- Mar 22, 2010
- 908
- 0
- 0
- Apr 2, 2009
- 8,660
- 16
- 17,510
Now apart from what's already said above, the overwhelming evidence against him was readily accessible to anyone with the will to do just a little research regarding his case, or the sport in general. Though as I said before most people prefer falsehood to facts, especially as regards to their sports heroes, or anyone for whom they have emotionally invested themselves. But this is what happens when people let faith, as among the religious, hold court over reason in their thinking. Blind faith, in the absence of reason, makes even intelligent people say and believe stupid things. Indeed, despite everything, Armstrong is still looked upon with blind faith by many morons in the US, as was demonstrated by the fact that after USADA recently condemned him the next day the Livestrong foundation received record donations! It reminded me of that famous expression: “A fool is easily parted from his money.” Such behavior is noteworthy, if anything, in evidencing what considerable level of stupidity is obtained by those who insolently call themselves the faithful. The nation has been hoodwinked, the citizenry defrauded in having Lance Armstrong represent the cancer community and indeed the very fight against the disease itself through his so called fund-raising organization. Yet most people are quite happy in being deceived. The truth is that there are two Livestrong foundations, one .org and the other .com, though only one is “non-profit” (but even here a good bit of the raised funds go into corporate expenses, like flying LA around the globe on private jets and schmoozing with certain political leaders), while the other is not – although this is never clearly stated. Hence thousands of unsuspecting people in good faith think they are donating to fund cancer research, but in reality are just fattening Mr. Armstrong’s already sizable bank account. In short Lance has shamelessly exploited without compunction and commercialized the sick , which is naturally, especially in light of his illness background, appalling and grotesque. It also speaks volumes of the persona.
It is truly a shame to see cycling, the most beautiful sport to me, dragged through the mud like this, though this is not the fault of USADA but his alone in this case. I’m thus sorry to say at this point, to reform it, it must be torn down to the foundations. For it can’t be reformed unless it is first torn down. Naturally this should also be done as well with European and World Cup soccer and the major American sports, chief among them football, where, apart from the doping, a significant degree of corruption, hypocrisy, mendacity, baseness has always been the order of the day within the teams and the governing federations, as the Joe Paterno case revoltingly has demonstrated. But these sports are too mighty and make far too much wealth circulate to make them easy targets, unlike cycling, which in comparison to them is weak and poor and thus much easier to throw under the truck in the name of all sport.
LA of course didn’t invent doping, however the dimension of the fraud that was his career and the bullying legacy he has left in its wake was absolutely unprecedented among European riders. Furthermore, he also did bring to the continental sport a very US maniacal corporatism in the way he hierarchically managed the team, his business affairs and approach to racing. He was, for this reason, loved by few, but feared by many and from the European perspective, whether we like to face it or not, the only all-American thing about Lance had nothing to do with so called heroics, but the ruthless prepotency with which he conducted his cause in a foreign land. True there were many Europeans that supported him, starting with his DS Johan Bruyneel, who should thus be looked upon with no less disdain than Lance, but the truth is that only an American with his incomparable ego and callous insensitivity could have pulled off what he did; and all because, as I’ve said before, the business of cycling was drooling over being expanded further within the ultra-lucrative US market. Moral of the story: it’s all about money and profits.
Finally as far as Armstrong’s career goes: he was the greatest fraudulent Tour de France winner in the history of the sport. Many a winner, most that is, were doped, though he was the greatest in this, nothing more. His “shock and awe” tactics, to borrow a US military expression held so dear by the neocons, may have been spectacular, even impressive, but it did not earn him broad based respect among many a European fan, as well as the few in America, who know that our fair sport is more than one race in July even if it’s called the Tour de France. Cycling is not just the Tour, but also the one-day spring and fall classics, the Giro d’Italia, Vuelta e Spagna and the last but not least the World Championships. Following his first comeback after cancer LA ignored all these other cherished by the fans races, to pretty much exclusively focus upon the one race he knew would give him the greatest returns, both monetary and fame wise. In this he was quite astute and intelligent in making sure nothing would risk him not being at maximum peak in July, though many here couldn’t applaud the fact that Lance was basically an ungenerous champion and ultimately cowardly in the sporting sense. To say nothing about the fact that this was all done with the most high-tech and sophisticated of doping programs. The two-wheeled sport till his career was about seeing the greatest champions competing against themselves in a variety of events throughout the year. In this sense there is no Superbowl or World Series in professional cycling, while not even the colossal enterprise that is the Tour de France deserved the status Lance’s career was giving it, at the expense of events like the Giro that had suffered as a result in becoming a decidedly national affair. While it may seem strange and even improbable that one man could have had all that power an influence over his profession, yet that is just precisely what occurred in this case. In the final analysis all the money that LA brought into the sport from overseas, will be transformed into heinous and gargantuan losses because of his fraud. There is a sublimely just, if rather perverse, paradox to this though.
Sport, not just cycling, has needed to be rid of him and his kind for decades now. But since it is all just about money and not truth or integrity, such instances are in fact quite rare.
It is truly a shame to see cycling, the most beautiful sport to me, dragged through the mud like this, though this is not the fault of USADA but his alone in this case. I’m thus sorry to say at this point, to reform it, it must be torn down to the foundations. For it can’t be reformed unless it is first torn down. Naturally this should also be done as well with European and World Cup soccer and the major American sports, chief among them football, where, apart from the doping, a significant degree of corruption, hypocrisy, mendacity, baseness has always been the order of the day within the teams and the governing federations, as the Joe Paterno case revoltingly has demonstrated. But these sports are too mighty and make far too much wealth circulate to make them easy targets, unlike cycling, which in comparison to them is weak and poor and thus much easier to throw under the truck in the name of all sport.
LA of course didn’t invent doping, however the dimension of the fraud that was his career and the bullying legacy he has left in its wake was absolutely unprecedented among European riders. Furthermore, he also did bring to the continental sport a very US maniacal corporatism in the way he hierarchically managed the team, his business affairs and approach to racing. He was, for this reason, loved by few, but feared by many and from the European perspective, whether we like to face it or not, the only all-American thing about Lance had nothing to do with so called heroics, but the ruthless prepotency with which he conducted his cause in a foreign land. True there were many Europeans that supported him, starting with his DS Johan Bruyneel, who should thus be looked upon with no less disdain than Lance, but the truth is that only an American with his incomparable ego and callous insensitivity could have pulled off what he did; and all because, as I’ve said before, the business of cycling was drooling over being expanded further within the ultra-lucrative US market. Moral of the story: it’s all about money and profits.
Finally as far as Armstrong’s career goes: he was the greatest fraudulent Tour de France winner in the history of the sport. Many a winner, most that is, were doped, though he was the greatest in this, nothing more. His “shock and awe” tactics, to borrow a US military expression held so dear by the neocons, may have been spectacular, even impressive, but it did not earn him broad based respect among many a European fan, as well as the few in America, who know that our fair sport is more than one race in July even if it’s called the Tour de France. Cycling is not just the Tour, but also the one-day spring and fall classics, the Giro d’Italia, Vuelta e Spagna and the last but not least the World Championships. Following his first comeback after cancer LA ignored all these other cherished by the fans races, to pretty much exclusively focus upon the one race he knew would give him the greatest returns, both monetary and fame wise. In this he was quite astute and intelligent in making sure nothing would risk him not being at maximum peak in July, though many here couldn’t applaud the fact that Lance was basically an ungenerous champion and ultimately cowardly in the sporting sense. To say nothing about the fact that this was all done with the most high-tech and sophisticated of doping programs. The two-wheeled sport till his career was about seeing the greatest champions competing against themselves in a variety of events throughout the year. In this sense there is no Superbowl or World Series in professional cycling, while not even the colossal enterprise that is the Tour de France deserved the status Lance’s career was giving it, at the expense of events like the Giro that had suffered as a result in becoming a decidedly national affair. While it may seem strange and even improbable that one man could have had all that power an influence over his profession, yet that is just precisely what occurred in this case. In the final analysis all the money that LA brought into the sport from overseas, will be transformed into heinous and gargantuan losses because of his fraud. There is a sublimely just, if rather perverse, paradox to this though.
Sport, not just cycling, has needed to be rid of him and his kind for decades now. But since it is all just about money and not truth or integrity, such instances are in fact quite rare.
- Mar 22, 2010
- 908
- 0
- 0
- Oct 26, 2009
- 654
- 0
- 0
Alpe d'Huez said:
I agree. 60 Minutes or Bryant Gumbel's Real Sports would be the place for this. Tyler Hamilton's interview on 60 Minutes was extremely good, but it didn't seem to do much to public opinion. What would really do the job is one of those shows doing a tell-all interview with George Hincappie. Yeah, I realize we can keep dreaming about that...
I wonder what effect Tyler Hamilton's book will have on the public's perception. I think it's hilarious that the book is coming out on Lance's 41st birthday.
- Mar 22, 2010
- 908
- 0
- 0
- Nov 7, 2009
- 11,100
- 5,291
- 28,180
Dr. Maserati
BANNED
- Jun 19, 2009
- 13,250
- 1
- 0
"Implication", thats a new word to our discussion.QuickStepper said:
But lets play:
So, Tracee says "ouch" at the length of sanction?QuickStepper said:
The title was the giveaway- "LA vs USADA what are we to believe", an attempt at bringing a balanced view, rather than finding the truth.
Phils from UCI outrage piece? "USADA has no legal-right to strip Lance Armstrong"- do you want to tell Phil or shall I?QuickStepper said:
Two of those links are the same story.QuickStepper said:
Great - he retains his sponsors, (nothing about punishment or process) - better question to the sponsors would be will LA be on any of your billboards soon?
Link to WP doesnt work but I found it - no mention that its too severe, lots of mentions of hero.
QuickStepper said:
Ok - I stopped reading and just looked at the openings to the last few.
But again none of them question the USADA and the severity of the sanctions - they all mitigate the decision by pointing to Armstrong's 'charity work' and/or hero status - which was built on the fraud.
The details are new - obviously.QuickStepper said:
No point revealing details to the public before Armstrong has been allowed to fight or run.
But it is not PR.
- Mar 22, 2010
- 908
- 0
- 0
Carols said:Hope I can find it amongst all the bickering
It's probably in the evidence thread but Tygart has stated it repeatedly in interviews in the wake of LA's waiving arbitration.
RUBE: I was only kidding, but if you responded to quickstep with no edit that would look pretty cool on the screen.
Dr. Maserati
BANNED
- Jun 19, 2009
- 13,250
- 1
- 0
To be fair, they have not yet been exposed to the facts.Alpe d'Huez said:While I believe there are too many LA threads already, I think that's a good idea about the evidence thread.
Meanwhile, I feared that Lance would take his fight to the court of public opinion, and he's done just that. I thought it would work on some, but I didn't realize it would work on as many as it has. There is an alarming amount of dolts out there who choose to remain ignorant on this issue and completely side with Armstrong, almost repeating his exact words. There is also a real lack of critical thinking and analysis in the behavior and words of the media.
Just look at this USA Today article, and especially the comments. This is just one of many, most of the articles/comments I see out there are like this. It's probably 80/20 in his favor. Lance must look at this and think he's won.
What a sad day when something like this happens, a life-long cheater is exposed, and so very many people remain willfully ignorant of the facts and support him anyway.
Again, I have said that many will still support - we saw how people suspend their objectivity in the Penn State case.
However overall his status has plummeted and as more info comes out more will abandon him.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 10,645
- 20
- 22,510
QuickStepper said:That's what I was going to say.
Yeah, there's a limit. The field in the database backend has a hard limit on the size of the field. For text it's big. The front-end probably truncates anyway.
- Mar 22, 2010
- 908
- 0
- 0
MarkvW said:
I could take an uneducated stab at it but I think for more precision you are better off looking in the evidence thread.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 10,645
- 20
- 22,510
MarkvW said:
If we're talking the UCI-make-it-up-as-we-go-along rules, then I suppose they will manufacture a way to get it into CAS. But, if we're talking the anti-doping code for many other athletes like FuYu Li, there needed to be an arbitration hearing to appeal.
MarkvW said:
The process as I understand it requires some formal documentation be sent to the federation. Give it some time.
- Aug 7, 2010
- 404
- 0
- 0
Reasoned decision
Speaking of "reasoned decision," I know that somewhere among all of the 14 gajillion posts on this whole mess there was a post that quoted USADA and its intent to release its RD in five days. Can anyone point me to it? A site search didn't help much.
Thanks,
FS
Speaking of "reasoned decision," I know that somewhere among all of the 14 gajillion posts on this whole mess there was a post that quoted USADA and its intent to release its RD in five days. Can anyone point me to it? A site search didn't help much.
Thanks,
FS
- May 14, 2010
- 5,303
- 4
- 0
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
The writer is using the Sandusky case as an historic or cultural marker, he isn't comparing it to Armstrong or to his case. I know you mean to emphasize the gravity of the case, the magnitude of his misdeeds, and the low character of LA, by making this comparison; but all you really do when you make the comparison is to minimize Sandusky and his crimes. The two things, Armstrong and Sandusky, are on completely different scales.
MarkvW said:
Neither of them holds any type of license with the UCI unlike Bruyneel as a DS, or Armstrong as a rider. I'm not sure the same process would apply. It also makes it difficult to sanction someone who doesn't hold a license because there's nothing to withhold. The best case is that the governing body (UCI) would issue instructions that certain types of association or collaboration with these people would result in a sanction for license holders. Does it need a "reasoned decision" before taking that action? Is the UCI obligated to take any action? Hard to say.
John Swanson
- May 26, 2009
- 10,230
- 579
- 24,080
Fausto's Schnauzer said:
Race Radio said the report will be out by Thursday.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=996800&postcount=10739
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 41K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 792
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 13K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 854
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram