Response to Lance threads...My Opinion...Where is Pro Cycling headed?

Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
jackhammer111 said:
if you condemn lance for this you pretty much have to condemn they whole group, you own favorites as well.
Fair enough points made on Lance by Jackhammer. I should not condemn Lance for having doped based on the above point. He did work and train very very hard. But its obvious Ferrari was a better doctor and Lance was also a super responder to drug therapy. Being a super responder not only gives him more sustainable power but it allows him to recover faster and train more often. A clean 81.2 V02 max is that of a "mule" sitting in 60th place on G.C. 6 bottles stuffed up his jersey. These are simple facts. Not all the teams after 2001-2009 could blood dope with their own blood to escape the epo test and this also favored Lance's very rich Postal/ Disco/ Astana teams heavily. If everybody was clean and doping didnt exist Lance wouldnt be in the top 30 for sure and he might not make the top 50. If he did the Tour clean this year he likely would not be able to finish.

Personally, the fact that lance has lied on TV repetitively in the context he has placed himself in sickens me. I shouldnt care that he dopes...and he can even lie about it to some degree. But going off and using sick people as his marketing production is terrible. And then personally telling them that they need to just work hard on sheer willpower and "hope" like he did, their cancer will magically go away is discusting.

So where is Cycling going now? I'd like to see different teams win the big races (besides Lance.) And "I dont give a flying F" as Jeanson would have said; that they dope! ha ha. And I'd like to see Fujii, Saxo Bank, domestic teams like OCH talked about more often...Less negativity on "lance" and more cycling talk. Less "ishyness" and more positivity is what I and everybody needs.


Cheers. :)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BigBoat said:
Fair enough points made on Lance by Jackhammer. I should not condemn Lance for having doped based on the above point. He did work and train very very hard. But its obvious Ferrari was a better doctor and Lance was also a super responder to drug therapy. Being a super responder not only gives him more sustainable power but it allows him to recover faster and train more often. A clean 81.2 V02 max is that of a "mule" sitting in 60th place on G.C. 6 bottles stuffed up his jersey. These are simple facts. Not all the teams after 2001-2009 could blood dope with their own blood to escape the epo test and this also favored Lance's very rich Postal/ Disco/ Astana teams heavily. If everybody was clean and doping didnt exist Lance wouldnt be in the top 30 for sure and he might not make the top 50. If he did the Tour clean this year he likely would not be able to finish.

Personally, the fact that lance has lied on TV repetitively in the context he has placed himself in sickens me. I shouldnt care that he dopes...and he can even lie about it to some degree. But going off and using sick people as his marketing production is terrible. And then personally telling them that they need to just work hard on sheer willpower and "hope" like he did, their cancer will magically go away is discusting.

Cheers. :)
I can accept your opinion as your own until it gets the this spot.

This is a gross misrepresentation of how Lance approached his own cancer, not an opionion about it. He did a lot of his own research into treatments and was active in choosing what to. He knows it was the medicines and surgery that saved his life, not willpower and hope and to say otherwise is ... disgusting.

His foundation promotes scientific research into cures.

You are entitled to you own opinions.

You are not entitled to your own facts.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
jackhammer111 said:
I can accept your opinion as your own until it gets the this spot.

This is a gross misrepresentation of how Lance approached his own cancer, not an opionion about it. He did a lot of his own research into treatments and was active in choosing what to. He knows it was the medicines and surgery that saved his life, not willpower and hope and to say otherwise is ... disgusting.

His foundation promotes scientific research into cures.

You are entitled to you own opinions.

You are not entitled to your own facts.
K.

I heard from a very accurate source that Lance was saying differently in person to people on their death beds. Okay. I do not like how has used it as his marketing, and I find it tough how anyone can forgive him for that.

But... I will say Lance's foundation has helped people... But I just cannot stand him cashing in on something most people will never ever win from...and yet somehow he tries to relate to these people. I dont believe sneaker advertisements belong in the same genre as this. Lance no doubt worked hard but its just wrong. :(
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
jackhammer111 said:
I can accept your opinion as your own until it gets the this spot.

This is a gross misrepresentation of how Lance approached his own cancer, not an opionion about it. He did a lot of his own research into treatments and was active in choosing what to. He knows it was the medicines and surgery that saved his life, not willpower and hope and to say otherwise is ... disgusting.

His foundation promotes scientific research into cures.

You are entitled to you own opinions.

You are not entitled to your own facts.
Did you read "Its not about the bike?" Either your reading comprehension skills are woefully inadequate, or you are blinded by your hatred of anyone that doesn't believe Armstrong is the savior of cancer patients everywhere.

Personally, I understand that were Livestrong.whatever not in existence, there would still be substantial contribution to cancer research and help for individuals with the disease. In fact, I would suggest that it is very likely that the money would be much better placed and used if it were funneled to other organizations that have been in existence much longer and are a much better resource. Lets face it, Lance didn't discover cancer, nor did he discover cancer charities. Yes yes, I know, your cousin's. brother's, aunt's, boyfriend's, mother's life was enhanced by her contact with Livestrong. We know the story. I would suggest however that were Livestrong not in existence, there would have been another organization there to fill that place. How do I know? I was working with children with cancer before Lance was diagnosed. There were and still are plenty of organizations in place that will help people with the disease. (yes I also know that cancer is a catch all term, and that there are thousands of diseases classified as "cancer")

Sorry, I believe Lance is more about Lance than anything. Funny, the largest single donation I ever saw for cancer was from a anonymous donor. In fact, the greatest percentage of money given to the organization for whom I worked were anonymous donations. I guess some people just do good things because they are good things to do. Some people however need to sell lots of yellow things and give a small percentage of the profit so that they are seen as paragons of virtue.
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
BigBoat said:
K.

I heard from a very accurate source that Lance was saying differently in person to people on their death beds. Okay. I do not like how has used it as his marketing, and I find it tough how anyone can forgive him for that.

But... I will say Lance's foundation has helped people... But I just cannot stand him cashing in on something most people will never ever win from...and yet somehow he tries to relate to these people. I dont believe sneaker advertisements belong in the same genre as this. Lance no doubt worked hard but its just wrong. :(
Why is it that everyone has 'a source' or from 'someone that knew someone' Big boat you are a bit of a sick puppy, I can't remember how much Livestrong generated (and if you have a look in that draw somewhere you've still got your yellow band) what was it $100m and I think that if anyone has benefited from his cancer and his foundation then step away from that subject as I think to criticise him for that is just way below the belt.

Just to add I am not a fanboy just ****ed off with the vitriol !!
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
Thoughtforfood said:
Did you read "Its not about the bike?" Either your reading comprehension skills are woefully inadequate, or you are blinded by your hatred of anyone that doesn't believe Armstrong is the savior of cancer patients everywhere.

Personally, I understand that were Livestrong.whatever not in existence, there would still be substantial contribution to cancer research and help for individuals with the disease. In fact, I would suggest that it is very likely that the money would be much better placed and used if it were funneled to other organizations that have been in existence much longer and are a much better resource. Lets face it, Lance didn't discover cancer, nor did he discover cancer charities. Yes yes, I know, your cousin's. brother's, aunt's, boyfriend's, mother's life was enhanced by her contact with Livestrong. We know the story. I would suggest however that were Livestrong not in existence, there would have been another organization there to fill that place. How do I know? I was working with children with cancer before Lance was diagnosed. There were and still are plenty of organizations in place that will help people with the disease. (yes I also know that cancer is a catch all term, and that there are thousands of diseases classified as "cancer")

Sorry, I believe Lance is more about Lance than anything. Funny, the largest single donation I ever saw for cancer was from a anonymous donor. In fact, the greatest percentage of money given to the organization for whom I worked were anonymous donations. I guess some people just do good things because they are good things to do. Some people however need to sell lots of yellow things and give a small percentage of the profit so that they are seen as paragons of virtue.

Genuinely guys back off from the cancer side of this however entwined this is with LA but don't knock the cancer it is in really bad taste !!!!!!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
neil69cyclist said:
Genuinely guys back off from the cancer side of this however entwined this is with LA but don't knock the cancer it is in really bad taste !!!!!!!!
Um, no.

Sounds like we have a jackhammer sock puppet here.
 
neil69cyclist said:
Genuinely guys back off from the cancer side of this however entwined this is with LA but don't knock the cancer it is in really bad taste !!!!!!!!
All you guys hating on Armstrong are cancer lovers. Pointing out that Armstrong is using his cancer charity to enrich himself by building a commercial brand of the same name and deliberately confusing the public about which is which should not be discussed. Think of the children. You probably hate America too.
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
BroDeal said:
All you guys hating on Armstrong are cancer lovers. Pointing out that Armstrong is using his cancer charity to enrich himself by building a commercial brand of the same name and deliberately confusing the public about which is which should not be discussed. Think of the children. You probably hate America too.
Hey how many 'famous' people have charities in their names, I have worked in the charity sector and to have a brand to generate the income that Livestrong generates would be the envy of many a charity and I can tell you for a fact that this generated money from sources that would not normally contribute.

I am not saying that anyone is a cancer lover of course but don't knock someone for that part of his life because no matter you feelings he went through it and it is a horrendous disease, speak to Geoff Thomas
 
neil69cyclist said:
Hey how many 'famous' people have charities in their names, I have worked in the charity sector and to have a brand to generate the income that Livestrong generates would be the envy of many a charity and I can tell you for a fact that this generated money from sources that would not normally contribute.
How many have taken their charity and turned it into a money making venture? You would have to be a heartless SOB to do something as despicable as that.
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
BroDeal said:
How many have taken their charity and turned it into a money making venture? You would have to be a heartless SOB to something as despicable as that.
Every charity is a money making venture or it would be pointless, do you know how much money goes to a charity from Chuggers, I'll grab the report and accounts from a few big charities and that may well open your eyes to the amount of money that is given to the cause from the P&L.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BroDeal said:
All you guys hating on Armstrong are cancer lovers. Pointing out that Armstrong is using his cancer charity to enrich himself by building a commercial brand of the same name and deliberately confusing the public about which is which should not be discussed. Think of the children. You probably hate America too.
so now you're back to the laughable notion that livestrong.com is some kind of empire.

What is it they sell? Advertisments for a sports drinks and 45 dollar a year subscriptions that aren't even prominently placed on the site? He doesn't even own the site.

There's a lot of good free information on that site. I think everyone should go there. :D
 
jackhammer111 said:
so now you're back to the laughable notion that livestrong.com is some kind of empire.
Gee, smart guy, I must have imagined all the Livestrong clothing for sale by Nike. I also must have imagined that there is a for profit Livestrong company in addition to a non-profit organization and Armstrong deliberately blurs the distinction between the two.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
neil69cyclist said:
Genuinely guys back off from the cancer side of this however entwined this is with LA but don't knock the cancer it is in really bad taste !!!!!!!!
Neil I'm not knocking anyone except Lance...It just sickens me that Lance uses them. His Tour wins were not done cleanly (to say the absolute least) and thats fine...But to then use these people as an example of how he won (by learning to fight harder on sheer power of will) is a complete load of BS and its disrespectful to them whether they know it or not. And... it makes me want to vomit thinking of it.

(and if you have a look in that draw somewhere you've still got your yellow band)
For a long time I was a fan of Lance...true. Your not bro a fan of his you say, neither am I. We have our differences but I find it repulsive what Lance is doing here. He's laughing all the way to the bank, and he charges hundreds of thousands a pop for his speaking engagements alone... Lance has grown absolutely nauseating and repugnant to me. It was his time to leave not to come back and use "cancer" as a shield for any criticism which is revolting in its own right.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BroDeal said:
Gee, smart guy, I must have imagined all the Livestrong clothing for sale by Nike. I also must have imagined that there is a for profit Livestrong company in addition to a non-profit organization and Armstrong deliberately blurs the distinction between the two.
Absolutely 100% of Nike's profits from the entire LIVESTRONG Collection go to the Lance Armstrong Foundation.
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
BigBoat said:
Neil I'm not knocking anyone except Lance...It just sickens me that Lance uses them. His Tour wins were not done cleanly (to say the absolute least) and thats fine...But to then use these people as an example of how he won (by learning to fight harder on sheer power of will) is a complete load of BS and its disrespectful to them whether they know it or not. And... it makes me want to vomit thinking of it.



For a long time I was a fan of Lance...true. Your not bro a fan of his you say, neither am I. We have our differences but I find it repulsive what Lance is doing here. He's laughing all the way to the bank, and he charges hundreds of thousands a pop for his speaking engagements alone... Lance has grown absolutely nauseating and repugnant to me. It was his time to leave not to come back and use "cancer" as a shield for any criticism which is revolting in its own right.
That is some deep seated hatred, I think you are seeing more in this than is really there.

Don't jump on the hater bandwagon, if it's a dirty peloton then they should all be the focus of your vitriol Armstrong had cancer fact he recovered and has generated $m's for charity (yes and himself) but so did Anita Roddick who bought stuff incredibly cheaply from 3rd world countries and built a commercial empire worth probably more than LA.
 
jackhammer111 said:
Absolutely 100% of Nike's profits from the entire LIVESTRONG Collection go to the Lance Armstrong Foundation.
Provide a link.

Using Hollywood-style accounting it is easy to skim money off of anything.

Gotta love this gem:

"the LIVESTRONG™ Challenge events, which are as much about community building as they are fund-raising events. They raised about $10m in 2006. But one company alone - Event 360 - took home a whopping $4.7m over the course of the year for event management services;"
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
BroDeal said:
Provide a link.

Using Hollywood-style accounting it is easy to skim money off of anything.

Gotta love this gem:

"the LIVESTRONG™ Challenge events, which are as much about community building as they are fund-raising events. They raised about $10m in 2006. But one company alone - Event 360 - took home a whopping $4.7m over the course of the year for event management services;"
As per usual, you've got things *** over tit. When you accuse Lance of ripping off people who donate to the fight against cancer, it is incumbent on you to prove that accusation or shut the **** up. It is not incumbent on someone who does not believe you to prove that he is not.
 
And now for a serious post: I'd like to take the time to pimp for a very worthy cause, Parkinson's disease. This one in the name of the most winning American cyclist ever, and one who isn't living a lavish, jet-set lifestyle, or hobnobbing with the rich and famous, or dating pop stars, and is still afflicted by this horrific ailment. Please donate to this worthy cause if you can:

Davis Phinney Foundation.
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
BroDeal said:
Provide a link.

Using Hollywood-style accounting it is easy to skim money off of anything.

Gotta love this gem:

"the LIVESTRONG™ Challenge events, which are as much about community building as they are fund-raising events. They raised about $10m in 2006. But one company alone - Event 360 - took home a whopping $4.7m over the course of the year for event management services;"
Bro,

The London to Brighton costs about £500k to run and generates about £1.5, most charities will make about 10-12% 'profit' on events they make their main money on direct donations.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
jackhammer111 said:
Absolutely 100% of Nike's profits from the entire LIVESTRONG Collection go to the Lance Armstrong Foundation.
Bullsh!t: http://store.nike.com/index.jsp?cp=USNS_KW_0611081618&country=US&lang_locale=en_US#l=shop,search,searchList-livestrong&ef_id=1778:3:s_d2cad1fe4b3faae0a760d0803ada1221_3113315072:yimsXENIYWUAAAsSUeEAAAAP:20090626211153

Show me where 100% of the profit from those $108 shoes with the yellow soles goes to charity.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1817781,00.asp

Here it is $50 from the profit......which is maybe 5-10% if that much. That little piece of cancer helper started at $999

You guys are so misinformed it would be laughable. You make sh!t up and pass it off like you know what you are talking about. What a bunch of tools.

So like I said, you don't like Mr Armstrong being referred to as the "cancer" of cycling, fine; Lance Armstrong is the venereal disease of cycling and the cancer community. Every time I see a yellow anything with that logo, I want to throw up.

Here, show me where on this site it tells the percentage: http://store-laf.org/

You just type sh!t and hope it sticks. Unfortunately for you, there are people who actually know what they are talking about. Dang, sucks to be so wrong so often, huh?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Where is Pro cycling headed......

Just to bring it back to the original question (sorry!).

To the general public cycling will continue to be associated with doping. However the UCI and other stakeholders will point to the bio-passport as the way forward.
There is a concerted effort on those stakeholders -UCI, race organisers, sponsors - to avoid any positives during the Tour from any big name star.
No Boonen or Valverde, thank you very much - this is to be a clean Tour.

I actually joined this forum to see the views of others regarding the 5 names that came out of the bio-passport, and I believe most shared my dismay at the first victims. Most of the posters here would see it as a disapointment - and we are left with a genuine question as to whether the 'fight against doping' has been curtailed.

The return of Lance has generated massive publicity - even my Mum knows HE is back!

Last year the only question I got was "Will this Tour be clean?"
This year its "What do I think of Armstrongs return?", "will he win?" and then finally "Do I think it will be a clean Tour?"

If the Tour can make it without a big doping scandal - a small minnow can be caught to show the 'new' testing works- then it could restore confidence in the general public and ultimatley big sponsors to invest in the sport.

However - I for one do not welcome this new direction.
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Where is Pro cycling headed......

Just to bring it back to the original question (sorry!).

To the general public cycling will continue to be associated with doping. However the UCI and other stakeholders will point to the bio-passport as the way forward.
There is a concerted effort on those stakeholders -UCI, race organisers, sponsors - to avoid any positives during the Tour from any big name star.
No Boonen or Valverde, thank you very much - this is to be a clean Tour.

I actually joined this forum to see the views of others regarding the 5 names that came out of the bio-passport, and I believe most shared my dismay at the first victims. Most of the posters here would see it as a disapointment - and we are left with a genuine question as to whether the 'fight against doping' has been curtailed.

The return of Lance has generated massive publicity - even my Mum knows HE is back!

Last year the only question I got was "Will this Tour be clean?"
This year its "What do I think of Armstrongs return?", "will he win?" and then finally "Do I think it will be a clean Tour?"

If the Tour can make it without a big doping scandal - a small minnow can be caught to show the 'new' testing works- then it could restore confidence in the general public and ultimatley big sponsors to invest in the sport.

However - I for one do not welcome this new direction.
You are right back to the point, I think the biggest problem will be generating sponsorship $'s to pay for the teams and riders, this is partly to do with recession but also to do with the image of the sport as someone that DOES know a lot about sponsorship and brand marketing I can tell you that if things continue as they are we will see the death of the sport as we know it. The major races will survive to a degree but there will be much smaller budgets and this could lead to TV's priority and budget moving away also.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
Thoughtforfood said:
...You make sh!t up and pass it off like you know what you are talking about. What a bunch of tools.
Oh, the irony! :rolleyes:

I have no idea what percentage of what goes where. As far as Nike goes, I also don't care as I wouldn't dream of buying any of the stuff on that page. You nasty little hate-boys with your deep-seated personal issues are the ones accusing him of every crime under the sun, including ripping off people who donate to Livestrong. PROVE IT. Put up or shut up.

Thoughtforfood said:
So like I said, you don't like Mr Armstrong being referred to as the "cancer" of cycling, fine; Lance Armstrong is the venereal disease of cycling and the cancer community. Every time I see a yellow anything with that logo, I want to throw up.
That's your personal problem, sonny. Stop inflicting your festering, sickening hatred on the entire forum over and over and over. You and your mates are a plague on this house.

Thoughtforfood said:
You just type sh!t and hope it sticks.
The ultimate, truly hysterical irony. :D
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY