Why the hate for Lance?

[Biffins]

I'm new to the forums and was quite taken aback by the enormous hate and venom for Lance dripping from almost every post and thread. It's kind of bizarre to me and am curious why it exists. I wasn't supporting Lance and was kind of indifferent to whether he made the top 5 again or not, but am curious why so many so desperately want him to fail.

Lance was indisputably one of the giants of cycling. He popularized the sport and made the Tour de France a global event. He brought money, fame, attention, and an audience to the sport. The Tour de France organizers recognize this and hence they honored him by allowing him to give a speech on the podium after his 7th victory in 2006, an honour bestowed on noone before or since. Without Lance cycling in general and the Tour de France would be akin to the Iron Man Triathlon in Hawaii, a gruelling event with local popularity and with some of the best athletes in the world and about which, by-and-large, the world doesn't give a hoot about. Lance's impact on popularizing cycling has arguably been greater than Tiger Woods on golf, Schumacher on F1 or Michael Phelps on swimming because of the obscurity the sport started from pre-Lance.

Given all this, anyone who loves cycling, has to be grateful to Lance for all he's done for the sport and for putting cycling and the Tour de France on the global map. Making it "AN EVENT". So when I saw him dropping yesterday, I only felt sad to see an old legend facing his human limitations and unable to command his historic prowess. Yes, I too wish he had not come back from retirement to tarnish his legacy, just like Schumacher. But since he bid, I can only now bid him adieu and keep the memory of his historic run.

Lance is the reason I started following cycling. Now that he's retiring for good, I can only thank him for bringing me to this wonderful sport.

So again I ask, why the hatred and venom for someone who has single-handedly done more for cycling than anyone before or, probably, anyone ever will?

 

[mickkk]

Because he is a drug cheat. He cheated himself, the sport and his fans.

 

[msjett]

Biffins, you will get your answer.....possibly very soon. Because people are willing to tell you more than once, why.

 

[Cerberus]

Many reasons.

He's widely seen as someone who has benefited more from doping and been more vigilant in enforcing the omerta than most other riders. He is also by many believed to have engaged in outright corruption to conceal his drug use negating the "it's a level playing field" argument. I'm personally not entirely sold on this actually being true, but there is evidence of impropriety (see his donations to UCI).

He also treated Contador very poorly in last years Tour this is actually my main beef with him, he came from the outside and took over the team from a stronger rider, while badmouthing the guy who should have been the captain. Very bad form.

Also he has a number of very fervent fans which is annoying to those of us who aren't fans, I don't know whether the hate pre-dates the fanboyism or if it's the other way around. Perhaps they co-developed.

Lastly Armstrong probably had the effect for cycling you describe in the US, but not so much in Europe. I think the claim that Armstrong has done more for cycling than he really has is another reason for the dislike, particularly since he's an exemplar of the Cycling=Tour de France view that's fairly common among casual fans, but frequently and virulently detested by more serious fans.

That being said I'm hardly the most fervent LA hater on the forum, and find the dislike somewhat over the top.

 

[rxgqgxnyfz]

Given all this, anyone who loves cycling, has to be grateful to Lance for all he's done for the sport and for putting cycling and the Tour de France on the global map.

TDF and basically cycling overall (of which TDF is actually just a small part of) has been on a global map hundred years before Lance came and convinced everyone in US that it's all his doing.

 

[danjo007]

because biffins, apparently every expert here seems to think they know the inner goings on of the the behind the scenes cycling world and claim without any solid proof at all, that hes a cheat.

god help us if any forum member here ended up with jury duty!

 

[Saddlesaw]

I'm new to the forums and was quite taken aback by the enormous hate and venom for Lance dripping from almost every post and thread......

If this is a true reflection of your forum experience you must have read with great interest the huge amount of information in the posts. Presumably you also took the opportunity to weigh the arguments made in those posts.

Given your question it can only be concluded that you are not moved by the weight of evidence and therefore your question is simple trolling......

 

[Archibald]

Don't feed the Trolls...

 

[eljimberino]

Through focusing only on one race and posessing a dogged determinism to win at all costs and he sucked a lot of the chivalry out of the sport.

 

[Biffins]

Because he is a drug cheat. He cheated himself, the sport and his fans.

Firstly that is your opinion and not a fact. He might have cheated but we don't know yet. We might find out in future or we might never find out. But nothing is proven yet.

Secondly I see lots of people happily supporting someone like Vino or Basso than Lance, and those are known proven drug cheats. So again this explanation is also not the reason there is so much hate for Lance.

 

[theyoungest]

Lance is a winner, and conforms to the characteristics which belong to that type of person, including being a bit of an a$$hole.

 

[la.margna]

who likes cheaters? who likes liars? who likes omertà enforcing dictators? who likes people building a business and profiteering from cancer misery?

 

[Biffins]

Many reasons.

He's widely seen as someone who has benefited more from doping and been more vigilant in enforcing the omerta than most other riders. He is also by many believed to have engaged in outright corruption to conceal his drug use negating the "it's a level playing field" argument. I'm personally not entirely sold on this actually being true, but there is evidence of impropriety (see his donations to UCI).

He also treated Contador very poorly in last years Tour this is actually my main beef with him, he came from the outside and took over the team from a stronger rider, while badmouthing the guy who should have been the captain. Very bad form.

Also he has a number of very fervent fans which is annoying to those of us who aren't fans, I don't know whether the hate pre-dates the fanboyism or if it's the other way around. Perhaps they co-developed.

Lastly Armstrong probably had the effect for cycling you describe in the US, but not so much in Europe. I think the claim that Armstrong has done more for cycling than he really has is another reason for the dislike, particularly since he's an exemplar of the Cycling=Tour de France view that's fairly common among casual fans, but frequently and virulently detested by more serious fans.

That being said I'm hardly the most fervent LA hater on the forum, and find the dislike somewhat over the top.

So there is hate for Lance because he's suspected of doping......... I thought everyone was suspected of doping in late 90s and early 00s. Nothing's proven yet. Plus it would be hypocritical to be supporting folks like Vino or Basso if only doping was the issue.

Yeah last year's Astanna team drama was just sad. I wished Lance had not returned to cycling.

Also I'd say the effect he had was global, not just US. Also note that the TdF organizers themselves honored Lance by allowing him to make a speech at the podium on his 7th win in 2006. So they agree, to some degree.

 

[Biffins]

If this is a true reflection of your forum experience you must have read with great interest the huge amount of information in the posts. Presumably you also took the opportunity to weigh the arguments made in those posts.

Given your question it can only be concluded that you are not moved by the weight of evidence and therefore your question is simple trolling......

Maybe the arguments were made in posts that have long since dropped from the front pages of the forums.

Now I just see hatred and venom. Noone is making any justifications, everybody is just piling on to kick him while he's down. I don't get it.

 

[Biffins]

Through focusing only on one race and posessing a dogged determinism to win at all costs and he sucked a lot of the chivalry out of the sport.

Sorry, this is quite a bizarre response.

So if he focused on just Tour de France, that makes him a target to loathe? I don't get it. If Agassi skipped Wimbledon (because they wanted him to wear white) or Australian Open (because it was too far), I didn't see tennis fans yelling curses at him. Why does it matter which races he chooses.

Also if he had a dogged determination in winning, I'd only assume it would make him more admirable.

As for chivalry in cycling, now you're sounding like my parents and uncles who yearn for the good old days when gentlemen played cricket instead of the athletes today who only care about winning. Jeez. All sports have an edge to them now. That's not just cycling.

 

[Biffins]

Lance is a winner, and conforms to the characteristics which belong to that type of person, including being a bit of an a$$hole.

Basically by that explanation you are saying anyone who has the audacity to think they are the best athlete of their sport, is a bit of an *** and not humble. By that measure every great champion, Federer, Nadal, Schumacher, Tiger Woods etc etc, are all a bit of an ***.

errrrrrr........ ok............

 

[Kwibus]

who likes cheaters? who likes liars? who likes omertà enforcing dictators? who likes people building a business and profiteering from cancer misery?

This is sick. Sure he makes money out of it, but what if he did nothing? Would that help the fight against cancer? I think he did a lot for struggle against cancer. I don't give a **** if that made him earn more money.
To some people doing nothing is better I guess?

 

[rxgqgxnyfz]

Yeah last year's Astana team drama was just sad. I wished Lance had not returned to cycling.

That drama that with half of it he organised and half of it he imagined and kept spinning spinning and spinning on. The half he imagined was supposed to be AC's, but he couldn't care less to answer cause he simply doesn't know english enough to even know about the campaign to discredit him in the first place.

Also I'd say the effect he had was global, not just US. Also note that the TdF organizers themselves honored Lance by allowing him to make a speech at the podium on his 7th win in 2006.

YES.

Allowing someone to make speech after a three-week race is unprecedented, never before happened act that only LA has been granted (bought more likely), throughout the entire history of cycling (which according to LA didn't even existed before he came and made it a sport).

 

[Lyds97]

I agree whole-heartedly with the justification Cerberus gave. It's not so much that he cheated (although all but the most naive cycling fan must acknowledge that he did) but the way he treated those who criticised the acceptance of doping in cycling, Bassons being a notable example. With his comeback at the Tour coming a year after the Festina affair, Armstrong arguably did his utmost to ensure that institutionalised doping was allowed to continue at a time when he should have been speaking out against the use of PEDs and helping the sport to clean up its act.

ASO may well have let Armstrong give a speech on the podium in 2005, but I don't think anyone is denying the sway he has with the Tour organisers. It's difficult to understand if you are an American cycling fan, but for a lot of us he did more harm than good, by making out that the TdF was the only race that mattered and by drawing legion 'fans' who shared that belief.

 

[Biffins]

who likes cheaters? who likes liars? who likes omertà enforcing dictators? who likes people building a business and profiteering from cancer misery?

I see lots of people liking Vino and Basso. So that explanation is not valid. Plus nothing is proven yet for Lance's case, though it might be but not yet.

As for the Livestrong foundation........... err it's a non-profit organization. I'm sorry you didn't know that.

 

[Cerberus]

So there is hate for Lance because he's suspected of doping......... I thought everyone was suspected of doping in late 90s and early 00s. Nothing's proven yet.

Plenty has been proven, I'm not going to repeat everything that has been said on the subject, but there's a summery of most of the evidence here: http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2009/11/8-things-on-lance-armstrong-from-other.html

It's fairly long, but you can read it if you're interested.

 

[ulrikmm]

I do not like his morals.

His aggressive, American "I'll sue you" dealing with critique (eg. the physiotherapeut who helped him put make up on his needle marks, bookwriters)

His "donations" (UCI beware: There is no such thing as a free meal).

His Twitter mindgames.

Him not attending the Contador victory party at the 2009 Tour (where everybody else got their watches), and then attempting to not notice Conatadors visit to his bus in 2010, and trying to cover it up in different ways 1) "I was not in the bus" 2) "I was in the bus but at the back and did not see him" 3) When he realised how unsympathic his behaviour appeared, he stated "this is the greatest talent ever" (= it will be OK to lose to him).

His blaming the team for his punctures in the pavée stage (he rode like an amateur, the cobblestone experts always ride in the middle of the cobblestones: It is harder, much more vibration, but you ride there because you want to avoid the dirt shoulders of the road: smooth looking - but treacherous (lots of flats from the smaller stones in the dirt).

Him pretending to be a nice guy, doing charity work, when in fact it is obvious that he is a manipulating egocentric.

This is what I think of him.

 

[Kwibus]

So there is hate for Lance because he's suspected of doping......... I thought everyone was suspected of doping in late 90s and early 00s. Nothing's proven yet. Plus it would be hypocritical to be supporting folks like Vino or Basso if only doping was the issue.

Yeah last year's Astanna team drama was just sad. I wished Lance had not returned to cycling.

Also I'd say the effect he had was global, not just US. Also note that the TdF organizers themselves honored Lance by allowing him to make a speech at the podium on his 7th win in 2006. So they agree, to some degree.

It is hypocritical. People who hate Lance because he probably used dope should hate the entire peloton around 2000. All lying riders who were all using dope.
Europe always loved cycling and the TDF has always been huge in Europe, but he sure made it more popular around Europe. Specially the US.

I'm no fan of Lance, but he is a champion and it's sad for him he lost it yesterday. An age came to an (2nd) end. It actually was over allready, but now it really is. I think it's honorable that he will continue the TDF to help Levi.

 

[Biffins]

ASO may well have let Armstrong give a speech on the podium in 2005, but I don't think anyone is denying the sway he has with the Tour organisers. It's difficult to understand if you are an American cycling fan, but for a lot of us he did more harm than good, by making out that the TdF was the only race that mattered and by drawing legion 'fans' who shared that belief.

So you're upset that he popularized only the TdF. You are wishing he had done the same for the Giro and Vuelta and made them as big an event? So you agree that he was good for the TdF then just you wish he had done more........ ???!?

All the people saying he focused only on the TdF is to me quite a bizarre answer. Why would you hate someone for making one event popular........ Next I'll hear how Sampras was an *** for saying Wimbledon was the most prestigious event..........!?!??!?!

 

[eljimberino]

Please lock this thread.