Question about anti-armstrong fanboys

[pmcg76]

Looks like I worded this a bit wrong . Sorry, I'm not an English major or anything close to it, but I appreciate the responses and pmcg's in particular. I am aware of Armstrong's obvious douche-baggery now, but wasn't sure if he acted like that throughout his whole career. That question has been answered, so thank you.

TFF, care to explain the harsh attitude towards me and and all other people that seem to disagree? It's one thing to argue, but the holier-than-thou attitude that apparently comes with 3,000+ posts is another.

My advice on TFF would be, take him with a pinch of salt. He is very knowledgable but can be very venomous so best to avoid arguments, especially if you are a L fanboy which I think he thought you were. Can be very funny when he gets into the flaming though.

 

[Moondance]

This thread is so confusing, I can hardly comprehend who is a Lance hater and who is a Lance lover.

I myself still like him him, actually, although he never was my favorite.

 

[180mmCrank]

This thread is so confusing, I can hardly comprehend who is a Lance hater and who is a Lance lover.
I myself still like him him, actually, although he never was my favorite.

A bit like real life then Most of us neither hate nor love the guy.

As has been said here already - there are a number of his achievements it's hard not to have some respect for - (recovering from Cancer, being World Champion and winning the TdF 7 times) - and at the same time he is clearly a self centered guy with a gi-normous ego who has done some pretty dodgie things too.

I don't particularly like the guy - and I like many of us I don't really know the guy either - he just doesn't seem very likeable. There are many examples in cycling and other sports of athletes that are succesful but not particularly likeable. The thing about becomming successful is it draws attention, magnifies things and people form opinions ... generally it becomes too easy to polarize as good guy/bad guy - in my experience the reality is more complex.

On balance I think he has been good for the sport - for no other reason than he has raised it's profile over the last decade - and yes that raised profile has come at a price - it has changed the sport - just my opinion.

The really big issues in the sport are not to with Lance they are more to do with the infighting and politics in the aministration of the sport - but that's another thread.

 

[Ripper]

A bit like real life then Most of us neither hate nor love the guy.

As has been said here already - there are a number of his achievements it's hard not to have some respect for - (recovering from Cancer, being World Champion and winning the TdF 7 times) - and at the same time he is clearly a self centered guy with a gi-normous ego who has done some pretty dodgie things too.

I don't particularly like the guy - and I like many of us I don't really know the guy either - he just doesn't seem very likeable. There are many examples in cycling and other sports of athletes that are succesful but not particularly likeable. The thing about becomming successful is it draws attention, magnifies things and people form opinions ... generally it becomes too easy to polarize as good guy/bad guy - in my experience the reality is more complex.

On balance I think he has been good for the sport - for no other reason than he has raised it's profile over the last decade - and yes that raised profile has come at a price - it has changed the sport - just my opinion.

The really big issues in the sport are not to with Lance they are more to do with the infighting and politics in the aministration of the sport - but that's another thread.

Enjoying the rain today 180?

I'd have to agree with much of what you said. It is interesting that Armstrong tends to result in a fair number of polarized opinions compared to some other riders, therein the 'lovers and the haters'

He does have that annoying twitterish habit though! I know, I know, he is not the only one. I just had to add this because I just hate most of Twittering

 

[180mmCrank]

Enjoying the rain today 180?

Are you local?

I have been at a kids pumpkin patch all morning getting soaked - but the sun has just come out here on the North Shore - blue sky - I may even get out for a ride this afternoon!

 

[Ripper]

Are you local?

I have been at a kids pumpkin patch all morning getting soaked - but the sun has just come out here on the North Shore - blue sky - I may even get out for a ride this afternoon!

Yes ... and I see the sun has just come out!

Pumpkins

 

[180mmCrank]

Ahhh - Beautiful British Columbia - the best place on Earth*

*If you don't mind rain!

 

[Anonymous]

Ahhh - Beautiful British Columbia - the best place on Earth*



*If you don't mind rain!

Honestly, it is one of the most beautiful places I have ever seen. Simply stunning beauty on Vancouver Island and southern BC. From the pictures I have seen of the rest, I think its worth the rain thing. I still want to drive to Alaska from Seattle one day.

That, and the single best Vegetarian meal I have ever eaten was in Victoria. (not Vegetarian, just like to eat it sometimes)

 

[CentralCaliBike]

A bit like real life then Most of us neither hate nor love the guy.

As has been said here already - there are a number of his achievements it's hard not to have some respect for - (recovering from Cancer, being World Champion and winning the TdF 7 times) - and at the same time he is clearly a self centered guy with a gi-normous ego who has done some pretty dodgie things too.

I don't particularly like the guy - and I like many of us I don't really know the guy either - he just doesn't seem very likeable. There are many examples in cycling and other sports of athletes that are succesful but not particularly likeable. The thing about becomming successful is it draws attention, magnifies things and people form opinions ... generally it becomes too easy to polarize as good guy/bad guy - in my experience the reality is more complex.

On balance I think he has been good for the sport - for no other reason than he has raised it's profile over the last decade - and yes that raised profile has come at a price - it has changed the sport - just my opinion.

The really big issues in the sport are not to with Lance they are more to do with the infighting and politics in the aministration of the sport - but that's another thread.

I really have no argument with anything stated above - cannot give a "+1" but it comes pretty close to how I feel in general about pro athletes in general, and LA (not sure about thinking he would be particularly unlikeable to a person not directly competing with him who knew him from a personal standpoint).

 

[Anonymous]

Looks like I worded this a bit wrong . Sorry, I'm not an English major or anything close to it, but I appreciate the responses and pmcg's in particular. I am aware of Armstrong's obvious douche-baggery now, but wasn't sure if he acted like that throughout his whole career. That question has been answered, so thank you.

TFF, care to explain the harsh attitude towards me and and all other people that seem to disagree? It's one thing to argue, but the holier-than-thou attitude that apparently comes with 3,000+ posts is another.

Okay, maybe I should have paid better attention.

It was honestly solely based on the thread title. It read like one made by a fan of The Uniballer. If I read it wrong, and your intention was not to be insulting, the I offer my sincere apologizes. I have a hair trigger, and sometimes I judge too quickly and fire off the flame thrower a bit too easily.

 

[richwagmn]

Why I dislike Armstrong...

- His treatment of Contador.
- His lies about EPO use.
- Dumping his first wife when she was no longer useful to him.
- His savaging of anyone who dare to get in his way (see Betsy Andreau).

I could go on...

 

[ridelikethewind]

Okay, maybe I should have paid better attention.

It was honestly solely based on the thread title. It read like one made by a fan of The Uniballer. If I read it wrong, and your intention was not to be insulting, the I offer my sincere apologizes. I have a hair trigger, and sometimes I judge too quickly and fire off the flame thrower a bit too easily.

Doh s***for......, you shouldn't appologise for misinterpreting a misleading thread title. Nor should other people appologise or attempt to explain posts on your behalf.

 

[cavfan11]

Okay, maybe I should have paid better attention.

It was honestly solely based on the thread title. It read like one made by a fan of The Uniballer. If I read it wrong, and your intention was not to be insulting, the I offer my sincere apologizes. I have a hair trigger, and sometimes I judge too quickly and fire off the flame thrower a bit too easily.

My intention was not to be insulting by any means. No worries though, I can appreciate your humor when it's not directed at me

 

[CentralCaliBike]

While it is good to see you articulate your views you are very wrong to try and suggest the "h8rz" have a "crypto-fascist hard-on" just for Lance.

There is a new thread on Jan Ullrich in the Clinic, many posters there are the exact same Lance "h8rz".... could it be they don't like the frauds of the sport not the personalities??

No-one has stepped in to defend Jan. No-one has pointed out that he never failed a PED test (his sole discretion was for ecstasy while out with an injury), and that no evidence has been presented nor have the Swiss who hold his licence opened an investigation. No-one has called in to question the chain of custody surrounding his alleged blood-bag. No-one has said how Jan only went to Dr. Fuentes because he was overweight.

If you have "personal admiration" for frauds and cheats why is it you have never rushed to protect the names of Basso, Ulrich, Riis, Menchov, Contador etc when they get named in the clinic and out the "h8rz'?

Certainly the group has paid attention to Jan Ulrich and made fun of him on the thread you mention - and I have not seen Jan fans out in mass to defend him, but the animosity is not there as it is with LA. If you actually look at the Jan thread what you see is not really much directed at Jan - the thread and Jan's activities are used as a parody to poke fun at LA and those who defend him.

 

[derailleur]

Its a hook with a worm on it.

So you openly admit you are trolling.

 

[Anonymous]

So you openly admit you are trolling.

You're a swift one Junior...uh, yea, I was trolling you. Hey, I'll bet you figured out the girl in "The Crying Game" was a man right about the time it showed his package.

 

[krebs303]

Doh s***for......, you shouldn't appologise for misinterpreting a misleading thread title. Nor should other people appologise or attempt to explain posts on your behalf.

Good God give him a break he has to explain his jokes

 

[derailleur]

Your idea is that we sweep everything under the carpet from his past and focus on the present. Well his behaviour this year at the Tour was enought to not like him either.

What about the Giro? Or his trip to the Bahamas? He had dinner at Uchi the other night. Did he do anything there you could add to your file? Clams are essentially alive when served as sushi. He murdered them with his teeth! Des assassins!

And once again, do you consider what he done to Simeoni or Bassons as incorrect behaviour and if naybody else has done anything similar in a cycling context.

I consider it the distant past. No worse than what Garmin did to Hincapie this year. The legal actions involved were inconclusive. Simeoni dropped his case; why do that if it had merit? You'd have harangued him in the peloton if he'd done that to you, too. Bassons was being harangued by everyone, especially his own teammates; singling out Armstrong is ignoring the cultural aspects of the problem.

Lance publicizes his test as part of a PR campaign to suggest he is the most tested athlete in the world. Not necessarily true but thats part of the problem, the PR BS.

Not necessarily false, either. He's certainly among the most tested athletes in the world. But the continuing stream of negative results doesn't seem to stem the tide of claims that he's still doping from people who have made up their minds not to like him.

There was genuine optimism the sport might change post 99, most of the French teams cleaned up for example. At the start of the season, a pro Jean Cyril Robin stated that he believed a small proportion of the peloton were still doping. It wasnt clean but had gotten a lot better.

Again, this optimism/disappointment oscillation has been going on for a century. The sport can not be cleaned-up from the peloton. It has to be cleaned-up from the top down.

Finally, its human nature to want to see the biggest gangster get their justs, the guy who has got away with it even though we know they cheated and benefited more than other gangsters.

It's also human nature to protect yourself when everyone around you is fostering a culture of duplicity that threatens your success, and when people inside and outside the sport are making accusations without proof.

When the system is capable of obtaining the proof, instead of making only circumstantial cases, you'll get your gangster. Until then, you're the gangster for wanting him punished without due process. That's a bigger threat to your own rights than his alleged crimes ever were.

For the rest, see Dr.Maserats post.

If people are making accusations against Ullrich without proof, I'll defend him too.

 

[Anonymous]

A few Lance fanboys have been on the thread to shout about the haters as usual, blah, blah, blah. What you may also have noticed is that they never once addressed the issues I made in my original post. This is a very common trait in Lance fanboys, they either brush over or regard as irrelevant the issues we find offensive.

Throw the Simeoni incident at them and they will blow it off as a minor disagreemet whilst to many cycling fans...

See the funny side here?

As I said in my second post in this thread, both the haters AND the fanboys IGNORE certain issues equally. You single out the fanboys as the one's who don't make rational decision, but the haters do this too. Everyone chooses to ignore things that they personally think are irrelevant..

For example, the fanboys will ignore the Simeoni incident = TRUE

For example, the haters will ignore the fact (one of many I posted that was ignored) that LA has never served a doping suspension = TRUE

Nobody actually addresses this issue, do they?

I hope that the OP can see that, as I've said many times, the fanboys and the haters all talk sh-it. We all ignore facts, we all have our reasons for doing this. neither a hater or a fanboy is worse than the other, becoz personal opinion is sacred to the individual.

Yes fanboys talk "blah blah blah" as you said, which is ironic, becoz the haters also talk "blah blah blah"... can't you see both sides are the same? all human beings are the same.. we have positive and negative traits. A fanboy is no better or no more enlightened than a hater. They are like two different races with two different beliefs, both equally flawed in their individual analysis..

LA haters vs LA fanboys, at least in this niche forum world, is a debate that will go on for a long time, and neither side will ever be proven to be wrong or right. Both sides of the story have valid arguments, which I personally respect, which is why I don't call myself a fanboy whenever I make LA comments. Yes, I am a fan, but I am also a fan of EVERY cyclist - and i've repeatedly said this. To me, this says I am not a crazy fanboy as people suggest, just a good old fashioned fan who likes to defend people (and accept the flaws in BOTH sides of an argument)

 

[Ferminal]

Well you often get this in sports. I used to follow quite a lot of Formula 1 (and still do) and there was the same attitude towards Michael Schumacher. People who saw themselves as part of the 'in crowd' were very cynical about him and saw him as too commercially popular and hated all the hype. On top of that the likes of Armstrong and Schumacher are strong characters that are very good at getting people around them to work for their cause, and have made many enemies along the way. Put these things together and it creates quite a strong hatred against them.

Wrong, no one hates Tiger or Federer, search my post history for the explanation.

 

[BroDeal]

LA haters vs LA fanboys, at least in this niche forum world, is a debate that will go on for a long time, and neither side will ever be proven to be wrong or right.

Wrong. This is not a debate about whether vanilla is a better flavor than chocolate. This attempt to equate two sides as being nothing a but a difference in opinion smacks of the namby pamby panty waists in America who never want anyone's feelings hurt. One argument is just as good as another, and we should all pretend that there are no answers, only opinions that never have more validity than another opinion.

There is right and wrong. There is truth. The truth is that Armstrong doped. He used EPO. That has been proved by retrospectively testing of urine samples. Those who don't accept it are the naive, the intentionally ignorant, and the stupid who refuse to face reality, much like the pathetic losers who cling to the belief that O.J. is innocent.

 

[Hugh Januss]

See the funny side here?

As I said in my second post in this thread, both the haters AND the fanboys IGNORE certain issues equally. You single out the fanboys as the one's who don't make rational decision, but the haters do this too. Everyone chooses to ignore things that they personally think are irrelevant..

For example, the fanboys will ignore the Simeoni incident = TRUE

For example, the haters will ignore the fact (one of many I posted that was ignored) that LA has never served a doping suspension = TRUE

Nobody actually addresses this issue, do they?



Yes fanboys talk "blah blah blah" as you said, which is ironic, becoz the haters also talk "blah blah blah"... can't you see both sides are the same?

I feel like my IQ dropped 20 points just reading this slop.
No one has ever ignored the fact that Armstrong has never served a doping suspension you putz. In fact it has been explained many times why he has never done. Think back a little if you can and see if any of this rings a bell.
1. Post dated TUE for failed cortizone test which he paid $500,000 for.
2. Insufficient quantity of sample for B test of six EPO positives from 1999.
3. If somebody does turn up unannounced for out of comp test he makes them wait while he "takes a shower".
4. If the testers show up at an inconvenient time for morning blood tests they get to have coffee while the riders "prepare" for the test.
5. I could go on but by now I'm sure you have your hands over your ears and you are repeating over and over "it's not true, no it's not true".

So OK now come up with another "fact" that "we ignore". Oh, but to make it harder it can't have anything to do with weight loss or different training method or supersized heart because we have shot those down already too.

Awaiting your reply.

 

[Ferminal]

For example, the haters will ignore the fact (one of many I posted that was ignored) that LA has never served a doping suspension = TRUE

Such an irrelevant argument when lots of people these days get doping suspensions just for seeing reputable Doctors. Whereas some people with say, seven positive drug tests don't get doping suspensions.

I don't think doping is the entire reason for the contempt towards Armstrong. If that was the sole reason, which pro cyclists would we like. People have been cheering for Vino since his return, Basso has generally had a positive reception. Contador doesn't exactly have a big negative following.

The bigger cause of angst is Armstrong's deception and pursuing active denial (which usually involves persecuting an individual) related to doping, not the fact that he has/does use PEDs.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I could stand him if he wasn't a drug cheat but he is. his other annoying traits are just add to the hate. i'm annoyed that he has got away with it so many times. I use to be a bit of a LA fan boy but the more you learn the more you realise that he is nothing more than a cheat.

 

[sappie]

My main gripe about Armstrong (and I have a few) is not so much that he may (probably) have been a doper, but that he was such a dedicated enforcer of the omerta.

Though I generally hold dopers in low esteem, I can understand why a doper dopes -- the constant pressure to win, or even to stay on a team, etc. So if Armstrong probably cheated, that in itself would not be so utterly disgusting -- he would be one of countless others. But the total hypocrisy of it all is hard to swallow.

The most blatant examples include, as you all know, his treatment of Christophe Bassons and Filippo Simeoni. You have to be a total a**hole to do that.