Warning for Lance fans

[Preemo]

I'm a long time lurker, been reading these forums for a couple of years.

I'm a Lance Armstrong fan who believes Lance is a freak of nature honed by his background and supported by his focus, methods and strong team - but not by illegal performance enhancing drugs.

I am writing this as a warning to other Lance fans (genuinely I am) and not as a troll or in an attempt to inflame the community or anything else. I am also who I claim to be and am not some old poster returning under a new name. (I think that covers all the likely accusations to come my way.)

What is my warning - it is this: This forum is rife with rumour, circumstantial information and long bows drawn from a sprinkling of facts. There is no genuine editorial standards and no enforced fairness in dealing with the subject matter here - it is after all a public forum.

This forum also has plenty of anti-Lance posters (many seem to be veterans of the Lance wars) who delight in finding and them swamping/overwhelming any pro-Lance posts.

If you want a neutral view with some degree of editorial standard go look at the Wikipedia article on Lance. It objectively lists all the facts able to be collaborated. If you want to see the way the anti-Lance folk are forced to be both factual and logical, have a look at the discussion tab of the Wikipedia article. The Wikipedia editorial community engage with them over 3 or 4 archives worth of discussion. (The same can be said for the Levi controversy) The end result is wins on both sides and the Lance article as it stands emerges.

Finally, I acknowledge there have been plenty of accusations and circumstantial evidence against Lance, and maybe he has used performance enhancing drugs. To be fair to him, there is nothing proven or conclusive but if one day he was found guilty I would be disappointed but not unbelieving. We have all done and do things we are not proud of - it should not be a surprise if sporting hero's are the same, but my default position remains innocent until proven guilty.

I hoping this can become a sticky to warn newcomers.

I am hoping the anti-Lance haters don't descend on this thread and destroy what I am trying to do.

I hope I am not misunderstood and the intent of my post is acceptable. I seldom post and I am sure there are insinuations/nuances in my post I don't intend.

I hope I have played the issue and not the person. I respect the right to have and argue an anti-Lance viewpoint even if I disagree with it.

I hope Lance has one more TDF victory left in his legs.

 

[craig1985]

 

[issoisso]

Oh boy. This will not end well.

*grabs popcorn*

For the record, here is my opinion: I'm not anti-Lance nor pro-Lance, and I think it's pretty indisputable he won those races through simply being far better than his oponents and deserves full credit for that.

I also know all the facts, and thus consider it completely indisputable that he used PEDs during his entire career, comeback included.

I get your intention and it's a good one.

However, you mentioned wikipedia as being non-biased and presenting all the facts. And that just by itself is going to get you flamed, as there are a very considerably amount of facts that aren't there because Lance fans immediately edit them out and contest them.

Not that you wouldn't get flamed if you hadn't said that, as a lot of people here will see the word "Lance" and will immediately engage "go for the throat" mode regardless of how right or wrong you may be.

Good luck with this. you'll need it

 

[petethedrummer]

if one day he was found guilty I would be disappointed but not unbelieving.

What do you mean by this?

 

[peloton]

clueless

 

[Preemo]

Oh boy. This will not end well.

*grabs popcorn*

For the record, here is my opinion: I'm not anti-Lance nor pro-Lance, and I think it's pretty indisputable he won those races through simply being far better than his oponents and deserves full credit for that.

I also know all the facts, and thus consider it completely indisputable that he used PEDs during his entire career, comeback included.

I get your intention and it's a good one.

However, you mentioned wikipedia as being non-biased and presenting all the facts. And that just by itself is going to get you flamed, as there are a very considerably amount of facts that aren't there because Lance fans immediately edit them out and contest them.

Not that you wouldn't get flamed if you hadn't said that, as a lot of people here will see the word "Lance" and will immediately engage "go for the throat" mode regardless of how right or wrong you may be.

Good luck with this. you'll need it

Thanks issoisso,

I respect your views and can appreciate your conclusion.

Wikipedia is certainly controversial, but at least the discussions with editors I read there had some level of objective standard to pass. There are policies about living people etc. and rules about when something is a fact. I also know that a degree of mob rules there too and they have had their fair share of disasters.

 

[Preemo]

What do you mean by this?

I was making trying to make the point that I am not one of those people whom it is impossible to convince otherwise. There are some who would take a positive drug test result as a conspiracy or something - I would take it to mean he used drugs. Not sure if my original post was clear or if this helps clarify.

I am so afraid that I will say something unintentionally and needlessly offend or open myself up for unwarranted abuse.

 

[Indurain]

Why can't you just admit that it is highly probable that he took and is still taking drugs and is a big con and that the main purpose of his foundation is a tax haven and still consider him your hero for his bike riding. You put your hero on a pedalstil you always end up disappointed.

I did this with Indurain. I have no doubt that he most probably doped and that he has many weaknesses, amongst the worst being a friend to and helping Armstrong. But hey as a bike rider and the way he conducted himself in the peleton, doped or not, he is still a legend and should be admired.

 

[Berzin]

If you're sick and tired of trolls, please do not respond to this thread.

Just ignore it.

Responding will give them strength, like zombies chomping on human flesh.

 

[Preemo]

Why can't you just admit that it is highly probable that he took and is still taking drugs and is a big con and that the main purpose of his foundation is a tax haven and still consider him your hero for his bike riding. You put your hero on a pedalstil you always end up disappointed.

I did this with Indurain. I have no doubt that he most probably doped and that he has many weaknesses, amongst the worst being a friend to and helping Armstrong. But hey as a bike rider and the way he conducted himself in the peleton, doped or not, he is still a legend and should be admired.

Hi Indurain,

I'll freely admit that there has “been plenty of accusations and circumstantial evidence against Lance, and maybe he has used performance enhancing drugs.”

I’ll freely admit that like most people his motives are complex and probably not entire selfless and noble.

I’ll freely admit that Lance benefits financially from the foundation, but probably not illegally.

I know that I run a real risk of being disappointed, but it won’t be a big disappointment in the scheme of things. It’s a risk I’m willing to run.

Indurain was a great athlete. If he were in his prime today Lance would probably never have achieved his TDF fame. When you consider the improvements in equipment, training, understanding of human physiology etc. his performances were incredible. Probably topic of another post.

 

[Preemo]

If you're sick and tired of trolls, please do not respond to this thread.

Just ignore it.

Responding will give them strength, like zombies chomping on human flesh.

Please don't make this into some kind of troll war or whatever it is called. If you have a contrary view it is fine with me. Don't feel compelled to post your view here. The contrary views are well covered in many many other threads in this forum.

My wish is that this thread remain fairly pristine and be made a sticky (or easily found in a search by a newbie) so that this position can be seen by other Lance fans and they can see a perspective contrary to those views.

 

[petethedrummer]

I was making trying to make the point that I am not one of those people whom it is impossible to convince otherwise. There are some who would take a positive drug test result as a conspiracy or something - I would take it to mean he used drugs. Not sure if my original post was clear or if this helps clarify.

I am so afraid that I will say something unintentionally and needlessly offend or open myself up for unwarranted abuse.

I read it differently. Thanks for clearing it up.

 

[petethedrummer]

Anyway, why do Lance fans need a special warning sticky? Why not one for fans of all shady cyclists? Is it because Lance has become a God like figure and his fans need to avert their eyes from the anti-Lance heresy?

 

[craig1985]

Please don't make this into some kind of troll war or whatever it is called. If you have a contrary view it is fine with me. Don't feel compelled to post your view here. The contrary views are well covered in many many other threads in this forum.

My wish is that this thread remain fairly pristine and be made a sticky (or easily found in a search by a newbie) so that this position can be seen by other Lance fans and they can see a perspective contrary to those views.

Sorry if we have judged you wrong, but lately we have some Lance fans who's views who have made reading the thread feel like bashing one's head against the wall.

 

[Preemo]

Sorry if we have judged you wrong, but lately we have some Lance fans who's views who have made reading the thread feel like bashing one's head against the wall.

No worries and thanks for that.

I agree that many Lance fans seem blind to the very real concerns and suspicions that exist and also to the fact that it is possible to reasonably conclude either way about his drug usage.

 

[CycloErgoSum]

I'm a long time lurker, been reading these forums for a couple of years.

I'm a Lance Armstrong fan who believes Lance is a freak of nature honed by his background and supported by his focus, methods and strong team - but not by illegal performance enhancing drugs.

I am writing this as a warning to other Lance fans (genuinely I am) and not as a troll or in an attempt to inflame the community or anything else. I am also who I claim to be and am not some old poster returning under a new name. (I think that covers all the likely accusations to come my way.)

What is my warning - it is this: This forum is rife with rumour, circumstantial information and long bows drawn from a sprinkling of facts. There is no genuine editorial standards and no enforced fairness in dealing with the subject matter here - it is after all a public forum.

This forum also has plenty of anti-Lance posters (many seem to be veterans of the Lance wars) who delight in finding and them swamping/overwhelming any pro-Lance posts.

If you want a neutral view with some degree of editorial standard go look at the Wikipedia article on Lance. It objectively lists all the facts able to be collaborated. If you want to see the way the anti-Lance folk are forced to be both factual and logical, have a look at the discussion tab of the Wikipedia article. The Wikipedia editorial community engage with them over 3 or 4 archives worth of discussion. (The same can be said for the Levi controversy) The end result is wins on both sides and the Lance article as it stands emerges.

Finally, I acknowledge there have been plenty of accusations and circumstantial evidence against Lance, and maybe he has used performance enhancing drugs. To be fair to him, there is nothing proven or conclusive but if one day he was found guilty I would be disappointed but not unbelieving. We have all done and do things we are not proud of - it should not be a surprise if sporting hero's are the same, but my default position remains innocent until proven guilty.

I hoping this can become a sticky to warn newcomers.

I am hoping the anti-Lance haters don't descend on this thread and destroy what I am trying to do.

I hope I am not misunderstood and the intent of my post is acceptable. I seldom post and I am sure there are insinuations/nuances in my post I don't intend.

I hope I have played the issue and not the person. I respect the right to have and argue an anti-Lance viewpoint even if I disagree with it.

I hope Lance has one more TDF victory left in his legs.

+1

Well said. I disagree with your conclusion, but I respect and admire the manner in which you present it. Without dissenting opinions new knowledge cannot be discovered. You're right about editorial standards; it's the nature of the beast.

Welcome

 

[Preemo]

Anyway, why do Lance fans need a special warning sticky? Why not one for fans of all shady cyclists? Is it because Lance has become a God like figure and his fans need to avert their eyes from the anti-Lance heresy?

Hi Pete,

Good point and something I did not think about. Lance transcends cycling and many cycling (as apposed to Lance) fans have come into the sport because of him. It seems to me the media and fans turning up at races/events when he is there is much larger than otherwise.

I know a lot more about Lance than other cyclists .....maybe in a few years I'll be writing a "Contador fans beware" thread

 

[Cerberus]

I was making trying to make the point that I am not one of those people whom it is impossible to convince otherwise. There are some who would take a positive drug test result as a conspiracy or something - I would take it to mean he used drugs. Not sure if my original post was clear or if this helps clarify.

There already is a positive test. They dug up his 1999 samples and they tested positive for EPO. You presumably know about this because it's mentioned in teh Wikipedia article. The only way that could happen is if he either did use EPO, or if there was a conspiracy to frame him. Granted it might have required a slightly smaller conspiracy than the one that would be required to frame him in an official test, but the choice between doping and conspiracy is there nonetheless. I have no doubts as to which is most likely.

 

[BroDeal]

This is BPC...once again.

 

[El Imbatido]

This is BPC...once again.

I do not think so Brodeal, BPC tends to quote people like i have quoted you above, without having the posters name in the quote. ie. the quote by part

Preemo,

Thanks for your contribution, whilst i like many others here disagree with you it is nice to see it presented nicely for once and not just a war of insults. Enjoy the forum, take everything with a pinch of salt and like you have said in your previous posts, draw your own conclusions from the information.

Cheers

 

[python]

sorry i did not get it, what was the warning for lance's fan's ?

be prepared that he might have doped ?

that this forum has many anti-lance fans ?

not flaming just did not understand the point of the long op.

 

[Preemo]

There already is a positive test. They dug up his 1999 samples and they tested positive for EPO. You presumably know about this because it's mentioned in teh Wikipedia article. The only way that could happen is if he either did use EPO, or if there was a conspiracy to frame him. Granted it might have required a slightly smaller conspiracy than the one that would be required to frame him in an official test, but the choice between doping and conspiracy is there nonetheless. I have no doubts as to which is most likely.

Good point but not a slam dunk. The reason I say that is that the test was not an official test. The standards were not the same as for official tests and to date I don’t know that 6 year old samples are still stable for the EPO test to standards of evidence required – I mean the test was certified with current samples I think.

I believe even L'Équipe said that Lance did not have the means to defend himself.

The Vrijman's report also cleared Armstrong because of improper handling and testing. The report said the tests were conducted improperly and fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest they "constitute evidence of anything.

Like much of what surrounds Lance, you could conclude as you point out that it is reason to believe he used drugs and you can conclude that to be fair to Lance it does not.

Remember we are talking about the reputation and future of a living person. Consider as a thought experiment that he used EPO in 1999. Lance would respond exactly as he has – deny the report, claim his innocence and refuse the re-test of old samples.

Now consider in the thought experiment that he did not use EPO. He would react exactly the same way – deny the report, claim his innocence and refuse the re-test of old samples because even 1 positive (for whatever reason) would see him guilty. He would have nothing to win (because the rumours would continue even if all tested negative) and everything to lose.

I’m hoping I don’t have to do this with every point in the for and against story. I appreciate you raised it genuinely and validly and with no ulterior motive. I have tried to respond fully enough to make the point that no individual point is conclusive. There are often very strong reasons on either side of each point.

In the end it becomes a personal judgement as to whether the points overall start to become so large that you make a judgement. As I have said, I am of the view of innocent until proven guilty. I think that is fairest to the individual – we are after all talking about a living real person. I keep thinking if this was me on trial for my life and future I would hope that the standard of proof would be fairly high.

 

[python]

sorry i did not get it, what was the warning for lance's fan's ?

be prepared that he might have doped ?

that this forum has many anti-lance fans ?

not flaming just did not understand the point of the long op.

ok i think i got it. pls dont bother responding preemo coz it would be a waste.

after reading another of your posts it's rather clear, you came here to spin the same old crap with nicer rhetoric and 'polite' language.

educate yourself to the facts of armstrong's reality, then i'll give you my ear.

goodbye.

 

[laziali]

Please. Stop. Feeding. The. Troll.

 

[Preemo]

sorry i did not get it, what was the warning for lance's fan's ?

be prepared that he might have doped ?

that this forum has many anti-lance fans ?

not flaming just did not understand the point of the long op.

Thanks for your question and not flaming.

Ultimately what I am saying is that it is possible and valid to have a view that Lance did not use performance enhancing drugs. That reading this forum you might think that was not the case. A fair (in my opinion) view of the facts is that it is unproven. I acknowledge others have a different view and that too is valid. I'm not out to convince anyone or anything. I am not trying to bait or personalize the argument and I must say (thankfully) all the posters to date have been taken it in that spirit and responded in kind.

I hope that makes sense....I have spent what feels like several hours on this thread now and it is well past my bed-time so I will be signing off soon.