• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 4 (Post-Settlement)

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Norks74 said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
thehog said:
ebandit said:
poor lance....what bollox....he got nothing more than he deserved....sanction loss of results/contracts

and he was not the only one team doctors.bruyneel ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Well he was an early investor in Uber which is about to go IPO which should make him more money than he ever did as a cyclist. I say he came out alright.
...or maybe not.

Uber's IPO joins ranks of Wall Street flops
Uber plunged at the opening of trading, falling as much as 8.8% from its IPO price of $45 per share. The stock closed at $41.57

Uber's IPO got caught in a perfect storm
In all, Uber lost nearly $6 billion in market cap in its first five hours as a public company.

Whether Uber 'flopped' on IPO misses the point. We need to know how many shares Lance has for his $100k (and on what terms..) before you can even start to calculate how much his holding is worth...

I'll contend that he has done more than very well should he have sold his entire holding on IPO day.

Exactly - Fanning (Napster founder) made $125m from his original $25k investment. I’d say Armstrong made $100m+ in holdings.

Thus in theory Armstrong’s ‘loan’ from SCA has made him beyond wealthy.


6j2f4j.png
 
And others that are STILL prepared to moan on and on about Armstrong's transgressions from 15-20 years ago every time there's a news article about him. Also equally ready to ball-wash for their own hero as well. Different strokes for different folks.
 
Re:

Soggy Chamois said:
And others that are STILL prepared to moan on and on about Armstrong's transgressions from 15-20 years ago every time there's a news article about him. Also equally ready to ball-wash for their own hero as well. Different strokes for different folks.

Except that my "hero" WAS NEVER STRIPPED of his TDF titles, was never part of the most sophisticated doping program in the history of sports, never went out of his way to take others down, never tested positive for doping, never offered up $300k to anyone who'd claimed they saw him dope, so yeah, I guess I'm still not willing to forgive.

Not MINE or my hero's fault he's(Wonderboy)a POS, sociopathic, pathetic cheater.

So yeah, go ahead and continue ball washing Wonderboy, and I'll continue ball washing the ONLY AMERICAN in cycling history to win the TDF. :D
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 4 (Post-Settlement

I lack the energy to hate someone for so long a period of time. It just gets emotionally draining, especially when the person is a total stranger.
Ideally someone within the cycling community would have conducted the interview, because there are still a lot of unanswered questions. No fault to the interviewer for not asking them; clearly he knows next to nothing about the sport.
That said, for me it is time to move on. I see a guy who is contrite and genuine. The guy has taken a schit kicking, both financially and personally, so I am done beating a dead horse. He seems to me a person who is trying to improve himself, just as we all should.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 4 (Post-Settlement

the delgados said:
I lack the energy to hate someone for so long a period of time. It just gets emotionally draining, especially when the person is a total stranger.
Ideally someone within the cycling community would have conducted the interview, because there are still a lot of unanswered questions. No fault to the interviewer for not asking them; clearly he knows next to nothing about the sport.
That said, for me it is time to move on. I see a guy who is contrite and genuine. The guy has taken a schit kicking, both financially and personally, so I am done beating a dead horse. He seems to me a person who is trying to improve himself, just as we all should.

Sums it up fairly well. My thoughts are similar. Tygart and co. have since become just as big as frauds as Armstrong ever was. Sky have proven nothing has changed in the sport and you need need the gun rather than a knife to win bike races. You can only laugh at it.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
Norks74 said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
thehog said:
ebandit said:
poor lance....what bollox....he got nothing more than he deserved....sanction loss of results/contracts

and he was not the only one team doctors.bruyneel ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Well he was an early investor in Uber which is about to go IPO which should make him more money than he ever did as a cyclist. I say he came out alright.
...or maybe not.

Uber's IPO joins ranks of Wall Street flops
Uber plunged at the opening of trading, falling as much as 8.8% from its IPO price of $45 per share. The stock closed at $41.57

Uber's IPO got caught in a perfect storm
In all, Uber lost nearly $6 billion in market cap in its first five hours as a public company.

Whether Uber 'flopped' on IPO misses the point. We need to know how many shares Lance has for his $100k (and on what terms..) before you can even start to calculate how much his holding is worth...

I'll contend that he has done more than very well should he have sold his entire holding on IPO day.

Exactly - Fanning (Napster founder) made $125m from his original $25k investment. I’d say Armstrong made $100m+ in holdings.

Thus in theory Armstrong’s ‘loan’ from SCA has made him beyond wealthy.


6j2f4j.png

Looks like Armstrong made about $400m from Uber. Not bad, he could buy SCA and fund Walsh’s Program II :cool:

“It’s saved our family,” Armstrong told CNBC’s Andrew Sorkin in an interview aired on Thursday. In 2009, the former pro cyclist invested $100,000 in Chris Sacca’s nascent venture capital firm, Lowercase Capital. A
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 4 (Post-Settlement

thehog said:
the delgados said:
I lack the energy to hate someone for so long a period of time. It just gets emotionally draining, especially when the person is a total stranger.
Ideally someone within the cycling community would have conducted the interview, because there are still a lot of unanswered questions. No fault to the interviewer for not asking them; clearly he knows next to nothing about the sport.
That said, for me it is time to move on. I see a guy who is contrite and genuine. The guy has taken a schit kicking, both financially and personally, so I am done beating a dead horse. He seems to me a person who is trying to improve himself, just as we all should.

Sums it up fairly well. My thoughts are similar. Tygart and co. have since become just as big as frauds as Armstrong ever was. Sky have proven nothing has changed in the sport and you need need the gun rather than a knife to win bike races. You can only laugh at it.

I agree, hate takes a lot of energy and Voldemort clearly isn't worth it. And, to some extent, I only wish him the best if he is indeed genuine and contrite.

That said... I think the outcome of that story for many, many people remains "don't get caught". It's not "do not dope", "don't be a fraud", "do not take advantage of other people", etc... for all this, I'd feel better if Voldemort remained out of the public's eye. He has way enough money so that he doesn't need to advertise anything. He's free and has the means to do anything he wants (except competing against other people). The only reason he's in the media is how much he cares about his image. It's just PR, ego. Don't fall for it.
 
Re:

86TDFWinner said:
He just can't help himself, he has to try to stay relevant!

What a poor, sad, sorry, pathetic excuse for a human being:
I do know you don't like Armstrong that much and noboby should, but even the "greedy-Johan hater-nymphomaniac-prostitute" Emma O'Reilly forgave him and moved on.

Your feelings about the guy have been noticed by the CN readers, but now-and-then life is easier with the advice of Dr. Jones Sr fresh in mind:
tumblr_msm07rhOag1rpike2o7_r1_250.gif
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 4 (Post-Settlement

This Charming Man said:
Prejudice against American cyclists, by Trvis Tygart. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeuFf_bDMY4

[conspiracy]
How the *** is Bob Roll so confident Landis can pull back his 10 minute deficit in the pre-stage talk? I mean even in Coppi-Bartali times that would have been an epic accomplishment, in 2006 that's ridiculous, even though it was a strange race in any case.
Sure, on the surface he was just being optimistic for an American rider to an American audience, but if I had seen him say that live without knowing what would happen, my reaction would've been "what an idiot, total nonsense!".
[/conspiracy]
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 4 (Post-Settlement

spalco said:
This Charming Man said:
Prejudice against American cyclists, by Trvis Tygart. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeuFf_bDMY4

[conspiracy]
How the **** is Bob Roll so confident Landis can pull back his 10 minute deficit in the pre-stage talk? I mean even in Coppi-Bartali times that would have been an epic accomplishment, in 2006 that's ridiculous, even though it was a strange race in any case.
Sure, on the surface he was just being optimistic for an American rider to an American audience, but if I had seen him say that live without knowing what would happen, my reaction would've been "what an idiot, total nonsense!".
[/conspiracy]
I believed flandis could do it. A weak field, without the superstars.
 
Q for 86TDFWinner: Can I presume you read the LeMond biog that came out last year? What's your take on its claim that Armstrong bounced Laurent Fignon into having to go public on his cancer diagnosis? From the book:
At 11:12 a.m. on June 11, 2009, Lance greeted his millions of Twitter followers with a most unexpected Tweet: ‘Sending out my best to Laurent Fignon who was recently dx w/ cancer. A friend, a great man, and a cycling legend. Livestrong Laurent.’

And thus did the cycling world learn that an enigmatic legend of French cycling was fighting for his life.
 
Re:

This is one unsolved mystery about Armstrong from FMK's review linked above:
I’ve no idea how much raw talent Armstrong had, but the problem with basing such a claim on his performance in those early Tours is that, just a chapter or two before, LeMond and Fignon’s poor performances in their final Tours was taken as proof the rest of peloton was hopped up to the gills on EPO. If we know that Armstrong didn’t take to EPO until the end of 1995, how can we then argue that his poor performance in those early Tours signified a lack of talent?
I think the fallacy described here originates from people confusing two things:

1) Whether there was something strange in Armstrong's 1998 comeback when his results were significantly better than his 1994-1995 results. To point this out before the USADA case and confessions was a good argument that he might've started to take "hard" PEDs as French journalists, David Walsh and Mike Ashenden have pointed out during the the SCA hearings and elsewhere.

Because all the complaining about what a pathetic GT-rider Lance was during his pre-cancer days is at least somewhat accurate and hasn't gone anywhere even after the 2012-2013 events, the abundance of this material has led to this question:

2) Whether Lance had no natural talent because his domination started only after the application of blood doping with the help of Dr. Ferrari. While this can be true, many people come to this conclusion because they remember the observations by LeMond and even more sympathetic Phil Anderson how in troubles the Texan was particularly during the time trials and mountain stages during his pre-cancer years.

Whether or how much Lance had talent is an interesting questions, but I thinkg that particularly Greg LeMond has far too "Vo2Max reductionist"-reading of the world when he tends to think that there is something suspicious in anyone with a Vo2Max below his presumed 95 ml/kg/min figure who produces more watts than he could do during his Tour wins.

I think it is the consensus view that that cycling efficiency tends to be inversely related to oxygen capacity among elites, and this article should remind everyone that the magical figure isn't the end of story:
https://www.outsideonline.com/2398524/highest-ever-vo2max-cyclist-oskar-svendsen

It is interesting that when training induced improved cycling efficiency was discussed in David Walsh's book From Lance to Landis, LeMond didn't think the issue in terms of muscle/peripheral level adaptation to training but only in terms of instant pedalling efficiency, in terms of cadence, knee angles and the interplay between different pushing and pulling muscles etc. and told that his coach had told that the improvement would be something like one percent at most.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 4 (Post-Settlement

This Charming Man said:
Excellent to see Lance interviewed on NBC Sports coverage today. He is quite insightful on TdF strategies.
Respect to Greg LeMond, however, motivation is a great motivator in life and sports. Stephen Hawking case in point, we do what we need to do to excell. If VO2 max were the greatest factor in winning, Greg would have won each and every race he entered as a European proffessional, every last one!
 
Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Q for 86TDFWinner: Can I presume you read the LeMond biog that came out last year? What's your take on its claim that Armstrong bounced Laurent Fignon into having to go public on his cancer diagnosis? From the book:
At 11:12 a.m. on June 11, 2009, Lance greeted his millions of Twitter followers with a most unexpected Tweet: ‘Sending out my best to Laurent Fignon who was recently dx w/ cancer. A friend, a great man, and a cycling legend. Livestrong Laurent.’

And thus did the cycling world learn that an enigmatic legend of French cycling was fighting for his life.

I'll have to read it & get back to you, okay. Sorry for the late response.
 
Also, He can't seem to keep his lies straight:

He told Oprah during the interview with her, that he "didn't start doping until '95 or so" and then he told the guy on ESPN he "started in '93" and he's not called out on it. It's amazing to me, that he STILL gets love and respect from so many here and elsewhere.

His entire career has been one big lie and fraud, it's like a Ponzi scheme, he's the Bernie Madoff of cycling.

Liggett and Rolle just lap it up too...
 

TRENDING THREADS