. That led to more things like the off-score, which led to the biological passport and all the while, no credit. And every other sport that has the doping problem is sitting back and laughing, laughing their asses off, getting no attention, no criticism, no exposure and not doing a ****ing thing.

Unless we get more meat on the table this is a worthless interview.

Awaiting part 2.

(and no, UCI didn't do enough to fight/change the culture)

 

[DirtyWorks]

There's a coded message in this interview.

He's setting it up for his deposition.

It's well crafted too.

99 per cent of my career isn’t about doping
More evidence nothing has changed with that joker.

Prepare for a resurrection where no one gets thrown under the bus and Armstrong is the lone doper.

but we were more or less a clean team. And then again, as young riders, you would be even a tier below that.

DB: You said more or less?

LA: [Laughs] That’s what I mean, more or less. Again I don’t know what others did or didn’t do, and I don’t want to get into the details...

but we felt that to compete at that level we didn’t have a choice.


Carmichael's legacy right there.

 

[Taxus4a]

Unless we get more meat on the table this is a worthless interview.

Awaiting part 2.

(and no, UCI didn't do enough to fight/change the culture)

But despite all the critics you want to do to the UCI, that I have did, Armstrong is right. What UCI could do that years? Why dont you put in the mind of UCI those years?

 

[thehog]

It's well crafted too.

99 per cent of my career isn’t about doping
More evidence nothing has changed with that joker.

Prepare for a resurrection where no one gets thrown under the bus and Armstrong is the lone doper.

but we were more or less a clean team. And then again, as young riders, you would be even a tier below that.

DB: You said more or less?

LA: [Laughs] That’s what I mean, more or less. Again I don’t know what others did or didn’t do, and I don’t want to get into the details...

but we felt that to compete at that level we didn’t have a choice.


Carmichael's legacy right there.

I agree. Lance taking care of Lance.

He knows exactly what he's doing.

Benson probably thought he got a scoop.

But Lance is just setting things up. Making sure all those who were in on the game have nothing to worry about. You keep it secret, I keep it secret.

Hein, I still love you.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

But despite all the critics you want to do to the UCI, that I have did, Armstrong is right. What UCI could do that years? Why dont you put in the mind of UCI those years?

Hein was mostly interested in selling tickets. He is after all a salesman.

 

[Taxus4a]

Hein was mostly interested in selling tickets. He is after all a salesman.

Well ; I dont say no to that..., but I repeat my question: what would you do againts doping if there wasnt test?

 

[frenchfry]

A vulgar, manipulating liar. Part 1 was a waste of time, can't wait for part 2.

 

[Taxus4a]

I agree. Lance taking care of Lance.

He knows exactly what he's doing.

Benson probably thought he got a scoop.

But Lance is just setting things up. Making sure all those who were in on the game have nothing to worry about. You keep it secret, I keep it secret.

Hein, I still love you.

He said there are some things he only would talk to the WADA or to a TRC, and that is normal, what you expect in an interview of this kind? but I have found interesting this first part of the interview.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Well ; I dont say no to that..., but a repeat my question: what would you do againts doping if there wasnt test?

ask yourself the question: how come Kim Andersen could continue in the sport at the time?

 

[DirtyWorks]

Hein was mostly interested in selling tickets. He is after all a salesman.

Oh, it's much bigger than that though.

When was that ASO broadcast rights contract signed for the U.S.?

I don't have the link handy, but recall Hein admitting Thom Wiesel's stock trading outfit managed some of his money. No conflict of interest there at all.. Nope.

Lots and lots of money made. Lance still loves Hein, Pat, and Thom. Now that Hein and Pat are retired, they are Scot Free.

The last part is lying his way into some redemption with WADA. This is step one. Well played sir.

 

[thehog]

http://stevetilford.com/2013/11/05/lance-armstrong-99-of-my-career-isnt-about-doping/

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Oh, it's much bigger than that though.

When was that ASO broadcast rights contract signed for the U.S.?

I don't have the link handy, but recall Hein admitting Thom Wiesel's stock trading outfit managed some of his money. No conflict of interest there at all.. Nope.

Lots and lots of money made. Lance still loves Hein, Pat, and Thom. Now that Hein and Pat are retired, they are Scot Free.

The last part is lying his way into some redemption with WADA. This is step one. Well played sir.

My friend, the finest sales people are almost entirely driven by money.

 

[MarkvW]

He said there are some things he only would talk to the WADA or to a TRC, and that is normal, what you expect in an interview of this kind? but I have found interesting this first part of the interview.

Notice the omission of reference to Lance's civil fraud cases. Lance is going to have to talk about doping and fraud in painstaking detail. The lawyers are probably already querying Tygart about good doping questions.

This piece is pure puffball.

 

[Benotti69]

There's a coded message in this interview.

He's setting it up for his deposition.

There were a few coded BS statements in their. He took a pot shot at Hampsten.

T&R is what Armstrong wants and I hope Cookson doesn't deliver because this guy is not repentent, neither are most of them.