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

[Stingray34]

to me, the way texas forced himself on the team with the existing structure, formed around the proven leader is and always will remain the ugliest episode in his career.

NEVER have I been an LA fan, for various reasons, but the bolded above rings too true.

That move contavened pretty much every unwritten law in pro cycling. Arrogant, self-important, classless....

I was never particularly an LA fan either. I was happy for him when he came back to win post-cancer, the fact he could overcome a disease, stay alive and actually compete was great. The question marks were evident then with the 'saddle sore cream' story, but that seemed pretty minor considering we'd just had Festina and Pantani blowing the Giro. He seemed no worse than others.

The problem for me was the manner in which he raced, killing the race with boring tactics obviously enhanced with team-wide blood manipulation. If you were familiar with cycle racing before the Gunderson era, his performances were red flags. And he just kept on getting away with it as all his competitors were removed from racing.

If LA was your introduction to cycling, I can understand the excitement his dominance generated. For mine, racing was more engaging when there was doubt about the outcome.

On top of this, even before his apparent megalomania and sociopathy became public circa 2004 with Simeoni, he was and remains an antipatico character, being hard to like as a person. If you know people, you can just tell when someone is a two-faced schwanz. A real big dripping schwanzkopf.*







*That one's for you, Cobblestoned.

What, me worry?

Yep, me worry

 

[jobiwan]

If LA was your introduction to cycling, I can understand the excitement his dominance generated.

As a young fan getting introduced to LA/cycling on the OLN/Versus broadcasts, it was exciting, but you're right, it almost seemed too easy for him, and of course its easy to see why now.

 

[Stingray34]

Fathers and Sons

Is this the most justice they'll face?

 

[mewmewmew13]

Of course, the risk-taking is just a huge part of the sociopath lineup. Just look at the long list of public figures, Clinton, Kennedys and Eliot Spitzer immediately come to mind, and too many other politicians, sports figures etc to even begin to list....makes the head spin.

It is part of the power-monger and huge ego persona that helps one rise to the top of the heap, but ultimately will bring them all down. Some slide through but some don't...

 

[uspostal]

Why would antbody on here care if LA was a sociopath or not. Seems like a lot of people who don't like him spend a lot of time on him. I'm sure the anti LA camp sends 0.00 dollars to his charties, or promote or buy anything he endorses. If you keep poking a bees nest sooner or later you'll get stung.

 

[Stingray34]

Why would antbody on here care if LA was a sociopath or not. Seems like a lot of people who don't like him spend a lot of time on him. I'm sure the anti LA camp sends 0.00 dollars to his charties, or promote or buy anything he endorses. If you keep poking a bees nest sooner or later you'll get stung.

If something doesn't hurt you personally, it's permissable?

You do understand how societies work, right? You have an insight into behaviours favoured or rejected by evolution, no? Even sociopathic animals are rejected by their herds. Ask Dr Attenborough.

Troll fed and full.

I guess I'm guilty of being more fond of cycling than Lance.

 

[Merckx index]

Not to defend the guy, but:

an excessive need for novel, thrilling, and exciting stimulation; taking chances and doing things that are risky.

The problem for me was the manner in which he raced, killing the race with boring tactics

So which is it? And would a risk taker really go to all that trouble to cover his doping tracks? The classic risk taker flaunts it, invites people to catch him out.

lack of behavioral control

Sounds like he would be unable to focus on a race for several hours, let along get up every day and train. Again, the cold and calculating LA seems missing from this analysis.

a variety of brief, superficial relations, numerous affairs, and an indiscriminate selection of sexual partners; the maintenance of several relationships at the same time; a history of attempts to sexually coerce others into sexual activity or taking great pride at discussing sexual exploits or conquests.

By this standard, a conservative estimate would be that half the men in America are at least borderline sociopaths.

 

[Stingray34]

Not to defend the guy, but:





So which is it? And would a risk taker really go to all that trouble to cover his doping tracks? The classic risk taker flaunts it, invites people to catch him out.



Sounds like he would be unable to focus on a race for several hours, let along get up every day and train. Again, the cold and calculating LA seems missing from this analysis.



By this standard, a conservative estimate would be that half the men in America are at least borderline sociopaths.

Two different writers, opinions and subjects. The two quotes you supplied aren't exactly contradictory, either. He took enormous risks in order to pulverise into submission? Excessive risk to ensure victory?

The zip lips gesture 2004 made it pretty explicit. Come get me. Too big to fall. You're right about that state of mind echoing around the USA, though. It's autistic AND careless. It invites conflict that is used as motivation.

2004 was his most dominant tour. Going after Simeoni was the carrot that kept things interesting.

 

[Granville57]

If you keep poking a bees nest sooner or later you'll get stung.

Is that a threat?

 

[Granville57]

i think the the physiological dimension (and i'm willing to concur that ferrari played a part) was secondary to the psychological calculation behind the comeback 2.0

in that sense texas was not delusional counting on crushing contador's will and self-confidence. after all, similar arrogant assaults in the past worked like a charm every time...

of course, as we've learned, it was the biggest mistake armstrong ever made - underestimating contador's will and willingness to fight back. he met his match...

to me, the way texas forced himself on the team with the existing structure, formed around the proven leader is and always will remain the ugliest episode in his career.

and i say this fully realizing there wre plenty of other ugly episodes - from chasing simeoni to abusing betsy to what not...

ferrari's reassurances were secondary to the unmeasurable arrogance and vanity of the immense ego this man always put ahead of everything else.

in a nut shell, this is the quintessential reason why i'm one of his most determined detractors.

I had to reignite this post because I just can't second it strongly enough.
LieStrong's behavior towards Contador so clearly demonstrates just how FOS LA really is.

Since we're discussing 2.0, two things always stood out to me in particular.

Exhibit A
The interview with Paul Sherwen prior to the TDU in 2009.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8iYXS-d23U&playnext=1&list=PL1496C30F1431FC43

Just after the 3:30 mark
Sherwen:
"If you’re in a situation in the Tour de France, and it’s a question of Alberto winning or you making him lose [interesting choice of words ]...You’ll do the right thing."
(Which, interestingly enough, comes across as more of a statement than a question)

LieStrong:
"Oh, you gotta do the right thing. If we roll up to Monte Carlo, July 4th, 2009, and he’s the strongest...I will be the Worlds Strongest Domestique, without a doubt."
(Emphasis his, btw)

As for another demonstration of 2.0 sociopathy...

Exhibit B
Lance publicly calls out one of his detractors from an email glitch.
The fun begins at the 1:50 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-nwp1qk1Lg

When this clip first came out, I was stunned by just how petty and vindictive LieStrong was. I simply couldn't fathom why a guy of his stature would, or could, be bothered to stoop to this level of schoolyard bickering while at the same time, not so subtly, turning his loyal followers into agents of his revenge. Gee, Lance, what's that guy's email again?

A better question might be: Why is this particular clip still even posted under the Livestong banner?

Much like D-Queued, this clip prompted me to attach a list of sociopathic traits when emailing it to others. You also have to love his feigned surprise as he reads through the emails. As if the agenda of calling this guy out wasn't the entire motivation behind posting the video in the first place.

So why is it still officially sanctioned by Livestrong?

 

[Stingray34]

So why is it still officially sanctioned by Livestrong?

A sense of proportion isn't one of LiveStrong's core brand values. Unlike, say, 'kill 'em all.'

 

[thehog]

Does that mean he doesn't wear condom's?

Not to defend the guy, but:





So which is it? And would a risk taker really go to all that trouble to cover his doping tracks? The classic risk taker flaunts it, invites people to catch him out.



Sounds like he would be unable to focus on a race for several hours, let along get up every day and train. Again, the cold and calculating LA seems missing from this analysis.



By this standard, a conservative estimate would be that half the men in America are at least borderline sociopaths.

 

[andy1234]

Armstrong is the ultimate evolution of the American dream. If all that counts is winning and wealth, then Armstrong is truly a product of the nation that produced him.

He may well be a sociopath based on the criteria the internet psychologists on here have shown, but those traits can be seen in most highly succesful individuals.

Outstanding achievment at the very highest level of any pursuit is probably a good indicator of unusual behavioral patterns. If it werent, everyone would be doing it....

 

[patricknd]

Armstrong is the ultimate evolution of the American dream. If all that counts is winning and wealth, then Armstrong is truly a product of the nation that produced him.

He may well be a sociopath based on the criteria the internet psychologists on here have shown, but those traits can be seen in most highly succesful individuals.

Outstanding achievment at the very highest level of any pursuit is probably a good indicator of unusual behavioral patterns. If it werent, everyone would be doing it....

The sex part was added by the guys that don't get laid much.

 

[Stingray34]

Yup, I second that.

Let's make Gunderson the inaugural winner of the Cyclingnews Forum's annual 'Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence' Award.

Cue the show girls, and screw on Dick Clark's head...

 

[Granville57]

Outstanding achievment at the very highest level of any pursuit is probably a good indicator of unusual behavioral patterns. If it werent, everyone would be doing it....

Doing...what? Achieving outstanding things?

Off the very top of my head, Wayne Gretzky comes to mind.
Unusual behavior need not be a prerequisite for reaching the highest level of anything.

Do the two sometimes go hand in hand? Absolutely. The people running Enron were completely sociopathic.

Should we accept it as simply being part of the landscape at "the top"?
No. There are countless examples on both sides of the fence.

Talent need not be wed to deranged behavior—which, by the way, is what we're talking about here. Not simply "unusual" behaviors but disturbing behavior.

Just as there are countless individuals with serious sociological and psychological problems that achieve nothing even approaching success, spinning it the other way around doesn't justify anything.

 

[Anonymous]

Stupid articles like this drive me crazy. This guy is typical moronic American sports writer who should stick to talking about NASCAR. What a dumb, xenophobic, apologist piece of sh!t article this fish-hack wrote:
http://www.newsday.com/news/with-bonds-done-should-armstrong-be-next-1.2822410

 

[Berzin]

Armstrong is the ultimate evolution of the American dream. If all that counts is winning and wealth, then Armstrong is truly a product of the nation that produced him.

This is true, with the key attributes being unrepentant arrogance and a monumental sense of glee at being "Number 1".

I don't know why Americans must be such sore winners, or why they delight in their heroes being that way, but it's a reason why Gunderson's downfall will be so much sweeter when the day finally comes.

 

[Granville57]

Stupid articles like this drive me crazy.

Me too.

We should be seeing several incarnations of this article as it gets passed around the various news rooms.
With Bonds done, should Armstrong be next?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hp5RAb8FEFZuuPw3zWekUXJn1fkw?docId=1ade958a84ad40d38b24bf3d43e389f2

 

[Topangarider]

One thing that Wonderboy consistently did was take huge risks. As more comes out about his actions over the last 20 years people will be shocked at the level of risk he was willing to take in all areas of life

I think it's wrong to assume rational and intelligent behavior from even the most intelligent and seemingly high functioning people. I am not a fan of trying to diagnose LA but there does seem to be some pattern of disturbing behavior. As for "smart" people doing really wreckless and dumb things two recent examples jump out at me - Tiger Woods and Elliot Spitzer. Spritzer was careless enough to get caught in wiretaps and wire transfers. Does anyone here think LA wouldn't be so careless as to meet with someone in an effort to influence a witness or get their story"straight"?

 

[Race Radio]

Armstrong is the ultimate evolution of the American dream. If all that counts is winning and wealth, then Armstrong is truly a product of the nation that produced him.

He may well be a sociopath based on the criteria the internet psychologists on here have shown, but those traits can be seen in most highly succesful individuals.

Outstanding achievment at the very highest level of any pursuit is probably a good indicator of unusual behavioral patterns. If it werent, everyone would be doing it....

Your version of the dream, not mine.

 

[Anonymous]

Me too.

Oops, sorry for the double.

 

[andy1234]

Your version of the dream, not mine.

Its not my version, but I'm glad to hear its not yours either.

 

[Berzin]

Your version of the dream, not mine.

Yes, it's not mine either but that's what it's morphed into unfortunately.

 

[D-Queued]

Armstrong is the ultimate evolution of the American dream. If all that counts is winning and wealth, then Armstrong is truly a product of the nation that produced him.

He may well be a sociopath based on the criteria the internet psychologists on here have shown, but those traits can be seen in most highly succesful individuals.

Outstanding achievment at the very highest level of any pursuit is probably a good indicator of unusual behavioral patterns. If it werent, everyone would be doing it....

Sharks in Suits?

Yes, they can be observed in corporate boardrooms. It is not atypical, though, that the sociopath ultimately creates a big enough reputation and damages relations with a wide enough circle that they ultimately become victims of their behavior.

wrt Gunderson (or anyone else), it isn't one or two traits that confirm the diagnosis, or a mild tendency. Rather, it is the exhibition of most of the traits with a strong, repetitive pattern.

Most of us would not impulsively antagonize an FDA investigator, repeatedly, on twitter. Even that action, however, must be accompanied by most of the other traits for the 'description' to be appropriate.

Dave.