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

Page 464 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I would like to hear why he never reached out to Tyler Hamilton during his Apology Tour de Farce.

Or why he never reached out to the cancer community to apologize for using toxic amounts of illegal substances while still proclaiming remembrance of his survivorship.

The rest is BS. Exactly what one would expect from someone like him-remorseless, hasn't learned the meaning of contrition, and making cynical, calculate decisions based on getting the better of the situation which seems to be beyond his control.

And that last part is what he really regrets more than anything else.
 
Berzin said:
I would like to hear why he never reached out to Tyler Hamilton during his Apology Tour de Farce.

Wasn't he claiming to Macur that he'd attempted to call Tyler but got no answer and/or never heard back? I could be wrong, but I'm sure he made a statement to that effect.
You know, thereby placing the blame on Tyler for there being no reconciliation and trying to make out he's a good guy...


I have to admit I like this one:
"You know what we're sorry for? We're sorry we were put in that place. We would have loved to have competed man to man, [on] bread and water. We're sorry we were put in that place."

Who the FiretrUCK put you in that place??!!
I love the way he's always blaming "the peloton"... We had to do it... We would have loved to compete clean... everyone was doing it... wah wah wah... It's not my fault I went full *** with PEDs... :rolleyes:
 
Dec 13, 2012
1,859
0
0
Berzin said:
I would like to hear why he never reached out to Tyler Hamilton during his Apology Tour de Farce.

.

If I remember rightly he did attempt to meet Hamilton (from reading on Twitter) but Hamilton said only if it is without your entourage. I don't knoe if the meeting ever went ahead.
 
Dec 13, 2012
1,859
0
0
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/30984162
Armstrong makes some good points here but also some very contradictory points. He says if Mcquaid had made the same decision as Cookson he would be criticised which is correct. Says Astana should be banned but then says that he wouldn't dope if he was riding now as you don't need to. So the winner of last years Tour team should be banned yet you don't need to dope now, very strange comment to make.

He then goes on to make comments about Froome and Wiggins and his effect on them being questioned about doping saying it's not fair and they shouldn't be questioned on things that happened in 1999 (15 years ago) does he forget that he also won as late as 2005 and doped in 2009/10.
 
SundayRider said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/30984162
Armstrong makes some good points here but also some very contradictory points. He says if Mcquaid had made the same decision as Cookson he would be criticised which is correct. Says Astana should be banned but then says that he wouldn't dope if he was riding now as you don't need to. So the winner of last years Tour team should be banned yet you don't need to dope now, very strange comment to make.

He then goes on to make comments about Froome and Wiggins and his effect on them being questioned about doping saying it's not fair and they shouldn't be questioned on things that happened in 1999 (15 years ago) does he forget that he also won as late as 2005 and doped in 2009/10.

Yeah, as if anyone here actually believes Nibali won clean.:rolleyes:
 
SundayRider said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/30984162
Armstrong makes some good points here but also some very contradictory points. He says if Mcquaid had made the same decision as Cookson he would be criticised which is correct. Says Astana should be banned but then says that he wouldn't dope if he was riding now as you don't need to. So the winner of last years Tour team should be banned yet you don't need to dope now, very strange comment to make.

He then goes on to make comments about Froome and Wiggins and his effect on them being questioned about doping saying it's not fair and they shouldn't be questioned on things that happened in 1999 (15 years ago) does he forget that he also won as late as 2005 and doped in 2009/10.

I noticed this too. His spin is all mixed up. The spin has spun out. Frog in a blender?
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
I watched the clip on BBC and read Betsy F's comments.

As others have said its just the same old LA trying to control/shift the narrative nobody buys it.

I think what's a bit sick is when he discusses himself in the 3rd person and continually mentions his kids, and makes out he has been in therapy seen the light and recovered from a personality disorder he has been suffering from.

Its a similar method to how he used Cancer as a shield from criticism previously.

Anyone who has had genuine mental illness will attest that its not something you would joke about and use for sympathy (certainly not something you would twist in order to further some perverse public relations retribution attempt).

The most chilling thing that came out of the Walsh book was that weeks after he had left hospital he is on a plane over to the Cofidis presentation when in actual fact he was going to see Ferrari. I don't know how anyone in their right mind would even consider PED after staring death in the face days before.

Gives you a fairly good idea of the mind of Lance Armstrong IMHO.
 
frenchfry said:
For so long so many people believed fervently in every lie that passed his lips, and worshipped his being.

That time is gone, but he clings to his relevance.

The only way out is a reality show. I think it's time for at home with the Armstrong's.

There were plenty of stupid people who worshipped him the first time around. They must still be out there somewhere :rolleyes:
 
thehog said:
The only way out is a reality show. I think it's time for at home with the Armstrong's.

There were plenty of stupid people who worshipped him the first time around. They must still be out there somewhere :rolleyes:

Please no. Not even in jest.
Some 4th rate cable channel may just decide its worth doing.
 
Feb 4, 2012
435
0
0
Freddythefrog said:
Worth a read http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/30955902

So Lance says "I'm sorry we were all put in that position."
If that were truly the case, Armstrong would have cooperated with USADA in an effort to clean up the sport, so future riders wouldn't be placed in that position. Instead he opposed USADA every step of the way, including using his political connections in an attempt to cut their funding. He continues to slag Tygart.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Pazuzu said:
If that were truly the case, Armstrong would have cooperated with USADA in an effort to clean up the sport, so future riders wouldn't be placed in that position. Instead he opposed USADA every step of the way, including using his political connections in an attempt to cut their funding. He continues to slag Tygart.

Yep. Armstrong just *** stirring....
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Pazuzu said:
If that were truly the case, Armstrong would have cooperated with USADA in an effort to clean up the sport, so future riders wouldn't be placed in that position. Instead he opposed USADA every step of the way, including using his political connections in an attempt to cut their funding. He continues to slag Tygart.

So do Digger and thehog. They're both just like Armstrong.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
3
0
DirtyWorks said:
It wouldn't happen. Wonderboy could not control the narrative and the producer would be his next sworn enemy. No one in the industry wants to deal with that.

what narrative? isn't that what reality shows are all about? delusional people being entertaining with their lowlife behavior?

i'm sure if they have a comment from Betsy roll over the screen after each episode it will be acceptable.
 
Aug 21, 2012
138
0
0
Breaking news: Lance Armstrong still a narcissist and master of cognitive dissonance.

How long before he's the public savior of cancer survivors again? Or did that ever stop?
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
the sceptic said:
what narrative? isn't that what reality shows are all about? delusional people being entertaining with their lowlife behavior?

i'm sure if they have a comment from Betsy roll over the screen after each episode it will be acceptable.

They interviewed Betsy about it, and I'm glad they did. She was able to point out that Armstrong is once again harassing them with unethical legal maneuvers. Lance has changed...only he's doing the same things he always did. I don't know why some people still continue to support the guy?
 
the sceptic said:
what narrative? isn't that what reality shows are all about? delusional people being entertaining with their lowlife behavior?

Which is fairly much what all the Lance haters do on this forum :rolleyes:

They are entertained. And without him they'd have to watch the Kasdashians.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
thehog said:
Which is fairly much what all the Lance haters do on this forum :rolleyes:

They are entertained. And without him they'd have to watch the Kasdashians.

...says one of the show's producers...