Walsh Interview

[BroDeal]

Long. Check it out.

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/david-walsh

 

[pmcg76]

Good interview, I actually have his book Tales of the Tour de France from 93 in which he first interviewed Lance. Excellent book.

Lance fans are naturally loathe to give Walsh any respect despite the fact that he has been following cycling much longer than the vast majority of Lance fans. He was also the first biographer of Sean Kelly in 1985.

Personally, I see a lot of similarities in Walshs attitude change from Lance fan to Lance objector with my own attitude to Lance.

Still think this latest book is a bit unnecessary.

 

[Anonymous]

Great interview. I suggest it is a worthy read even if you are predisposed to discounting anything he writes. I think you will see that the characterization of him by the Lance camp is an attempt to discredit him not based on who he is, but through rhetorical dishonesty.

 

[hfer07]

Long. Check it out.

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/david-walsh

Great Interview--Looking forward to read his new book, & I hope he emphasizes a bit more in the UCI corruption than LA already told history-(well,they are both equally corrupted)

 

[rhubroma]

Long. Check it out.

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/david-walsh

Yes long indeed. Well I honestly have never read Walsh's books, but what I have gathered from the interview is that it is uncanny how much of what he says coincides exactly what I have been thinking for years (and recently writing on this forum).

From the protected cancer icon, to the conflict of intrests problem with the UCI, to the Livestrong foundation as a personal shield and propagandistic public image maker, etc.

I've been writing this stuff on my own here, because 11 years living and competing in Italy has educated me this way. But it seems, apart form those on this site who view the situation likewise, the majority of folks see non of this, are absolutely blind to it and find in our way of thinking nonesence or even a biased vindictive mentality and only have the critical capacity to brand us as "Lance haters."

While it's true I don't like the man, but it is not a bias which has caused me to see him in thie vein. To the contrary, it is precisely because I have come to see him as the nasty (Simeoni), liar and the fraud that he is, who even has now had the gall to coopt the cancer community to cover up his doped career and use it as a platform for a future public life that has caused my thorough dislike for his persona, which I naturally find currupt and therefore insipid.

 

[keen_but_slow]

The good news is that as soon as he pops his head above the parapet by becoming politically active, there's money to be made by journalists asking some awkward questions, as opposed to the usual "tell us again why you're so brilliant" that he usually gets.

 

[whiteboytrash]

Finally got around to reading all of this.

Couple of aspects interested me. One was that fact that Walsh barley makes any money from the books. His main income is from writing about other sports for newspapers. The money he makes from Lance books covers the cost of production. ie there is no profit in it.

Secondly and the most interesting point and one I was not aware of. LAF and Livestrong.org were created as non-profit organisations by Lance Armstrong – not charities. Although LAF does spend 45c in the dollar promoting itself.

However Livestrong.com is a “for profit” organisation owned by a company which Lance owns. Now there is no indication to anyone that visits or uses or buys products from Livestrong.com that is purely for profit. This I find even more disgusting than what I thought he was doing. So when you see Livestrong plastered across athletes chests or on the Astana kit it’s not to promote awareness but to promote a commercial company under the guise of awareness. Disgraceful.

I now understand the point Kimmage was making at the ToC. You don’t have a patent on cancer.

 

[Not Riding Enough]

Interesting interview and he certainly comes across as very reasonable and considered.

He also just didn't bag out the Lance Armstrong Foundation or livestrong.org and negate any good that they do just because of his opinions of Armstrong and how he may be using it for his own ends.

I also didn't realise that there was a just for profit livestrong.com which does have some Lance Armstrong Foundation stuff prominently on the front page. It is just wrong.