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

Page 524 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.
Oh ok well now I see the connection. Wow we got to go back far to find a connection of Lance making stuff up. Not sure that was really dudes point but that's fine. Edit: I see now that it was, my bad.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.


Exactly!
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.

Appears Frankie has been lying by omission in his depositions. Case in point USADA. I don't think there are any heros in this little game.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
3
0
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

86TDFWinner said:
DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.


Exactly!

sounds like Frankie may have been making stuff up too.

I think it's time for some people to realize there are no heroes in cycling.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

thehog said:
DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.

Appears Frankie has been lying by omission in his depositions. Case in point USADA. I don't think there are any heros in this little game.

Nice "theory" ya got there. :rolleyes:

Depositions require truthful answers to posed questions. There's no obligation to answer un-asked questions.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

thehog said:
DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.

Appears Frankie has been lying by omission in his depositions. Case in point USADA. I don't think there are any heros in this little game.

I've always looked at Armstrong’s attack on Andreu as just the ringleader attacking one of his accomplices. Just makes Armstrong look worse.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

thehog said:
DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.

Appears Frankie has been lying by omission in his depositions. Case in point USADA. I don't think there are any heros in this little game.

I have no problem with the idea the USADA reasoned decision was carefully constructed, including omissions in witness testimony. None at all. Cycling left a huge door open, everyone knew it, and USADA took the opportunity to make a point. We know there are plenty of false claims in the testimony too.

Yes, it would be wrong to make them out to be heroes. That's a pretty fictional title anyway. I'm quite forgiving of Frankie's strategic confession as they paid an enormous price for doing the right thing many times over before USADA's ban recommendation.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

the sceptic said:
86TDFWinner said:
DirtyWorks said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
86TDFWinner said:
This made me chuckle a bit:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/tourdefrance/2010-07-18-lance-armstrong-greg-lemond-epo_N.htm


We all know he's completely FOS here(as he is with EVERYTHING else That comes out of his maw). I had to laugh when I saw this.
Your post makes me chuckle a bit more. 2010 link to the ultimate multicolored fish wrap that hangs up trying to load into a browser because the info is so old.

I would even guess this is probably the wrong thread for that. But you don't really want to bring up that thread again or maybe you do. Lets get that Lemond doping thread back up and running so folks can ask for people to be banninated. :D

The point being Armstrong has no problem making stuff up, even in a deposition. Now, as for the actual topic, yes, FOR SURE, there's a thread for that.


Exactly!

sounds like Frankie may have been making stuff up too.

I think it's time for some people to realize there are no heroes in cycling.

there have been no heroes in cycling for a long time.
 
Re: Re:

DamianoMachiavelli said:
MarkvW said:
It is possible to see Armstrong as a nasty piece of work (or even a psychopath as some amateur Clinic psychologists diagnose him) and still see Frankie Andreu as an ordinary doping cyclist.

I have yet to see anyone refer to Andreu as a "junkie" seriously. But Betsy Andreu uses that term in her arguments, though. Looks like the Andreu choir is up and running on the clinic again...

Welcome to the Andreu hate machine that has her talking points encapsulated into charged words and inflammatory terms then pounded into the public using the age old technique of the propagandist, repetition of a simple and memorable message. Thus from her and her chief flunky there is the constant use of the word junkie. Million Dollar Heist gets capitalized for emphasis. Another favorite is manipulation, which Betsy constantly uses in interviews to discount anything Armstrong says that adds nuance to the doping landscape. That last is ironic. Manipulation of the public is precisely what she and her online followers are engaged in and is the tactic she and LeMond claim Lance used to victimize them. She is a hypocrite of the most nauseating kind, the type that wear a mask of piety.

The charged word strategy is why Betsy and her pod people have to minimize Frankie's culpability because the terms she uses to tar Lance and those who remain his friends can be fairly applied to her husband.

She and her followers have tried to get around this with a Clintonesque parsing of language. After portraying a race deal as an Oceans 11-like casino robbery, they cut Frankie out of the story by saying he did not "negotiate" the deal. But negotiation was not his part. The record is clear in multiple accounts that were given before Andreu's sycophants had an interest in minimizing Frankie's involvement. Frankie made the initial offer to Team Coors. After deciding that no one on the team was capable of challenging Lance, Coors finalized the deal with Anderson. The team got the best it could out of the day, the essence of being a professional cyclist. Frankie was fully aware of the deal, facilitated the deal, and collected money from deal. In short, Frankie is an insurance fraudster.

The dodge around Frankie doping the majority of his career has become so absurd that by next week he'll be using the purchase of his boyhood tricycle to say he only doped for a fraction of his time on the bike while pretending cortisone use before races in the 80s is not really doping in the same way that using EPO but retiring before the EPO test forced the move to transfusions means he was not really part of the Postal program. The hallmark of a junkie is someone who refuses to admit his drug use, limits acknowledgement of its extent, or rationalizes it. We obviously have that with Frankie, so let's call him what he is, a junkie.

Making charged words the centerpiece of the Andreus' propaganda strategy does seem to have a slight flaw, doesn't it? Of course, with hypocrites you expect that flaw.

I tend to agree with the word usage, they are stepping around the "drug use" and turning it into "only did EPO 3 times", its most odd.

What I find so unusual is why didn't Frankie admit to his Cortisone use prior? It similar to Frankie buying EPO and helping George to dope. That information comes out later on but its only comes out because "Lance is trying to smear us"". The story just keeps evolving and Frankie's part in the USPS doping story is fairly significant. Even Vaughters was doping less than Frankie! and that's saying something!

Then the entire "Lance call Frankie a junkie", when clearly that never actually occurred.

And then Race Radio returning to the Clinic to try smooth over the latest events and then blaming Lance for making "targets" during his deposition. Last time I checked Armstrong was the actual target of a $100m lawsuit, rather than him targeting people.

Armstrong is a bad dude but that doesn't mean everyone gets off the hook. The way I'm looking at it was a lot guys at USPS were doping and on the take.

And has the term "victim" been trademarked?
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
3
0
What I find so unusual is why didn't Frankie admit to his Cortisone use prior? It similar to Frankie buying EPO and helping George to dope. That information comes out later on but its only comes out because "Lance is trying to smear us"". The story just keeps evolving and Frankie's part in the USPS doping story is fairly significant. Even Vaughters was doping less than Frankie! and that's saying something!

Everyone has an agenda in this game. Calling Lance a pathological liar is all well and good, but it's fairly obvious that team good dope has been lying a lot too.

Why should we trust anything these people say?
 
Re:

the sceptic said:
What I find so unusual is why didn't Frankie admit to his Cortisone use prior? It similar to Frankie buying EPO and helping George to dope. That information comes out later on but its only comes out because "Lance is trying to smear us"". The story just keeps evolving and Frankie's part in the USPS doping story is fairly significant. Even Vaughters was doping less than Frankie! and that's saying something!

Everyone has an agenda in this game. Calling Lance a pathological liar is all well and good, but it's fairly obvious that team good dope has been lying a lot too.

Why should we trust anything these people say?

Because some of them publicly stated they were cheating when it was the worst thing to do for them.

I'm at a complete loss why this matters. Please take a moment to acknowledge this information is coming from the liar who lies in deposition to meet his end goal.
 
Re:

the sceptic said:
What I find so unusual is why didn't Frankie admit to his Cortisone use prior? It similar to Frankie buying EPO and helping George to dope. That information comes out later on but its only comes out because "Lance is trying to smear us"". The story just keeps evolving and Frankie's part in the USPS doping story is fairly significant. Even Vaughters was doping less than Frankie! and that's saying something!

Everyone has an agenda in this game. Calling Lance a pathological liar is all well and good, but it's fairly obvious that team good dope has been lying a lot too.

Why should we trust anything these people say?

The Good Garmin Dopers with Frankie on guitar have just revealed themselves as evil dopers. They were just upset because Lance took all the money for himself.

The whole thing is a joke. The only real victims is the fans who believed in these jokers who pretended they've lost careers because of Lance.

Perhaps they should go to school like the rest of us and do regular jobs before complaining so much? Just a thought.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

doperhopper said:
Final proof: Pharmstrong was clean in 1993 - because he could win only "the Vino way", buying the Triple Crown.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrong-testimony-claims-jim-ochowicz-behind-1993-triple-crown-victory/

Whoa!

Och was the mastermind?

I dunno if he's telling the truth or not, but that seems to count as some real news.

Bus, meet Och.

Och, meet bus.

Did thehog's memory fail him? Again?

thehog said:
...

From memory Swart also named Frankie as the organizer of the million dollar heist at the Coors Classic did he not? (edit: Confirmed on Twitter its in 7DS).

Again, you couldn't make this stuff up... its actually pure comedy :p

Yup, pure comedy.

Nice post thehog. :rolleyes:

Dave.
 
There appears to be a difference of opinion on who made the approach to the Coors Light team. In 'Seven Deadly Sins' Walsh recounts that Swart said "as far as he could remember" the contact came from Frankie Andreu of Motorola through Scott McKinley of Coors.

If Armstrong is telling the truth, then Swart's recollection was wrong. Who knows?

I'm not quite ready to take Armstrong's word over Swart's recollection. At least one Andreu apologist appears quite willing to accept Lance's word on this issue.
 
YAK Alert:

Ben Foster wants audiences to put themselves in Lance Armstrong's shoes after watching The Program

If you had that much power and control, and you’d done that much good for people in the cancer world – half a billion dollars he raised – but he also took drugs, when everyone else was taking drugs as well. It’s a complicated storyline. Have a conversation about it: what would you do?

This twit still believes the Pharmstrong "Robin Hood" narrative, that a substantial portion of that half a billion dollars ended up in the veins of cancer patients rather than in His Lanceness's extensive wine cellar or the fuel tanks of his personal Gulfstream IV jet aeroplane.
 
funny that the movie is made about lance - supposedly based on walsh's book and how walsh wanted to expose lance because of his doping - yet the movie has dopers in it who are profiting from the movie - klier, millar, dekker...not to mention the lead actor taking drugs.
 
Re:

Digger said:
funny that the movie is made about lance - supposedly based on walsh's book and how walsh wanted to expose lance because of his doping - yet the movie has dopers in it who are profiting from the movie - klier, millar, dekker...not to mention the lead actor taking drugs.

The movie has bombed much like Walsh's books. This is despite Walsh trying to market the hell out if the movie with Foster and co. It's just a bad movie made by a half decent director but because he knew so little about cycling he ended up getting dupped by Walsh & Millar.

The Hamilton book would have made a better genuine movie. He's a hell of a lot more interesting than David Walsh.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Re:

DirtyWorks said:
I still want to know what the plan was looping Och into this particular scandal. Maybe more poorly executed strategy by wonderboy?.

Armstrong getting close to poking the bear...

Armstrong's trigger finger getting twitchy at the prospect of losing QuiTam case and all his millions so he fired off one as a warning to others.

Thom Weisel better start topping up Armstrong's offshore accounts soon and others better start delivering brown envelopes.....

Or Lance might have a bad fall while out training.

Anything is possible.
 
Re:

DirtyWorks said:
I still want to know what the plan was looping Och into this particular scandal. Maybe more poorly executed strategy by wonderboy?.

Armstrong getting close to poking the bear...
Is this not the information that LA was trying to strike a deal with the UCI's T&R Commission?

Now it's coming out anyway through legal depositions that serve him nothing, or everything...
 
Oct 21, 2015
341
0
0
Re:

MarkvW said:
There appears to be a difference of opinion on who made the approach to the Coors Light team. In 'Seven Deadly Sins' Walsh recounts that Swart said "as far as he could remember" the contact came from Frankie Andreu of Motorola through Scott McKinley of Coors.

If Armstrong is telling the truth, then Swart's recollection was wrong. Who knows?

I'm not quite ready to take Armstrong's word over Swart's recollection. At least one Andreu apologist appears quite willing to accept Lance's word on this issue.

There is no difference. Armstrong's deposition is consistent with Swart's account, especially since Lance gives only fuzzy, secondhand information about what happened. He does not say anything about who approached Team Coors. Someone had to make the initial contact with Coors to see if they were receptive. The best information says it was Frankie. Amazing that some are trying to twist this to let Frankie off the hook.

LA's answers have him being unaware of the details, what role each person played, and only learning about it after the fact. The details are vague. His answers could describe multiple scenarios. All accounts have Anderson negotiating the deal or at least being part of the negotiations. No other accounts have Ochowicz being part of negotiations. Och could have simply said something to LA like, "We negotiated a deal," leading him believe that Och was personally involved in finalizing it when Anderson was the one who met with the Coors people to laid out the terms and Och was informed later. Och might have been in the room, negotiating the deal alongside Anderson. Anderson might have negotiated terms then Och later sealed the deal in a conversion with Pettyjohn. All those are consistent with LA's deposition.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Re: Re:

DamianoMachiavelli said:
MarkvW said:
There appears to be a difference of opinion on who made the approach to the Coors Light team. In 'Seven Deadly Sins' Walsh recounts that Swart said "as far as he could remember" the contact came from Frankie Andreu of Motorola through Scott McKinley of Coors.

If Armstrong is telling the truth, then Swart's recollection was wrong. Who knows?

I'm not quite ready to take Armstrong's word over Swart's recollection. At least one Andreu apologist appears quite willing to accept Lance's word on this issue.

There is no difference. Armstrong's deposition is consistent with Swart's account, especially since Lance gives only fuzzy, secondhand information about what happened. He does not say anything about who approached Team Coors. Someone had to make the initial contact with Coors to see if they were receptive. The best information says it was Frankie. Amazing that some are trying to twist this to let Frankie off the hook.

LA's answers have him being unaware of the details, what role each person played, and only learning about it after the fact. The details are vague. His answers could describe multiple scenarios. All accounts have Anderson negotiating the deal or at least being part of the negotiations. No other accounts have Ochowicz being part of negotiations. Och could have simply said something to LA like, "We negotiated a deal," leading him believe that Och was personally involved in finalizing it when Anderson was the one who met with the Coors people to laid out the terms and Och was informed later. Och might have been in the room, negotiating the deal alongside Anderson. Anderson might have negotiated terms then Och later sealed the deal in a conversion with Pettyjohn. All those are consistent with LA's deposition.


what about Gorski paying Verbruggen 500k at the 1999 TdF for the backdate cortico saddle sore positive?

Race Radio could flesh this out and put some dario pieri meat on the bones
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
The movie has bombed much like Walsh's books.

BFI weekend takings chart for film's opening weekend in the UK:

1 Hotel Transylvania 2 £6,317,438
2 Suffragette £2,938,446
3 Pan £2,738,758
4 The Martian £2,419,958
5 Crimson Peak £967,168
6 Sicario £877,236
7 Legend £449,248
8 The Intern £269,851
9 The Lobster £229,619
10 Everest £218,450
11 Otello - Met Opera 2015 (Opera) £172,773
12 The Maze Runner: Scorch Trials £171,897
13 Macbeth £171,079
14 The Program £144,181
15 The Walk £135,374

For a Frears flick, that's probably close to par for the course, he's not exactly a popcorn magnet. That said, for the Gruan, it's a flop.

thehog said:
The Hamilton book would have made a better genuine movie. He's a hell of a lot more interesting than David Walsh.

That's the one Frears wanted, after reading a review in the LRB which even I thought was long. Am amazed anyone got to the end of it without falling asleep. (Though I do agree with Frears that the Hamilton book is a crime caper.)

I knew very, very little. I saw the back pages of newspapers but I knew nothing really. Tyler Hamilton wrote a book. He rode with Lance, and he then wrote a book, and I read a review in the London Review of Books and it just sounded riveting. We tried to buy Tyler Hamilton's book and he was too busy shafting his co-writer! Then we moved onto David Walsh's book [Seven Deadly Sins: My Pursuit Of Lance Armstrong]

link

Me, I thought Seven Deadly Sins - up until the point the book goes tits up - was quite cinematic and could have made a good screenplay, in the right hands.
 

TRENDING THREADS