The Official Lance Hating Thread

[BroDeal]

I'm sorry guys but it's getting pretty bad -- I just went out tonight with a large circle of friends that know next to nothing about cycling and when one of my friends told them how much I've been riding and racing lately they were immediately all asking me "what is the deal with Lance Armstrong and everyone saying he took drugs?!" It is not just the cycling community that understands what went on anymore, it seems to be the general public is becoming aware of what is going on.

The BALCO scandal did a huge amount of damage to the credibility of anyone denying dope use. Huge sports superstars flagrantly lying about doping and then being proved to be lying, and even sentenced to prison for perjury, has made everyone skeptical. Maybe everyone deep down knew that the doping was going on. The physiques of athletes in sports like baseball and football and even basketball have changed radically over the last twenty years. Perhaps BALCO opened the floodgates and allowed the average Joe to finally admit to himself what was obviously going on.

Any athlete with the cloud of suspicion hanging over him that Armstrong has is assumed by the public to be guilty. Newspaper articles now frequently use phrases like "long dogged by doping accusations" when reporting about Armstrong.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I had the same conversation as BikeCentric on a ride the other day with some friends who are more rec cyclists and don't follow the sport as much as us. I was asked if I felt Lance really doped like it's being said. I didn't go all out, but mostly gave a matter of fact answer based on his past we all know about. In a sense pretty much equating him to Landis, only not caught quite as red handed. They all seemed to already accept what I was saying was completely true and no one reacted with shock, or surprise, or even countered anything I said or questioned it.

Armstrong is not helping and he's no longer even fooling the man on the street. He needs to go away and let this sport move on and recover.

This is precisely how I feel. While we had scandals in recent years, the sport has slowly been trying to clean up. Mostly through younger riders, a few teams, and true fans, and organizations like the ASO, CONI, and the German Sports Federation. With Lance back in the picture, it's like we're going in reverse to the dark years of recent past where riders and teams question and criticize doping controls and fight organization and progress and bring more suspicion back onto the sport. Why in the world anyone would be happy to be taken back there is beyond me.

 

[Mr.DNA]

One of the things that makes Lance great is his lack of smugness.

 

[Dr. Wattini]

LA is the Messiah

Actually, Lance is helping cycling immensely
This is not a praise of Lance as a human being - just about his effect on today's cycling.

Dude,
WTF? You are transforming LA into The Messiah who came down to earth to save cycling!!! Here is a piece of info for you bro. Giro is celebrating 100 years of existance. The Tour is in its 103-104 year of existance. The same is the case for Roubaix, classics and a number of races. Cycling has endured WWII, it has evolutionized and actualized. For you to suggest that LA is here to save cycling is disrespectful to the sport and to the real fans.
With or without LA, cycling will continue to exsist. Sadly for some fat americans the tour maynot be in TV if LA goes away. But who cares, cycling is not an american sport.

 

[Dr. Wattini]

Al Capone used to give money to the poor and was admired by those he helped. The rest of the community recognized that he was pox on society.

The real "Patron", the colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar Gaviria, would take a desk to a street corner in a colombian slumb and sit there to give money away to people. These poor fools would have a relegious figurines in their homes and next to the virgin mary, it was not difficult to find a picture or Escobar.

 

[elapid]

You are transforming LA into The Messiah who came down to earth to save cycling!!! Here is a piece of info for you bro. Giro is celebrating 100 years of existance. The Tour is in its 103-104 year of existance. The same is the case for Roubaix, classics and a number of races. Cycling has endured WWII, it has evolutionized and actualized. For you to suggest that LA is here to save cycling is disrespectful to the sport and to the real fans.
With or without LA, cycling will continue to exsist. Sadly for some fat americans the tour maynot be in TV if LA goes away. But who cares, cycling is not an american sport.

The TdF made Lance Armstrong the cyclist and media icon that he is today. He would not have achieved his lofty heights if he had won any other race. The TdF saved Lance Armstrong, not the other way around. Currently, Lance may be a drawcard but he is not a saviour for cycling or professional racing (and may in fact be a deterrent for the latter).

 

[antoine]

Thats pretty harsh. No matter what you think of him as a person or cyclist, the fact is that he has generated millions of dollars that would otherwise have gone elsewhere.

yeah, that money could have gone to cancer research, for example.

 

[Dr. Wattini]

The TdF made Lance Armstrong the cyclist and media icon that he is today. He would not have achieved his lofty heights if he had won any other race. The TdF saved Lance Armstrong, not the other way around. Currently, Lance may be a drawcard but he is not a saviour for cycling or professional racing (and may in fact be a deterrent for the latter).

elapid,
you are so right!
LA owes everything he has to Cancer and to the Tour

 

[BigBoat]

Lance has gone off on his mouth for being clean all these years... His one true chance to prove he is clean was when Lemond offered to follow his power files. A really cheeky way for Lance to prove he is clean would be to allow Coggan, Lemond, Ric Stern to trade off week to week following his power files... And do a surprise total blood volume test from Catlin before getting BASELINE data. Upper range for human aerobic power without blood boosters is 5.7 watts per kilo for an hour nonstop. Thats for a complete FREAK like Eddie, Hinault, Fingon, Lemond, Coppi, etc. This would show the real truth and class from the physiologist and from the involved parties but Lance wouldnt TOUCH THIS with a 10-foot pole! And then he DROPPED his independent testing shortly after.

If Lance road the Tour totally clean he would not even finish this Giro... He would be dropped by the pack first major climbing stage and to boot finish outside the time cut or climb off early. His choice which to do.

Upper range is 5.7 watts per kilo but there have been guys earlier this year sustaining 6.3 and higher! There are over 20 guys blood doping (which is the most you can have and still get a clean talent able to keep up and finish) without EPO micro dosing or HGH... You see not all will be able to blood dope and some will miss out and get destroyed. Basso rides well he will have DOPE written all over him even by the average Joe's from the viewership and media. Interesting to see how he reacts to the pressure, the general public doesnt understant that autologous transfusions and peptide hormones make it impossible to even keep up clean >>> So most still think there are clean Grand Tour riders and Basso is clean. But when he wins again everybody will know; DOPE! So it will be fun watching and seeing what happens.

 

[BikeCentric]

This is the best Lance hating thread ever. I just wanted to reiterate my hatred for everything Lance. Carry on.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Actually, I don't hate the guy. I don't hate anyone. But I guess that word could use some defining. For example, I wouldn't hate to have him get dropped at the Giro and Tour and DNF.

But who cares, cycling is not an american sport.

I'm from America. I agree

And yes, as Elapid and others have said, the Tour makes the riders, not the other way around. If Lance had never come along, someone else would have been celebrated for winning it in those years. This also applies to Merckx, Lemond, etc.

After OP broke, a journalist in Italy tracked down a recently retired Giro contender who how worked in housing development or something like that and was anonymously quoted as saying that it was impossible to win any GT without doping to one degree or another and had been that way his entire career (I'm assuming 1990s to 2005 or there abouts), and the only ones not doping are a few very strong support riders who finish an hour back or more. I now think that retired rider is none other than Big Boat.

 

[franciep10]

Actually, I don't hate the guy. I don't hate anyone. But I guess that word could use some defining. For example, I wouldn't hate to have him get dropped at the Giro and Tour and DNF.



I now think that retired rider is none other than Big Boat.

You almost got away with it Big Boat

 

[VeloFidelis]

I just don't like the guy. Just like I don't like other people who I see in the streets. I don't feel like I like him. that's it! *felt good, this confession, almost cathartic*

Nice post Bala... The way it should be. Though I fear my work is never done. It looks like I need to swim in this pool for a while. Do you think they're up for it?

Could be fun!

 

[VeloFidelis]

Dude,
WTF? You are transforming LA into The Messiah who came down to earth to save cycling!!! Here is a piece of info for you bro. Giro is celebrating 100 years of existance. The Tour is in its 103-104 year of existance. The same is the case for Roubaix, classics and a number of races. Cycling has endured WWII, it has evolutionized and actualized. For you to suggest that LA is here to save cycling is disrespectful to the sport and to the real fans.
With or without LA, cycling will continue to exsist. Sadly for some fat americans the tour maynot be in TV if LA goes away. But who cares, cycling is not an american sport.

OK... so I didn't see anything about "saving cycling" in the previous quote, so help me out as I'm obviously naive and confused.

Are you saying your position is:

A: Lance currently is having no effect on the sport?

B: Lance is bad for the sport because of the recurrent doping accusations he brings with him? (all while getting more testers needles stuck in him in the last six months than a Vodoo Doll working overtime, and proving once again that if it's there... they can't find it)

C: Lance is good for the sport because he draws world wide attention to your sport that is increasingly challenged for team sponsorship dollars, event sponsorship dollars, media attention, and has a dramatic affect on television time, prize money, and an increasing the global fan base... But you just don't like the guy?

D: Lance is a Tool!: I don't care about the rest

It would be nice to get a clear impression of your position here.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Can someone explain to me where the "ignore" feature is located?

 

[Dr. Wattini]

OK... so I didn't see anything about "saving cycling" in the previous quote, so help me out as I'm obviously naive and confused.

Are you saying your position is:

A: Lance currently is having no effect on the sport?

B: Lance is bad for the sport because of the recurrent doping accusations he brings with him? (all while getting more testers needles stuck in him in the last six months than a Vodoo Doll working overtime, and proving once again that if it's there... they can't find it)

C: Lance is good for the sport because he draws world wide attention to your sport that is increasingly challenged for team sponsorship dollars, event sponsorship dollars, media attention, and has a dramatic affect on television time, prize money, and an increasing the global fan base... But you just don't like the guy?

D: Lance is a Tool!: I don't care about the rest

It would be nice to get a clear impression of your position here.

Bro,
this is "the official lance hating thread" what do you think my position is? You are in the wrong thread buddy. You wanna idolize LA, this is not the right thread. Sorry dude

 

[slowoldman]

Can someone explain to me where the "ignore" feature is located?

Upper left, User CP, click it. Menu on the left says edit ignore list. You have found heaven.....

(I had to ask earlier Alpe, I am no computer wizard.)

 

[pmcg76]

Exactly. Imagine the situation without him...

LOL,

Fact-outside the traditional cycling countries Belgium, France, Italy, Spain & Netherlands, the popularity of cycling is cyclical depending on the success of riders from that particular counrty. Lance definitely had a positive affect in the US but as I pointed out on another thread ages ago, at the height of the Lance era, cycling in the US was roughly where it was in early 90s, maybe that was due to LeMond effect so there was no obvious golden period for US cycling whilst Lance was racing. Now for a few examplse.

Case study 1: Ireland & UK, in the 80s, Ireland had two of the best pros in cycling, Sean Kelly, Stephen Roche so the sport became really popular in Ireland and the Nissan Classic Tour of Ireland was launched in 1985. Around the same time, Channel 4 television in the UK started showing the Tour de France, British rider Robert Millar was one of the top climbers so combined with the success of Roche & Kelly, a Tour of Britain was launched in 1987.
Tour of Ireland stopped in 92 as the careers of Kelly & Roche declined, Likewise Tour of Britain ceased in 93/94 I think. Recession in early nineties was also a factor in these races stopping. Both these events restarted in recent times as cycling has become a more popular recreational activity and there are once again pro cyclists from these countries competing successfully.

Case study 2: Germany was never a big cycling nation, in the former west anyway, I think there was one Pro stage race in the early nineties. Then Jan Ullrich arrived on the scene, cycling became huge, there was lots of little former amateur races now running pro, Regio Tour, Sachsen Tour etc and lots of little teams. The national Tour of Germany was relaunched in 99 before the Lance phenomenon began. Now with the demise of Jan and the constant doping problems, the races and teams are disappearing again, nothing to do with Lance.

Case study 3: Australia: Phil Anderson was the first big time Aussie pro but there were the likes of Peiper, Hodge, Wilson, Stephens, Sunderland blazing a trail in the late 80s early 90s, cycling became more popular and as more Aussies (O'Grady, McEwen) became successful in Europe, the sport grew, result Tour Down under launched in 99 before the Lance comeack. This event was a huge success before Lance arrived this year and was more than surviving without his presece.

Look at the race calendars for France, Italy, Belgium, Holland, they are more or less the same as about 20/30 years ago with the same amount of races. The only decent race that springs to mind is Midi-Libere and that went when Lance was still racing. Spain is the one country that has been badly affected with Catalan week, Valencia, Aragon, Galicia, Burgos, Bicileta Vasca all stopping, dont think the Spanish races relied on Lance but the fact that nobody ever replaced Miguel Indurain didnt help.

So, Lance is most definitely NOT the saviour of cycling, only the end of the doping problems and an upturn in the economy will see races start up again. As I demonstrated, cycling in countries with little interest in the sport will flourish when they have star names themselves as for the traditional countries, the impact of Lance on their races has been neglible. There will always be cycling with or without Lance.

 

[pmcg76]

If peope really believe that Lance was/is capable of saving cycling, I suggest you read the thread Paris, July 25, 1999, (second page by now), when cycling really was in the crapper, because I am pretty confident if the first Tour winner after 98 was really clean, had the backstory of Lance and took a stance like in the interview, it could have had more of an impact on the sport than anything Lance has ever done since. Take a good look and remind yourself of what Lance actually said and done in comparison to the interview. Look forward to the comments.

 

[Escarabajo]

LOL,

Fact-outside the traditional cycling countries Belgium, France, Italy, Spain & Netherlands, the popularity of cycling is cyclical depending on the success of riders from that particular counrty. Lance definitely had a positive affect in the US but as I pointed out on another thread ages ago, at the height of the Lance era, cycling in the US was roughly where it was in early 90s, maybe that was due to LeMond effect so there was no obvious golden period for US cycling whilst Lance was racing. Now for a few examplse.

Case study 1: Ireland & UK, in the 80s, Ireland had two of the best pros in cycling, Sean Kelly, Stephen Roche so the sport became really popular in Ireland and the Nissan Classic Tour of Ireland was launched in 1985. Around the same time, Channel 4 television in the UK started showing the Tour de France, British rider Robert Millar was one of the top climbers so combined with the success of Roche & Kelly, a Tour of Britain was launched in 1987.
Tour of Ireland stopped in 92 as the careers of Kelly & Roche declined, Likewise Tour of Britain ceased in 93/94 I think. Recession in early nineties was also a factor in these races stopping. Both these events restarted in recent times as cycling has become a more popular recreational activity and there are once again pro cyclists from these countries competing successfully.

Case study 2: Germany was never a big cycling nation, in the former west anyway, I think there was one Pro stage race in the early nineties. Then Jan Ullrich arrived on the scene, cycling became huge, there was lots of little former amateur races now running pro, Regio Tour, Sachsen Tour etc and lots of little teams. The national Tour of Germany was relaunched in 99 before the Lance phenomenon began. Now with the demise of Jan and the constant doping problems, the races and teams are disappearing again, nothing to do with Lance.

Case study 3: Australia: Phil Anderson was the first big time Aussie pro but there were the likes of Peiper, Hodge, Wilson, Stephens, Sunderland blazing a trail in the late 80s early 90s, cycling became more popular and as more Aussies (O'Grady, McEwen) became successful in Europe, the sport grew, result Tour Down under launched in 99 before the Lance comeack. This event was a huge success before Lance arrived this year and was more than surviving without his presece.

Look at the race calendars for France, Italy, Belgium, Holland, they are more or less the same as about 20/30 years ago with the same amount of races. The only decent race that springs to mind is Midi-Libere and that went when Lance was still racing. Spain is the one country that has been badly affected with Catalan week, Valencia, Aragon, Galicia, Burgos, Bicileta Vasca all stopping, dont think the Spanish races relied on Lance but the fact that nobody ever replaced Miguel Indurain didnt help.

So, Lance is most definitely NOT the saviour of cycling, only the end of the doping problems and an upturn in the economy will see races start up again. As I demonstrated, cycling in countries with little interest in the sport will flourish when they have star names themselves as for the traditional countries, the impact of Lance on their races has been neglible. There will always be cycling with or without Lance.

I like your comments. I wish you could have made a point for Colombia, but cultural and economical differences are a big factor.

I think Australia will be the big winner of them all. Somehow I feel like Australia will keep cycling for good like in Europe.

As for my Country, we still keep the Vuelta a Colombia without stop, even during the dark ages in the 90's, since 1951. We never broadcasted the Tour when Lance Armstrong was winning, so I guess we never cared for him anyway.

Thanks.

 

[VeloFidelis]

Bro,
this is "the official lance hating thread" what do you think my position is?

So that would be D then?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

PMCG76 - if you'll allow me to add a Case Study of the USA:

With modest interest in George Mount's TV exposure in the 1976 Olympics, a great little move (Breaking Away), a fairly large underground of cyclists grew a little and when Greg Lemond starting winning everything as a junior including the Jr. World's, the Red Zinger, then Coors' Classic was formed with great success. After Greg was shot, Team 7-11 couldn't quite pick up the slack, and in 1988 the greatest bike race in US history folded.

A year later, with Greg coming back, the Tour de Trump debuted. It grew a great deal in the next few years awith Greg winning the Tour and World's again, and became the Tour du Pont. Then with Lance coming into view (and winning it). John DuPont's murder trial, and Lance's inability to match Lemond's success (then getting cancer) helped doom the Tour Du Pont. Other rides in that time, and teams in the US grew and faded. The Coors' Light team, Wheates, Crest. The ABC Classic, the Tour of the Americas, etc. Greg did have a big impact, but it's hard to say how much.

With Lance's return to greatness, it really took a while for racing to really take off. The Tour of Georgia got going in 2003, the Tour of California in 2006. The proposed Tour of Texas never really came off, nor did the overzealous Tour of America. But even after Lance retired, the numbers for cycling in the ToG and ToC didn't decline that great. Even after Lance announced his comeback, the ToG couldn't manage to pull together the funds to continue their race, even as a non Pro Continental race. Though they say they'll be back next year.

In retrospect, having lived through all of this, It's my opinion that cycling really isn't that much bigger in the US as far as racing goes, than it was in going back to the late 1980's. Greg says back in the late 70's there was actually a large underground of some very serious and talented racers: Mount, Bob Cook, Leonard Zinn, Jack Janelle, etc. even before he got there. There are however more recreational cyclists from what I can tell. People that will ride their bikes for commuting, to keep in shape, or even on club rides. That has definitely grown. But it's hard to know if that is due to Lance, or what percentage of it would be.

Finally, IMO, doping, and the general acceptance among even rec riders these days that Lance doped, is what has hurt the sport most, by far, even in this country. And as I see it, Lance is not the person who is going to dig us out of that, no matter what he says or does at this point. The ToC may hold well, and the ToG may come back. But the next racing boom in this country will likely come in 5-10 years when the next phenom comes along, has great results, and is media savvy.

 

[pmcg76]

I like your comments. I wish you could have made a point for Colombia, but cultural and economical differences are a big factor.

Lo siento,

I realise the Lucho Herrera, Fabio Parra era was huge in Colombia but I only really started following cycling in 89 when theirs careers were in decline plus we never got much coverage of Colombian cycling here in Europe. I have read a book about Colombian cycling by Matt Rendell which was really interesting, I think the success of Colombian football with the Valderrama, Higuita generaton had a big impact on thedownturn in popularity of Colombian cycling so yeah, apologies for not including Colombia.

 

[BikeCentric]

You left just one thing out of your history Alpe: an absolutely beautifull race was lost from the US Calendar in 2006:

http://www.procyclingphotos.com/sfgrandprix/2005/bgigpsf05_043.shtml

 

[BikeCentric]

I miss this race a lot:

http://www.procyclingphotos.com/sfgrandprix/2005/bgigpsf05_006.shtml