• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Why I will always be a "fanboy" and proud of it

Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Let me start this post by saying that I am really looking forward to see what amusing and deluded lengths the anti Armstrong brigade will go to paint me as either:

1. A "troll" - like it actually hurts someones feelings who doesn't depend on their reputation in an internet forum for their self esteem.

2. In the employ of Lxxxstrong/ Nxke/ the Taleban

3. Lance Armstrong himself

Ok....so here goes:

I have intermittently read posts in this forum for about a year or so, and frankly have never been even slightly inclined to post or get into any kind of debate with the self styled moral arbiters or doping experts who seem to have an extraordinary amount of free time on their hands. But I have to admit that some of the complete nonsense spouted has gotten the better of me.

So the first question. Do I think Lance doped?

Answer: Yes.

Do I care?

Answer: No

Who was cheated here? Ullrich? Pantani? Basso? Hamilton? Landis? Menchov? Vino? Kloeden? Beloki?

The playing field was level. Anyone who believes otherwise....I have some more bad news for you....Father Christmas doesn't exist either....honestly you can google it if you don't believe me.

Now once you have had a little lie down and recovered from the shock I will continue...

But the haters say "without dope he was just average"....well the evidence doesn't in anyway support your wish/ theory. The rules of the game were the same for everybody. "But it was just his doping programme that was better" they whine...."everyone knows it was sponsored by selling bikes on ebay or children into forced labour or dirty bombs to Al Qaeda"...or whatever the latest conspiracy it is that their fevered little minds can come up with. Well frankly, if his programme was better....good for him. I am sorry if this seems cynical....but if I saw Andy Schleck trying to take on Contador over the tourmalet on a brompton with a shopping basket on the front and toe straps, I wouldn't be whining about Contadors advantage....I'd be suggesting that Schleck find himself a new sponsor.

I admire Armstrong as a professional athlete. I admire his 7 tour wins. I admire the new audience he brought to cycling. I loved watching him....just as I loved watching Pantani....and Ullrich...and Indurain... I admire his comeback from serious illness. And I admire hugely the enormous good he has done in the continuing fight on Cancer and Cancer awareness. And you may hate that he made money while doing so....and that is your perogative, but i don't...You may hate the ubiquitous yellow wrist bands but they are a very simple reflection and barometer of the magnitude of his legacy. A lot of People love him. And always will.


And yes, some people hate him because or despite of everything I have said. And i don't wish to change your minds if you do. Just as I don't wish to change peoples minds if they believe Lady Di was killed by MI6....I will just continue thinking they are full of s..t.

And finally a few quick thoughts on a few related points;

1. Paul Kimmage....why oh why anyone uses him as the barometer of clean cycling I will never know.....himself a confessed doper who has never had the balls to name anyone of substance who doped with him...and yet has consistently criticised Millar, Kohl etc for also not naming names

2. Greg Lemond...ok I don't want to start any crazy conspiracy theories without any substance....but I think his "he said ....she said" rhetoric is pretty irresponsible to say the least....and I would love someone to ask him who his Doctor was in the 80's and if any of the medical help he received then has since become a banned practice...cos frankly Fignon...Bernard " I never tested positive" Hinault and Delgado don't put him in exactly angelic company.

3. Landis...all the haters love him now....even Adam Myerson would shake his hand....why?....what is there to admire? I feel genuinely sorry for the guy....I am afraid the one thing history may remember from this is his name and reputation being totally shot. And honestly that would be sad. I really hope someone looks out for him. It seems the most futile gesture. I don't think anyone will serve time or be "brought down" by anything he has said....he hasn't said anything new....other than name some names that it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure might have been involved....the only concrete thing he has provided is an admission of perjury.

4. Ferrari....trying to undermine his credentials as a coach, despite whether you agree with any of his supposed ethics is nonsense. Baby and bathwater springs to mind. Kilos/watts....VAM....high revolution pedalling techniques....all commonly accepted in todays cycling parlance and all developed in part by his work. And actually his hill climbing interval training is brilliant....genuinely brilliant....don't believe me....just join his site and get them.

Ok....finally...let me say this.....i love cycling....I really do. It changed my life. I am not trying to be an apologist for any kind of untoward behaviour. I am just being a realist. The thing I hate is cycling fans and some "commentators" seemingly trying to tear the sport apart by having meaningless imflammtory debates on the ethics of the past. Let the past be the past....dark or otherwise....no matter what anybody says, I won't stop admiring Tom Simpson....or Eddy Mercxx....or Jacgues Antequill.

I actually think as a sport it has done more to try and clean itself up than all other sports. But will it ever go completely away? Of course not. Even Lemond has said that the way forward may be to try and "control" doping. In an ideal world everyone would be clean. Great. But unfortunately that isn't the case....so let's have a reasoned debate. If any of us were offered a pill that enabled us to stay up for 18 hours a day with no side effects and that improved our looks /IQ's / brilliance in the sack, would we take it? Would we consider it cheating life? Really?

Let's talk about the future of cycling....whatever that may be. And frankly until someone shows me a photo of Armstrong or Bruyneel sacrificing babies on the postal bus before the ITT at the 2004 tour, I will, without reservation, love my memories of the past.

Peace


Oh....and P.S. without wishing to seem more imflammatory....does anyone else think that anyone who puts a supposedly brilliant quote as their signature might as well be wearing a T shirt that says "Sex instructor...first lesson free"?
 
Jul 24, 2009
351
0
0
Visit site
Yr about here ...

7 Stages of Greif:

1 Shock and Denial
2 Pain and Guilt
3 Anger
4 Bargaining
5 Depression and Sorrow
6 Testing and Reconstruction
7 Acceptance


it seems like a lot of you fanboys/trolls are on bargaining lately. yr all sorta comming through like in a group therapy session *hugs*
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
straydog said:
Let me start this post by saying that I am really looking forward to see what amusing and deluded lengths the anti Armstrong brigade will go to paint me as either:

1. A "troll" - like it actually hurts someones feelings who doesn't depend on their reputation in an internet forum for their self esteem.
<sniooed for brevity>

Actually - the first question is 'why bother telling us'?

You agree that Lance doped - yet "admire" his victories.

You you ask "who did he cheat? Ullrich? Pantani? Basso? Hamilton? Landis? Menchov? Vino? Kloeden? Beloki?" ...... yet forget that there are scores of cyclists who had better natural ability then any of the named above who returned home because they refused to join the arms race.

Kimmage, Lemond, Landis, Ferrari - there are several other threads devoted to their opinions.

In short you have no problem with cheaters - that does not amake you a troll, but it is easy to understand why you are (in your words) a "Lance fanboy".

EDIT- no-one has said Lance was "just an average rider", he was an average GT rider, which is a major difference, just check his prior GT experience pre 1995.
 
Jul 27, 2010
61
0
0
Visit site
So if everyone's cheating then it's okay to cheat? I don't buy it.

I tend to agree with your comments on Paul Kimmage though - I kind of admire him for going after Armstrong, knowing what he knows about him (I recall his comment about the stories he heard about the behaviour on Armstrong's/Bruyneel's team, which he said were "shocking, absolutely shocking"), but yeah, he's a doping cheat too so he can hardly sling mud.

However, I don't get the "other people were doing it therefore it's okay" attitude. Some people steal, murder, rob banks, to get ahead, get some cash etc...does that make it okay for you to do it?

You freely confess that you think Armstrong is a doper, so how do you feel about the fact that he has consistently lied about it? What about all the hope he's given to cancer victims? False hope, if as you say he's a cheat and a doper.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
Actually - the first question is 'why bother telling us'?

You agree that Lance doped - yet "admire" his victories.

You you ask "who did he cheat? Ullrich? Pantani? Basso? Hamilton? Landis? Menchov? Vino? Kloeden? Beloki?" ...... yet forget that there are scores of cyclists who had better natural ability then any of the named above who returned home because they refused to join the arms race.

This is the bit I like....when opinion becomes fact in the hands of the deluded...

who were the scores? The scores of proven clean cyclists who were empirically proven to be physically superior? You have convinced me.....such brilliant reasoning is impossible to argue with....and by any chance as you fall asleep at night do you believe that you were one of them?

As for the cadence comment...well I know the post was long and had some long words in it....but try reading that bit again...then do a bit of research on conconi, cecchini and ferrari and cadence....with among others Indurain


Do I have a problem with cheaters? I am a realist...it happens and does it fill me with moral outrage? No I have a life...and there are far more things to get really angry about....but the bit I really like is when people seem to say it was ok to dope but to say you didn't makes you a hypocrite....well show me one doper who during his career was going to put his hands up.


This is kind of fun though....before I know it i will be putting up a wacky little picture of myself....maybe with a "greif" mask on it
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
The Valley said:
So if everyone's cheating then it's okay to cheat? I don't buy it.

I tend to agree with your comments on Paul Kimmage though - I kind of admire him for going after Armstrong, knowing what he knows about him (I recall his comment about the stories he heard about the behaviour on Armstrong's/Bruyneel's team, which he said were "shocking, absolutely shocking"), but yeah, he's a doping cheat too so he can hardly sling mud.

However, I don't get the "other people were doing it therefore it's okay" attitude. Some people steal, murder, rob banks, to get ahead, get some cash etc...does that make it okay for you to do it?

You freely confess that you think Armstrong is a doper, so how do you feel about the fact that he has consistently lied about it? What about all the hope he's given to cancer victims? False hope, if as you say he's a cheat and a doper.


Well firstly....I don't equate doping to murder....he....and numerous others cheated in a bike race

The fact that he did....doesn't suddenly take away hope from cancer survivors....he survived, that is what gives people hope. He also worked incredibly hard and made a success of himself and in my opinion did nothing any different to his competitors
 
You you ask "who did he cheat? Ullrich? Pantani? Basso? Hamilton? Landis? Menchov? Vino? Kloeden? Beloki?" ...... yet forget that there are scores of cyclists who had better natural ability then any of the named above who returned home because they refused to join the arms race.
Christophe Bassons.

I don't care if he wasn't physically superior or if he doesn't constitute any "scores" by himself. The simple fact of the matter is he was a clean rider, he played by the official rules, and he was driven out of the sport. There's no way to tell what his real level would have been if the peloton had been clean. He might not have won any Tours, but that doesn't make a difference.

There were others like him, but that's irrelevant for the point I'm trying to make here. He was an innocent victim.

Anyone with any sense of justice would demand that the cheaters who took his career away from him and who didn't play by the rules be punished, no matter how many they are or how unrealistic the goal ultimately is.
 
Jul 24, 2009
351
0
0
Visit site
Yeah it was the Bassons / Simeonni (sorry I probably butchered the spelling) incidents that really turned me against Armstrong too. I genuinely dislike him and happily admit that makes me wanna see him go down. He's a bully. I dont like bullys.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
Christophe Bassons.

I don't care if he wasn't physically superior or if he doesn't constitute any "scores" by himself. The simple fact of the matter is he was a clean rider, he played by the official rules, and he was driven out of the sport. There's no way to tell what his real level would have been if the peloton had been clean. He might not have won any Tours, but that doesn't make a difference.

There were others like him, but that's irrelevant for the point I'm trying to make here. He was an innocent victim.

Anyone with any sense of justice would demand that the cheaters who took his career away from him and who didn't play by the rules be punished, no matter how many they are or how unrealistic the goal ultimately is.

Bassons WAS treated very badly....he spat in the soup as the french say....and was very brave to do so. As did Kimmage....and as you say this doesn't prove either of them were ever going to amount to much as a cyclist...but as you said that isn't your point...and I suppose my point isn't that cheating should be admired but rather this....why is such vitriol reserved for Armstrong and not the countless others?....because he was more succesful?

Bassons also said "I'm not the only clean rider but there aren't many who can say 'I don't take drugs'. For most riders, their health is the last of their concerns."
 
Mar 13, 2009
626
0
0
Visit site
straydog said:
...Who was cheated here? Ullrich? Pantani? Basso? Hamilton? Landis? Menchov? Vino? Kloeden? Beloki? ...be wearing a T shirt that says "Sex instructor...first lesson free"?

The USPS may be cheated, no?

Consider the long-term benefits of 'exposure' that a TdF winner provides is replaced by inextricable association to 'stripped because of PEDs' ex-winner.

It could be.
 
Aug 6, 2009
1,901
1
0
Visit site
So why are you guys feeding the trolls again? Someone whose first line accused anybody who disagrees with him of being deluded, probably isn't interested in a reasonable exchange of views.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,007
0
0
Visit site
Son, if you believe what you've written, really believe it, then there is a shred of pity I can give to you.

If you've written this in some fashion to indoctrinate yourself by repeating it aloud, to cement it into your being, then you're the fool. You've been sold a bill of goods thats gone spoiled.

For the future, and for your idol, there will be an Uncle coming round to collect a bill. Its long been overdue. Seems they were sold a bill of goods that was not what they thought it was. Not everyone, and not folks who decide, are fools like you.
 
straydog said:
Bassons WAS treated very badly....he spat in the soup as the french say....and was very brave to do so. As did Kimmage....and as you say this doesn't prove either of them were ever going to amount to much as a cyclist...but as you said that isn't your point...and I suppose my point isn't that cheating should be admired but rather this....why is such vitriol reserved for Armstrong and not the countless others?....because he was more succesful?

Bassons also said "I'm not the only clean rider but there aren't many who can say 'I don't take drugs'. For most riders, their health is the last of their concerns."
In a way and to a certain degree, it IS because he was more successful. If those who doped came 78th there would be little incentive to dope, so Armstrong is a much bigger problem than Thomas Frei, and he should be treated as such.

And that's without even getting into the omerta-enforcing side of things.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Colm.Murphy said:
Son, if you believe what you've written, really believe it, then there is a shred of pity I can give to you.

If you've written this in some fashion to indoctrinate yourself by repeating it aloud, to cement it into your being, then you're the fool. You've been sold a bill of goods thats gone spoiled.

For the future, and for your idol, there will be an Uncle coming round to collect a bill. Its long been overdue. Seems they were sold a bill of goods that was not what they thought it was. Not everyone, and not folks who decide, are fools like you.

"So why are you guys feeding the trolls again? Someone whose first line accused anybody who disagrees with him of being deluded, probably isn't interested in a reasonable exchange of views."

ha ha....and thank you to both of you for illustrating what I meant....honestly if you had just read it before you posted....


Resorting to meaningless name calling doesn't actually make me feel bad or anyone who is trying to have a debate suddenly change their opinion....it just confirms to them that you are incapable of actually having a debate...if you disagree with what i have said....fine....then reason it out....otherwise you just kind of make me think a ten year old has got onto their dad's laptop
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Visit site
straydog said:
Who was cheated here?
Every single rider who's career was cut short because they chose to rode clean. Every single rider who couldn't make it as a pro because they refused to dope. Every single rider who lost their job to a doper. Every single rider who could have had a much more successful career if they hadn't had to ride against dopers.

There were hundreds, if not thousands, who were cheated by Armstrong and his ilk. But they never really seem to count to the fanboys, do they?

The playing field was level. Anyone who believes otherwise....I have some more bad news for you....
No, it wasn't, and anyone who believes it was a level playing field is simply rationalizing and making excuses.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
In a way and to a certain degree, it IS because he was more successful. If those who doped came 78th there would be little incentive to dope, so Armstrong is a much bigger problem than Thomas Frei, and he should be treated as such.

And that's without even getting into the omerta-enforcing side of things.

The incentive....at last someone actually talking sense....I agree...but it wasn't like Armstrong invented doping....or winning....and he certainly didn't start the omerta either....even kimmage played along with that in the 80's.

I agree that Armstrong enforced and endorsed the omerta and I think the reason he and so many others did so was because they were protecting their interests at the time....and I agree it was not his finest hour...the Bassons incident....not the simeoni one....
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
straydog said:
Let me start this post by saying that I am really looking forward to see what amusing and deluded lengths the anti Armstrong brigade will go to paint me as either:

1. A "troll" - like it actually hurts someones feelings who doesn't depend on their reputation in an internet forum for their self esteem.

2. In the employ of Lxxxstrong/ Nxke/ the Taleban

3. Lance Armstrong himself

Ok....so here goes:

I have intermittently read posts in this forum for about a year or so, and frankly have never been even slightly inclined to post or get into any kind of debate with the self styled moral arbiters or doping experts who seem to have an extraordinary amount of free time on their hands. But I have to admit that some of the complete nonsense spouted has gotten the better of me.

So the first question. Do I think Lance doped?

Answer: Yes.

Do I care?

Answer: No

Who was cheated here? Ullrich? Pantani? Basso? Hamilton? Landis? Menchov? Vino? Kloeden? Beloki?

The playing field was level. Anyone who believes otherwise....I have some more bad news for you....Father Christmas doesn't exist either....honestly you can google it if you don't believe me.

Now once you have had a little lie down and recovered from the shock I will continue...

But the haters say "without dope he was just average"....well the evidence doesn't in anyway support your wish/ theory. The rules of the game were the same for everybody. "But it was just his doping programme that was better" they whine...."everyone knows it was sponsored by selling bikes on ebay or children into forced labour or dirty bombs to Al Qaeda"...or whatever the latest conspiracy it is that their fevered little minds can come up with. Well frankly, if his programme was better....good for him. I am sorry if this seems cynical....but if I saw Andy Schleck trying to take on Contador over the tourmalet on a brompton with a shopping basket on the front and toe straps, I wouldn't be whining about Contadors advantage....I'd be suggesting that Schleck find himself a new sponsor.

I admire Armstrong as a professional athlete. I admire his 7 tour wins. I admire the new audience he brought to cycling. I loved watching him....just as I loved watching Pantani....and Ullrich...and Indurain... I admire his comeback from serious illness. And I admire hugely the enormous good he has done in the continuing fight on Cancer and Cancer awareness. And you may hate that he made money while doing so....and that is your perogative, but i don't...You may hate the ubiquitous yellow wrist bands but they are a very simple reflection and barometer of the magnitude of his legacy. A lot of People love him. And always will.


And yes, some people hate him because or despite of everything I have said. And i don't wish to change your minds if you do. Just as I don't wish to change peoples minds if they believe Lady Di was killed by MI6....I will just continue thinking they are full of s..t.

And finally a few quick thoughts on a few related points;

1. Paul Kimmage....why oh why anyone uses him as the barometer of clean cycling I will never know.....himself a confessed doper who has never had the balls to name anyone of substance who doped with him...and yet has consistently criticised Millar, Kohl etc for also not naming names

2. Greg Lemond...ok I don't want to start any crazy conspiracy theories without any substance....but I think his "he said ....she said" rhetoric is pretty irresponsible to say the least....and I would love someone to ask him who his Doctor was in the 80's and if any of the medical help he received then has since become a banned practice...cos frankly Fignon...Bernard " I never tested positive" Hinault and Delgado don't put him in exactly angelic company.

3. Landis...all the haters love him now....even Adam Myerson would shake his hand....why?....what is there to admire? I feel genuinely sorry for the guy....I am afraid the one thing history may remember from this is his name and reputation being totally shot. And honestly that would be sad. I really hope someone looks out for him. It seems the most futile gesture. I don't think anyone will serve time or be "brought down" by anything he has said....he hasn't said anything new....other than name some names that it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure might have been involved....the only concrete thing he has provided is an admission of perjury.

4. Ferrari....trying to undermine his credentials as a coach, despite whether you agree with any of his supposed ethics is nonsense. Baby and bathwater springs to mind. Kilos/watts....VAM....high revolution pedalling techniques....all commonly accepted in todays cycling parlance and all developed in part by his work. And actually his hill climbing interval training is brilliant....genuinely brilliant....don't believe me....just join his site and get them.

Ok....finally...let me say this.....i love cycling....I really do. It changed my life. I am not trying to be an apologist for any kind of untoward behaviour. I am just being a realist. The thing I hate is cycling fans and some "commentators" seemingly trying to tear the sport apart by having meaningless imflammtory debates on the ethics of the past. Let the past be the past....dark or otherwise....no matter what anybody says, I won't stop admiring Tom Simpson....or Eddy Mercxx....or Jacgues Antequill.

I actually think as a sport it has done more to try and clean itself up than all other sports. But will it ever go completely away? Of course not. Even Lemond has said that the way forward may be to try and "control" doping. In an ideal world everyone would be clean. Great. But unfortunately that isn't the case....so let's have a reasoned debate. If any of us were offered a pill that enabled us to stay up for 18 hours a day with no side effects and that improved our looks /IQ's / brilliance in the sack, would we take it? Would we consider it cheating life? Really?

Let's talk about the future of cycling....whatever that may be. And frankly until someone shows me a photo of Armstrong or Bruyneel sacrificing babies on the postal bus before the ITT at the 2004 tour, I will, without reservation, love my memories of the past.

Peace


Oh....and P.S. without wishing to seem more imflammatory....does anyone else think that anyone who puts a supposedly brilliant quote as their signature might as well be wearing a T shirt that says "Sex instructor...first lesson free"?

This post is almost the identical format to Biffen's thread on How Lance changed the Tour. Either these guys are on the payroll or attend the same volunteer class.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
straydog said:
-------
Who was cheated here? Ullrich? Pantani? Basso? Hamilton? Landis? Menchov? Vino? Kloeden? Beloki?

The playing field was level.

----------

Really? How much was Jan's "Donation" to the UCI? Did his also include advance notice of Out of Competition Surprise Testing?

Any physician will tell you that all humans respond differently to Pharmacology. EPO is a great example of this. Some see a 2% gain others 15%. Which one was Lance? Riis? Ulrich?

Did all riders have access to Ferrari? How is it that Neopro making $30,000 per year can afford him?

Do you think Bassons would agree with you? Do you think the riders who chose to retire instead of dope, pay doctors, freeze bags of blood think that it was a level playing field?
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
straydog said:
Bassons WAS treated very badly....he spat in the soup as the french say....and was very brave to do so. As did Kimmage....and as you say this doesn't prove either of them were ever going to amount to much as a cyclist...but as you said that isn't your point...and I suppose my point isn't that cheating should be admired but rather this....why is such vitriol reserved for Armstrong and not the countless others?....because he was more succesful?

That refrain is pretty tiresome. If that were the case, wouldn't everyone be up in Indurain's grill about doping? He was pretty successful, too. 7 Grand Tours, Olympic Medal, World Champion, etc.

Why aren't people jealous of him? Maybe it's something else? For me, the Simeoni incident was a huge turning point in my opinion of LA. It's one thing to dope. It's another attack those who aren't giving into your myth. Also, the vitriol he has for any/everyone who questions the myth simply makes him a pretty despicable character in my book. If he followed Indurain's approach of just keeping his head down, there probably wouldn't be nearly the level vitriol for him.

I agree with you that Armstrong is underrated by many of his detractors, and in a way I blame the system which allowed and even encouraged his behavior more than I blame him. He made the best out of a bad situation, and in the process made a bad situation worse. Personally, I respect the guys like Danny Pate, Svein Tuft, Mark Scanlon and Bassons a lot more. Guys who just said "no thanks", raced clean and kept their heads up. This "level playing field" is a big justification for cheating, in my book at least.
 
Jul 27, 2010
620
0
0
Visit site
Oldman said:
This post is almost the identical format to Biffen's thread on How Lance changed the Tour. Either these guys are on the payroll or attend the same volunteer class.

seriously....is that the best you can come up with?

I work in a factory in china....forcing all those little blind kids to mould the bracelets
 

TRENDING THREADS