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

[Granville57]

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.

For years we got a close up look at Liestrong's "winning ways" but 2.0 gave us a special treat: We got to see first hand what a truly bad loser he really is.

He couldn't accept defeat by two better riders than him at the 2009 TdF with any sort of sincere grace. 2010 was simply an amplification of that. His entire career, which was built around "winning" ended in the most unspectacular way possible.

It's easy to look good when one's on top, but true character is what shows through on the downside.

I'll reference Gretzky once again. (Obviously he's Canadian. I'm just making a point here)
In the final game of his career, with the New York Rangers, he arranged to have dozens of hockey sticks on hand so that he could rotate through each one throughout the game.

The reason behind this was so that he could present one to every single one of his teammates (and supporting staff) as a parting gift.: A stick used in the final game by the greatest player the sport had ever seen. It wasn't because of some enormous ego, as if to say, "Of course I'm so great and special, how could you NOT want one of these?"

It was an honest assessment of his own place in the history of the sport, and he wanted to gives something special to those around him.

The team didn't even make the post-season that year (1999). It was a regular season game with not much else to celebrate except for the fact that it would be the last time The Great One would put on a uniform.

Even though the Rangers lost that game, in overtime, Gretzky ended his career with grace and style in a way that most could only hope to do.

 

[Anonymous]

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....

Did you masturbate while writing that?

 

[Elagabalus]

Ok, getting some of this information into the 'right' thread:

3. NEED FOR STIMULATION or PRONENESS TO BOREDOM -- an excessive need for novel, thrilling, and exciting stimulation; taking chances and doing things that are risky. Sociopaths often have low self-discipline in carrying tasks through to completion because they get bored easily. They fail to work at the same job for any length of time, for example, or to finish tasks that they consider dull or routine.

Examples: ...kerosene tennis balls...return of hope...use of PEDs...

Also related to risky behavior is the lack of behavioral control

10. POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS -- expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper; acting hastily

Examples: ...VandeVelde, Landis, Simeoni, Betsy, Novitzky, Dick Pound, The French...

And, also related are:

11. PROMISCUOUS SEXUAL BEHAVIOR -- 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.

Examples: hello Donut Grease... hello Yellow Rose... hello Haven...

12. EARLY BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS -- a variety of behaviors prior to age 13, including lying, theft, cheating, vandalism, bullying, sexual activity, fire-setting, glue-sniffing, alcohol use, and running away from home.

Examples: Did I mention the kerosene, and lighting the roof on fire?

Bottom-line, why would we be surprised by his risk taking in all areas of his life? Hasn't he exhibited and even boasted about a long history of impulsive behavior that frequently strayed beyond ethical norms?

Dave.

Just thought I would chime in here. I think Type 3 ADD is probably a better fit than the sociopath label. Betsy, in one interview, even mentions that everyone who new Lance (in the early days) thought he had ADD. I think one of the reasons for Comeback 2.0 was to satisfy the itch he couldn't scratch. Just think all his latest troubles with the Feds could have been avoided he if would have just stayed retired and took some Ritalin.

 

[Anonymous]

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....

Fortunately, not everyone in the US has this shallow, meaningless pursuit of nothing of substance as their ideal. I am sure that there are many equally shallow individuals such as yourself who think that what he is should be emulated, but hopefully, you are a minority.

 

[TexPat]

http://www.sociopathicstyle.com/traits/classic.htm

Ex. driving 98mph in a Suburban the wrong way down a very busy highway in TX

 

[andy1234]

Fortunately, not everyone in the US has this shallow, meaningless pursuit of nothing of substance as their ideal. I am sure that there are many equally shallow individuals such as yourself who think that what he is should be emulated, but hopefully, you are a minority.

Jeez, you must be f***ing dim if you think I am condoning this mentality..

 

[Benotti69]

http://www.sociopathicstyle.com/traits/classic.htm

Ex. driving 98mph in a Suburban the wrong way down a very busy highway in TX

wow all 20 of them i see in Gunderson.

 

[Granville57]

Jeez, you must be f***ing dim if you think I am condoning this mentality..

That's really not fair to TeamSkyFans.

 

[thehog]

Jeez, you must be f***ing dim if you think I am condoning this mentality..

I think he got you there. The reverse Smelnakov.

 

[TexPat]

wow all 20 of them i see in Gunderson.

I've been looking at the list of traits with interest, and have numerous examples.
Perhaps I should change my signature.

 

[Anonymous]

Jeez, you must be f***ing dim if you think I am condoning this mentality..

Jeez, you must be f***ing dim if you don't see that you are.

 

[DirtyWorks]

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....

In my experience, Tailwind is full of crazies. It's not just Gunderson. Wiesel definitely deserves some crazy credit. The crazies seem to attract extra heat.

Careful not to generalize. There are lots of healthy people doing their job at the highest levels of their profession and comport themselves well.

 

[D-Queued]

I've been looking at the list of traits with interest, and have numerous examples.
Perhaps I should change my signature.

Assuming an iceberg-like analogy, what we have witnessed in public is only the faintest hint of the reality. That faint hint is blazingly bright.

When putting the original set of examples together (wherever that post is now...), there were many good examples right out of 'It's not about the bike'.

Please note that the site referenced is not necessarily the definitive test, nor is it necessarily the psychiatric reference. The DSM is the psychiatric reference of note. Other assessment techniques are provided in Wilipedia.

One way to apply this particular list, for example, is to rank each trait (0-2) on the basis of the extent of its presence. Then you can count up the total.

When it comes to this particular list, #2 always cracks me up:

2. GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH -- a grossly inflated view of one's abilities and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart. Sociopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human beings.

Examples: Are they really needed? This is one where he just seems to shine.

Might as well take it straight fom the horses mouth: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Lance_Armstrong

"I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles"

Hard to top that one for feelings of supiority. Or, there is the quote in my sig:

"I have done too many good things for too many people"

5. CONNING AND MANIPULATIVENESS- the use of deceit and deception to cheat, con, or defraud others for personal gain; distinguished from Item #4 in the degree to which exploitation and callous ruthlessness is present, as reflected in a lack of concern for the feelings and suffering of one's victims

Examples: "This f*cking jersey's mine"

6. LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT -- a lack of feelings or concern for the losses, pain, and suffering of victims; a tendency to be unconcerned, dispassionate, coldhearted, and unempathic. This item is usually demonstrated by a disdain for one's victims.

Examples: Though it might better fit under #5 (especially defrauding others for personal gain) how about making sure Contador had no way to get to the TT start by taking all the remaining vehicles?

And on, and on.

Dave.

 

[TexPat]

The statement "I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles" and the crucifix on the chain around the neck of an atheist are rather incongruous.

 

[Race Radio]

In my experience, Tailwind is full of crazies. It's not just Gunderson. Wiesel definitely deserves some crazy credit. The crazies seem to attract extra heat.

Careful not to generalize. There are lots of healthy people doing their job at the highest levels of their profession and comport themselves well.

Bingo. Wonderboy is far from the only one that will be exposed

 

[thehog]

http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/interview_floyd-landis-is-feeling-victimised-pat-mcquaid_1533220

But lots of big names are being dragged into the issue...UCI functioning is like that of a government, we don't have the strongest PR machinery. By dealing with doping, we are taking the battle head-on. At the same time, we are also trying to protect the clean athletes. In relation to icons associated with drugs, we have to work with it. A lot of it, also, has to do with how the scandals influence the perceptions of the media. Lance Armstrong has never tested positive. If there was a result that came to the UCI that happened to be positive, it would go to the lab. We can't hide the result. We work under strict regulations and laws, so if he is caught, we would have to accept it. Floyd Landis was caught, still he spent 2-4 years in denial. Four years later, he comes out to say "Sorry, I did it". We won't accept such athletes and would want to throw them out.

So why he came out so late and made so much noise…He has a tiff with UCI. He felt he was victimised and felt that several other athletes got away freely. The fact remains that he was caught and was dumped. I won't accept his stand. I am very pragmatic. There have been athletes who have doped and won and nothing happened. But then they were beating the system. The fact that he was caught cannot be denied. We don't select anyone, however big the names they may be.

 

[JPM London]

http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/interview_floyd-landis-is-feeling-victimised-pat-mcquaid_1533220

There have been athletes who have doped and won and nothing happened. But then they were beating the system.

Wow, did he actually admit that riders exist who have doped and got away with it? Good thing we know Lance never tests positive and that he likes his own story and credibility - anything else would be unbearable...

 

[MD FACG FACP]

Parallel

It's a beautiful story and it's a lie. Does this story remind you of anyone in the world of cycling.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7363068n&tag=related;photovideo

 

[Stingray34]

It's a beautiful story and it's a lie. Does this story remind you of anyone in the world of cycling.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7363068n&tag=related;photovideo

Gunderson & co read this guy's playbook. It's all there:

*Exaggerated stories of hardship to create inspirational myth
*Identifies with a compelling cause
*Intermingling of charity and figurehead's private business interests
*Hiding behind good works
*Creeping avarice
*Marketing and travel expenses compete for charity spend
*Marketing and travel expense excess
*Figurehead's speaking fees not committed to charity
*Emphasis on 'raising awareness' (verbatim)
*Contributors being mislead (.com vs .org)
*Figurehead uses charity as "private ATM"
*Media whorishness with obsiquious, kissarse hosts
*Passive aggressive avoidance when faced with probing questions

How does one contact the AIP with a lead? Anyone wanna open a sportsbook on when 60 Minutes will file a report on Gunderson? When it happens, AbFab can rightly say it's 'old news...remember that Mortenson guy.'

 

[thehog]

It's a beautiful story and it's a lie. Does this story remind you of anyone in the world of cycling.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7363068n&tag=related;photovideo

Facinating reading the comments below. They read like the Livestrong Army textbook. People just want to believe.

 

[D-Queued]

It's a beautiful story and it's a lie. Does this story remind you of anyone in the world of cycling.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7363068n&tag=related;photovideo

"He uses (his charity) as his personal ATM machine."

Sure, but where is his Gulfstream?

Dave.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Gunderson & co read this guy's playbook. It's all there:

*Marketing and travel expenses compete for charity spend
*Marketing and travel expense excess
*Figurehead's speaking fees not committed to charity
*Emphasis on 'raising awareness' (verbatim)
*Contributors being mislead (.com vs .org)
*Figurehead uses charity as "private ATM"

Yeah, but there's no proof of these claims. We know they've been independently rated pretty badly for the amount of fund raising that goes to their very non-specific cause. But that's it and that's not against the law.

In another post somewhere, Madonna hired Fabiani to manage her disaster of a non-profit along with the disclosure that the U.S. Taxman is investigating the her non-proft organization. Even if the Pharmstrong gets investigated in the same way, what's needed to get ahead of this part of the story is the boring paperwork that shows some of these claims.

 

[Benotti69]

Gunderson & co read

*Marketing and travel expense excess
*Figurehead's speaking fees not committed to charity
*Emphasis on 'raising awareness' (verbatim)
*Contributors being mislead (.com vs .org)

Yeah, but there's no proof of these claims. We know they've been independently rated pretty badly for the amount of fund raising that goes to their very non-specific cause. But that's it and that's not against the law.

i beg to differ. We know how much has been spent on a gulfstream jet which has been used to fly around the world.

Building a brand new state of the art HQ.

We also know how much was given to research, a minuscle amount compared to how much the 'awareness brand'* generates.

as for the .com vs .org. we only see the name of the 'awareness brand'* without the .org which is the site that makes money for the 'awareness brand'*. the .com makes money for Gunderson.

* i absolutely refuse to consider it a charity. It is a brand using cancer as a marketing tool.

I feel that it will become a cult before long as the media turn on it when the full facts about how Gunderson has used it as a slush fund and the Universities and other large institutions refuse to have anything to do with it/him.

 

[Oldman]

Yeah, but there's no proof of these claims. We know they've been independently rated pretty badly for the amount of fund raising that goes to their very non-specific cause. But that's it and that's not against the law.

In another post somewhere, Madonna hired Fabiani to manage her disaster of a non-profit along with the disclosure that the U.S. Taxman is investigating the her non-proft organization. Even if the Pharmstrong gets investigated in the same way, what's needed to get ahead of this part of the story is the boring paperwork that shows some of these claims.

People in the business of fund management have suggested the IRS is already involved. Accounting folks with audit exposure apparently felt uncomfortable with many things charity related. It will be a long and boring process but the IRS has time, resources and they don't go away.

 

[D-Queued]

i beg to differ. We know how much has been spent on a gulfstream jet which has been used to fly around the world.

Building a brand new state of the art HQ.

We also know how much was given to research, a minuscle amount compared to how much the 'awareness brand'* generates.

as for the .com vs .org. we only see the name of the 'awareness brand'* without the .org which is the site that makes money for the 'awareness brand'*. the .com makes money for Gunderson.

* i absolutely refuse to consider it a charity. It is a brand using cancer as a marketing tool.

I feel that it will become a cult before long as the media turn on it when the full facts about how Gunderson has used it as a slush fund and the Universities and other large institutions refuse to have anything to do with it/him.

Can I categorize these as we go?

As with the 'donations' to the UCI, all of the above fit:

5. CONNING AND MANIPULATIVENESS- the use of deceit and deception to cheat, con, or defraud others for personal gain; distinguished from Item #4 in the degree to which exploitation and callous ruthlessness is present, as reflected in a lack of concern for the feelings and suffering of one's victims.

...with added notariety if one's victims are already suffer from cancer. Or, is that 6. LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT?

Dave.