Official Lance Armstrong Thread **READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING**

[D-Queued]

I'm not entirely on board with this lady but it's one more public example of dismissing a great American legend.

Lance Armstrong: Brilliance on a bike?

She doesn't like Lance (or any of "us" apparently)

She also cannot figure out the difference between peddling and pedaling.

But, she does have a compelling point about the incredible salaries.

Maybe charity is my calling after all. Looks like this is where the big bucks are.

Dave.

 

[TexPat]

Rev Mike, I find it hard to believe Gunderson ever got your sense of humour. Did you ever joke around; was it all on his terms?

Humour should have always been on his terms. Sadly, I drove a wedge between us when I met him one morning with an advert for Neuticles and a PowerBand (with half of the PowerDisc missing). Satire and sarcasm are seldom appreciated by royalty. It is an affront to their authority and legitimacy.
This was the beginning of the long period of estrangement which was furthered by the evil doers like D Walsh et al, who helped build die Mauer, as I call it.
Since reunification--for Herr Gunderson and I were truly like the two Germanys split in two, faraway yet so close--my humour is more appreciated, though toned down. The **** of any joke is always someone else (i.e. Greg Lemond).
In fact, Gundy, retweets my joke of the day.

 

[Granville57]

Bicycling magazine editor Peter Flax explains decision to print article saying Lance Armstrong doped

The article leaves the impression that a human source convinced Strickland, which Strickland confirmed in an interview this morning, though he declined to provide details.

Whew! That gets The Beazed off the hook.

Mods, maybe separating the Bicycling Mag posts into a unique thread, from post# 382 on (minus the off-topic trolling arguments), wouldn't be a bad idea?

 

[Berzin]

Armstrong is old news. The groupies will move on to golf, or whatever sport fat, rich, white dudes are doing these days.

That would be politics, where they are now out telling people that municipal workers are the ones who are bankrupting the states.

As far as the article goes, I believe it's a cynical ploy to soft-pedal the opportunity to have a magazine that's been a Lance Armstrong shoeshine rag for so long take the "bold" and self-congratulatory initiative to finally cast doubt on this idiot's chemically-enhanced athletic career.

I don't see any of it as revelatory, controversial nor particularly important in the grand scheme of things. I find it more telling that Livestrong wanted Race Radio to visit their corporate headquarters to get answers to his questions.

What were they going to do, drug him, tag him and then trace his whereabouts all over the internet?

Sounds more like an episode of Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom than a simple Q&A session about their organization.

 

[Race Radio]

I don't see any of it as revelatory, controversial nor particularly important in the grand scheme of things. I find it more telling that Livestrong wanted Race Radio to visit their corporate headquarters to get answers to his questions.

This is a very common tacit perfected by Tim Herman, aka Jabba the Hut.

Pretend you will co-oprate but always move the goal posts, delay, obfusticate. They have done this continually to multiple journalists. Once you give up and publish they smear you, say you never gave them a chance, smear you.....and then pretend they have answered the questions, when they have answered nothing.

To be clear my goal was the questions was to insure that I had the right info. If they had answered the questions and had nothing to hide I would have no problem setting the record straight. They chose instead to launch an internet smear campaign.....stupid move. It only confirms the image of petty and vindictive.

 

[D-Queued]

This is a very common tacit perfected by Tim Herman, aka Jabba the Hut.

Pretend you will co-oprate but always move the goal posts, delay, obfusticate. They have done this continually to multiple journalists. Once you give up and publish they smear you, say you never gave them a chance, smear you.....and then pretend they have answered the questions, when they have answered nothing.

To be clear my goal was the questions was to insure that I had the right info. If they had answered the questions and had nothing to hide I would have no problem setting the record straight. They chose instead to launch an internet smear campaign.....stupid move. It only confirms the image of petty and vindictive.

And, if they didn't trust you (which could be a fair viewpoint), they could openly post a FAQ on these items, make a press release, provide a friendly writer with material, etc.

There is always concern about responding to anything negative. If that were the concern, a good PR/Corp communications/MarCom person could easily re-cast the same questions into positives. They seem to have no shortage of talent here, but could not apply it?

Presuming, of course, that they could even speak to any of these issues in a positive way.

The answer: NOT.

Dave.

 

[barn yard]

the shredders must be going non stop at LIVESTRONGHQ at the moment

 

[Dr. Maserati]

On Strickland and the Bicycling article - his 12 year old daughter sounds like she has more integrity and objectivity than Bill has and is able to ask proper questions.

I was wondering if the article was an honest attempt to put the story right - or whether it is an elaborate ploy of damage limitation.

I reread parts of Sticklands book "Tour de Lance" and remembered this (about the 99 Tour):

Whats more confounding is that technically Armstrong didnt even need the exemption: though his detractors still characterize the result as a positive for doping, the trace amounts detected in the sample were below the limit that was legally considered a positive.

Which of course is untrue - there was no limit to corticoids.

And later this:

Through all of that, and since turning pro in 1992, Armstrong had never tested positive.

In his latest piece Strickland does not say why he has converted and has said in his book it was on "faith" - I don't believe his opinion has changed, just the narrative.

 

[webvan]

Yes, that has me confounded...the "admission" sounds more and more like damage control of sorts, although of course, trying to argue that all that doesn't matter because LIVESTRONG have done so much good for so many people will only go so far, like a guy who's ready to cheat to win and risk his health after a full recovery (and of course use that as an argument as to why he would never dope) ever gave a crap about anybody else than himself.

I was at my local Shack the other day and noticed that their big poster with LA as their CMO (Chief Mobily Officer) was no longer on display. Instead the LIVESTRONG gadgets were in a corner and I had to feel sorry for the guy working all day long with that crap in his immediate vicinity.

I don't think this has been commented on, but each time I see the "HE'S DONE" title, I read "he's done FOR", not "He's done with cycling"...

 

[Granville57]

Yes, that has me confounded...the "admission" sounds more and more like damage control of sorts...

I know that you've pressed the "admission" issue several times so far without much forthcoming support for the frustration of it all. Strickland is trying to be cryptic and coy, using it to justify his change of heart, without really saying anything. I'm with you on the frustration of it but I don't feel that too much hinges on knowing the source, in terms of the ultimate outcome. But like you, I am damn curious.

If we are to believe Strickland about the admission/non-admission, I'm not entirely convinced it came from Lance. Brunyneel perhaps? He was in close quarters with him. Altough, for some reason, I just can't shake the feeling that it was from someone like his ex-wife, Kristen.

I realize these quotes are amplified when viewed by themselves, and I realize that she's referring to her marriage, but still...

Here is the truth as I see it: Marriage has the potential to erode the very fiber of your identity. If you aren't careful, it can tempt you to become a "yes woman" for the sake of salvaging your romantic dream. It can lure you into a pattern of pleasing that will turn you into someone you'll hardly recognize and probably won't like. I am warning you because I only wish someone had warned me.

The time may come when you realize that the only way to restore the meaning to your marriage is to get back the real you. It requires warrior-size courage to take a stand against the miscommunication, deception and emotional distance that breed in the shadows of inauthenticity.
http://www.glamour.com/weddings/2006/07/kristin-armstrong?currentPage=3

Back to Strickland: The interesting part of the "admission" story, to me, is the bolded part:
"My catalyst was another one of those statements that was never said by someone I never talked with. It was not from one of Armstrong’s opponents. It was not from anyone who will gain any clemency by affirming it under oath. It was an admission that doping had occurred, one disguised so it could assume innocence but unmistakeable to me in meaning. The moment I received it felt strangely like a relief."

The first part could fit the bill of one of Lance's ex-wives/girlfriends. The second bolded part, that he received something, makes it sound like someone took pity on him and wanted to end the embarrassment that would be coming his way with a gift of truth.

He obviously chose his words very carefully here, and I just can't help seeing it in that kind of light.

Any other likely candidates that fit role as described by Bill?

 

[skippythepinhead]

He made it up

There was no source. He knew the whole time and he did his best to turn it into a touchingly elegant heartfelt description of the turd soup he concocted of his soul and crocodile tears.

 

[Granville57]

There was no source....

I can't believe that he just made up a source.
Strickland has put himself under a lot of pressure with this one, and to simply fabricate the very thing that tipped the scales for him would seem to be a lose-lose situation. If that ever came out, he'd lose all credibility from both sides of the fence.

He would most likely have had to share his source with those closest to him (this isn't exactly Watergate) or ask them to be complicit in his fairy tale—and that's something I just can't believe happened.

 

[webvan]

I agree he must have something to hold on to. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the mystery at the heart of this "tell all" article, as well as for that link for the Kristin article, pretty sombre but enlightening on how she was "grinded". That guy has no pity. Unsurprisingly she blames it all on herself when she was in fact crushed by this ruthless guy who will stop at nothing, like so many others have.

Could be Kristin or Sheryl, would have to be someone really close for Strickland to take it at face value or an organized "leak" for damage control, in that case LA...which would explain why he gos to such lengths to recall that unlikely story about confronting Lance in the past.

 

[skippythepinhead]

It's not like he made up the source, it's just that there have been so many sources over the years he could have relied on that might have caused him to do some, oh I don't know, say, journalism...

Coming out now and saying "Now I've found a credible anonymous source who winked at me the right way, and since I no longer require access to the Lord Emperor of Cycling, I can cryptically express my doubt and make it all about how I failed Lance and cancer and cycling" makes the article just that much more disgusting to me.

I am with those who believe this piece was written with utmost care to cause benefit to Lance by minimizing and trivializing his years of outright lying to this guy's face...you weren't crying when you cashed the checks, right Strickland?

 

[jimmypop]

There was no source. He knew the whole time and he did his best to turn it into a touchingly elegant heartfelt description of the turd soup he concocted of his soul and crocodile tears.

Thank you for sharing this. Awesome.

 

[lean mean &green]

It's not like he made up the source, it's just that there have been so many sources over the years he could have relied on that might have caused him to do some, oh I don't know, say, journalism...

Coming out now and saying "Now I've found a credible anonymous source who winked at me the right way, and since I no longer require access to the Lord Emperor of Cycling, I can cryptically express my doubt and make it all about how I failed Lance and cancer and cycling" makes the article just that much more disgusting to me.

I am with those who believe this piece was written with utmost care to cause benefit to Lance by minimizing and trivializing his years of outright lying to this guy's face...you weren't crying when you cashed the checks, right Strickland?

i don't know if strickland fabricated the source or not, although it's a little too convenient an excuse to explain reversing course in a simplified way to not trigger my BS alarm. it's also a nice fallback position when lance or his people come calling. truthfully, it doesn't even matter. he's ignored the obvious for so long it will take strickland forever to re-establish credibility but it's an important first step.

in a nutshell, LA and his PR are people are trying to turn a freefall into a wheels up landing. there's no dodging the ugliness, they only hope to minimize it. there's no doubt his image is going to take a hit but they'd like to avoid having lance look like a monster eg barry bonds. i think they've tried to concede a few doping realities in the strickland piece so long as his personality flaws remained mostly hidden.

 

[Benotti69]

i don't know if strickland fabricated the source or not, although it's a little too convenient an excuse to explain reversing course in a simplified way to not trigger my BS alarm. it's also a nice fallback position when lance or his people come calling. truthfully, it doesn't even matter. he's ignored the obvious for so long it will take strickland forever to re-establish credibility but it's an important first step.

in a nutshell, LA and his PR are people are trying to turn a freefall into a wheels up landing. there's no dodging the ugliness, they only hope to minimize it. there's no doubt his image is going to take a hit but they'd like to avoid having lance look like a monster eg barry bonds. i think they've tried to concede a few doping realities in the strickland piece so long as his personality flaws remained mostly hidden.

that is not going to be easy

 

[python]

brodeal and race radio interpreted the bicycling mag articles right - a barely concealed soft landing and a belated catching up with the times. still credit should go where it's due: this is better than some still totally ignorant fans.

about stickland's style...i was not impressed by sticking his teen daughter in the plot. looked like a laboured journalism. and in another piece, bicycling still called vrijman report independent. that said enough for me..

 

[Race Radio]

Wonderboy is asking around, trying to the gage the possibility of a "Confession"

Groupies will not care because he did it all to "raise awareness" and beat the evil French.

 

[frenchfry]

Wonderboy is asking around, trying to the gage the possibility of a "Confession"

Groupies will not care because he did it all to "raise awareness" and beat the evil French.

Maybe he can recycle the "what am I on" commercial - with a few modifications of course.

The problem is that his lies have been SO aggressive that they might come back to haunt him - though I agree that the diehard groupies will never be shaken from their zealous righteousness.

 

[Barrus]

Wonderboy is asking around, trying to the gage the possibility of a "Confession"

Groupies will not care because he did it all to "raise awareness" and beat the evil French.

This could well be the best strategy he can take. He could certainly strike a good deal, because I would expect he would have something on other people involved

 

[cat6cx]

I predicted an eventual confession from Lance when the WSJ article broke last summer. (of course I never documented that prediction on the forum. does it still count?)

I think Clemens and Pettitte are the 2 examples he's evaluating.

The "controlled confession" seems to land the best results (Pettitte, A-rod, Maguire) in the long term.

 

[jimmypop]

Wonderboy is asking around, trying to the gage the possibility of a "Confession"

Seems likely at this point, since he's probably learning how lying under oath can cause one great financial and personal harm.

 

[lean mean &green]

Wonderboy is asking around, trying to the gage the possibility of a "Confession"

Groupies will not care because he did it all to "raise awareness" and beat the evil French.

a confession is a dangerous thing, it will still need to be a carefully constructed lie to avoid incriminating himself against any potential charges.

 

[Digger]

Confession means he's in trouble for perjury still though.