The Tour de Oprah (WT) (1 team of 1 rider) Live Thread

[WinterRider]

Lance being Lance. Imagine the guy became Taxan governor, let alone president of the United States.

Anyway, Oprah was really really good. As a European, not really familiar with her, I'd never thought she would be that good.

I thought she was terrible. She is very charismatic and pleasant to listen to, but she missed numerous opportunities to dig deeper, and let him off easy in many instances.

 

[Joachim]

Vaughters as always looking for a fence to sit on.

Well he does have to operate within the confines of the sport doesn't he.

He doesn't have the luxury of being able to just b1tch, inconsequentially, on the internet, under a pseudonym.

 

[Benotti69]

Well he does have to operate within the confines of the sport doesn't he.

No he doesn't. He doesn't have to be involved in the sport. And to be at the sharp end means suspiscion is automatic for those not stupid.

He doesn't have the luxury of being able to just b1tch, inconsequentially, on the internet, under a pseudonym.

Of course he does. Armstrong has been doing since forums started talking about him.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Damn, I fell asleep after 30 minutes, 3 o'clock was a little too much for me. But for what I sayw David Walsh was totally right. No surprise.

He looked genuine, but maybe he is a good actor, don't know.

I laughed when I was entering my sleep when he said he was clean in 2009.

Gotta restate this. Watched the Utube one hour thing - thought it was to be one and a halve hour? - and one thing really sticks: the 'when I hadn't re -- entered in 2009 nothing would have happened'. That is not a sorry, that is a 'sorry I got busted'.

Dopers delight.

On the other hand he had some good insights and showed some remorse. As far as a pro - cyclist can have. Nevertheless, as far he can go he went far, given the lawsuits etcetera etcetera hanging over his head.

One thing: madame Oprah's opening lines were totally at fault, why not ask what stuff he used instead of listing them for him? What about hemassist, the link to Amgen? That would maybe have been too journalistic...

 

[Mr.38%]

I thought she was terrible. She is very charismatic and pleasant to listen to, but she missed numerous opportunities to dig deeper, and let him off easy in many instances.

I see what you mean but it would have been over the top for 99% of the audience. Advanced details like artificial Hgb is stuff for us nerds and WADA/USADA.

If you mean the Cancer Shield - yes, it'd be great if she'd carried it away.

 

[WinterRider]

I see what you mean but it would have been over the top for 99% of the audience. Advanced stuff like artificial Hgb is stuff for us nerds and WADA/USADA.

If you mean the Cancer Shield - yes, it'd be great if she'd carried it away.

It was more the simple stuff, like calling him out on his lies as he made them. She let a few long time talking points slide by, like the "never tested positive".

 

[Mr.38%]

It was more the simple stuff, like calling him out on his lies as he made them. She let a few long time talking points slide by, like the "never tested positive".

Again, I think this is stuff for WADA/USADA.

 

[Joachim]

It was more the simple stuff, like calling him out on his lies as he made them. She let a few long time talking points slide by, like the "never tested positive".

"Never tested positive" was made redundant with his answer to her first question, and again by the following two.

He went some way as to answering why later...the testing procedures were easy to beat. End of.

Where he wasn't fully convincing was with his relationship with the UCI. Mind you, if we are not prepared to accept what he says at face value, should we not extend the same scrutiny to his accusers? Some of them pass muster easily, Greg Lemond springs to mind. Some of them have interests of their own that they might not be disclosing. There is, however, a possibility that some of the comments made are exaggerated hearsay. We might all enjoy a good conspiracy, but often the truth turns out to be far more prosaic.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Dank u wel, Kaaskopp.

Crack LeMond has destroyed anyone who has been successful in cycling and admitted to doping later.
I get ****ed off when I hear that you can win the Tour without doping.

Look at Andy Hampsten. There was no way he was on any doping program, and because of that he simply didn't win the Tour. Comprende ?
Right now all clarities are eleminated, ain't.

You really are a sorry *** son of a b, but you must know that by now. Ex - pro? Ex - doper u mean? Still cannot handle guys like LeMond rode the 'snot voor je ogen in Roubaix' while u were fully pumped? Omerta man.

 

[Briant_Gumble]

Where he wasn't fully convincing was with his relationship with the UCI.

Yeah, I found that a bit confusing I'm not really sure what his game is there.

I believe Tyler and Floyd that he tested positive at the 2001 Tour of Switzerland and had it covered up.

It may be that he wants to be remembered for his athletic accomplishments and so is holding out some hope that if he doesn't reveal that he met with the lab director and discussed how the test works then people might tow the "level playing field line".

 

[Joachim]

Yeah, I found that a bit confusing I'm not really sure what his game is there.

I believe Tyler and Floyd that he tested positive at the 2001 Tour of Switzerland and had it covered up.
.

He has an agenda. That must is for sure. We'll have to wait and see what it is, whether it is legal, financial, or...ahem..moral.

With regard to the ToS alledged positive, I made the point upthread that it is possible that LA spun a yarn to Hamilton to make it seem as if LA was totally in control of the UCI, to deter Hamilton from thinking that he could ever take him on, on any level...sporting or otherwise. The guy was certainly scheming enough to do this, and manipulate Landis into unknowingly validating it. It would fit in with his attempt to intimidate friends and foe.

Or maybe he did have the UCI in his back pocket...

 

[Cycle Chic]

Armstrong's Body Language - Expert Analysis

Just a short thread but this is so interesting

Lance Armstrong's body language: an expert analysis from The Telegraph.

The University of Glasgow's professor of psychology, Paddy J O'Donnell, reveals how Lance Armstrong's body language gives away his true emotions


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...nguage-an-expert-analysis.html#?frame=2455330

Scroll through the photos from Oprah's interview with the arrow to the right and read the analysis underneath each photo.

AND

http://drlillianglassbodylanguageblog.wordpress.com/tag/lance-armstrong-interview-with-oprah/

Lance Armstrong’s Body Language on Oprah Showed No Contrition, Lack of Emotion, Blaming Others, and Possible Sociopathic Behavior

 

[manafana]

As with everything Lance does hes doing it for his own gain, he gave us an inch of rope nothing more. Wouldnt speak about the hospital incident either.

90% of what he said was no new to anyone and he didnt reveal much more than we needed to know and his not doping on comeback just made anyone with sense realise he wasnt planning on coming clean properly.

He also will never be able to make up for lives he tried to destroy.

 

[the asian]

Saugy confirmed that UCI instructed him to meet Bruyneel and Armstrong and explain to them how the EPO test works.

So we know for sure that Lance got preferential treatment.

 

[Joachim]

90% of what he said was no new to anyone.

Not new to you or I, but possibly new to quite a few of the other viewers.

We've only seen a half of the Oprah show so far, and we'll have to wait and see how the rest of his game plays out.

 

[the asian]

Not new to you or I, but possibly new to quite a few of the other viewers.

We've only seen a half of the Oprah show so far, and we'll have to wait and see how the rest of his game plays out.

Apparently the other part is about the family, Livestrong and the Sponsors.

So dont expect anything new to come out of it.

 

[WinterRider]

This is already in another thread.

 

[Cycle Chic]

check this one out.

http://drlillianglassbodylanguageblog.wordpress.com/tag/lance-armstrong-interview-with-oprah/

His thought process also seemed sociopathic. When you ask a sociopath a question they may answer it one way such as Did you threaten anyone to take drugs? Lance insisted that he did not. But then when you ask the question another way like Did you insist the members of the team see Dr. Ferrari ( who allegedly provided the drugs) he answered yes. In keeping with this sociopathic line of thinking he was asked if fellow cyclist Floyd Landis who spoke to the press about Lance’s doping felt rebuffed? Lance said No. But then when asked in a different way, if he blew Landis off, Armstrong admitted that he did indeed blow Floyd off as he said that Floyd was upset because ” I didn’t put him on my team.”This thought process is how sociopaths tend to think.

 

[Joachim]

Eurgh...I'll be expecting tears along with the standard American narrative about letting children down.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

He has an agenda. That must is for sure. We'll have to wait and see what it is, whether it is legal, financial, or...ahem..moral.

With regard to the ToS alledged positive, I made the point upthread that it is possible that LA spun a yarn to Hamilton to make it seem as if LA was totally in control of the UCI, to deter Hamilton from thinking that he could ever take him on, on any level...sporting or otherwise. The guy was certainly scheming enough to do this, and manipulate Landis into unknowingly validating it. It would fit in with his attempt to intimidate friends and foe.

Or maybe he did have the UCI in his back pocket...

Or, maybe he tested positive for 80% EPO isoforms like Hamburger [or which rider got spoken free at CAS for having 80%?] so the case was difficult?

 

[the asian]

Eurgh...I'll be expecting the tears

Sociopaths don't know how to cry.

 

[WinterRider]

"Never tested positive" was made redundant with his answer to her first question, and again by the following two.

He went some way as to answering why later...the testing procedures were easy to beat. End of.

Where he wasn't fully convincing was with his relationship with the UCI. Mind you, if we are not prepared to accept what he says at face value, should we not extend the same scrutiny to his accusers? Some of them pass muster easily, Greg Lemond springs to mind. Some of them have interests of their own that they might not be disclosing. There is, however, a possibility that some of the comments made are exaggerated hearsay. We might all enjoy a good conspiracy, but often the truth turns out to be far more prosaic.

The point is he did test positive in the 99 Tour. The second he said "I never tested positive." Oprah should have called him on the lie, and then dug for an explanation of how that test was covered up. And not just that they backdated a TUI, but how in the hell did they get the UCI to accept that?

 

[Mr.38%]

Or, maybe he tested positive for 80% EPO isoforms like Hamburger [or which rider got spoken free at CAS for having 80%?] so the case was difficult?

It seems it was a borderline result. I'm pretty sure the Lausanne incident will be discussed during Floyds case, so Lance better not lie now.

The image of WADA accredited labs is destroyed anyways.

 

[WinterRider]

Yeah, I found that a bit confusing I'm not really sure what his game is there.

I believe Tyler and Floyd that he tested positive at the 2001 Tour of Switzerland and had it covered up.

It may be that he wants to be remembered for his athletic accomplishments and so is holding out some hope that if he doesn't reveal that he met with the lab director and discussed how the test works then people might tow the "level playing field line".

I believe Lance on the test. I think there was a suspicious test result, but that if probably fell just below the official line for a positive. In an honest federation he probably would have been thrown out of the race and quietly benched for a while, but instead Lance was told about it by Hein, and ordered to talk to Saugy to find out how they ****ed up and almost got popped, thus the meeting. The payment for a sysmex machine was to cover up the meeting, give a plausible reason for Lance to meet with Saugy (the excuse being to further the fight against doping).

Lance being Lance, he had to brag about it so he told Tyler and Floyd he had a positive covered up, when the reality was slightly different.

 

[will10]

I thought Lance and Bruyneel didn't meet Saugy at Lausanne until 2002, despite the Suisse positive/suspicious test coming in 2001?