Will Armstrong save cycling?

[peterst6906]

Sure, but if Armstrong does tell all about the way the UCI protected him and facilitated his doping over the years, it really could turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to cycling.

Armstrong won't deserve any credit for anything good that comes of this. He is largely responsible for the mess of the past 15 years to begin with.

Any credit resulting from change will be to the credit of those riders willing to stand up and say no to doping from the start. Whether that happens is yet to be seen.

Armstrong also won't be responsible for the downfall of Verbruggen and McQuaid. They are totally responsible for that themselves.

 

[skippy]

@roberts21 , you mention phat mc quack , saying something on Monday , " business as usual " , but cannot find link ? Would appreciate , please?

My blogs to Lance & Oprah , did not expect Lance to name weasel & ostrich but seems these and heinous & phat are due to join him in the limelight !

Seems the Network " hosts " , still are unaware of the diff between Research & Awareness ! Lazy or do they think " it doesn't matter any longer ?

 

[DirtyWorks]

The only way I can see pro cycling being saved is if there is some positive influence and care for the current juniors who haven't yet made it into the sport but are in development teams and programs now.

Except there is one worldwide system and that system starves racers until the elite peloton. The elite peloton appears to be little more than entertainment wrestling talent. The sensible ones just walk away. Why introduce a kid into that system?

I say let's forget about the current generation and focus on cleaning the sport up from grassroots. I'd like to think Clinic members could help point out those local clubs and development teams who have people working on them with shady pasts?

Unless you live in Oregon, USA Cycling has and operates with impunity a government-granted monopoly on competitive cycling. The UCI enjoys a worldwide competitive cycling monopoly funded/supported by the IOC. If you want to do something, don't buy a UCI license.

Also, the "it's in the past. Cycling is cleaner than ever." has been a longtime reply by Hein and Pat and it is just an excuse to shut down discussion of the Pro and Amateur sport's many, many problems.

For example, in the USA, there are development teams run by USAC, Garmin, Specialized and others - what do we know about them?

The Specialized program appears funded by Thom Wiesel who has a long history of hiring doping doctors.
USA Cycling does not in fact develop athletes. Thom spends the money USAC generates as he wishes and the members of USA Cycling have no say at all. Thom's USACDF is a masterpiece. It's scammy, like Livestrong. I don't fully understand the scam, but it stinks like Livestrong.
I have no clue what's happening at Garmin's development program.

 

[will10]

Armstrong won't deserve any credit for anything good that comes of this. He is largely responsible for the mess of the past 15 years to begin with.
Any credit resulting from change will be to the credit of those riders willing to stand up and say no to doping from the start. Whether that happens is yet to be seen.

Armstrong also won't be responsible for the downfall of Verbruggen and McQuaid. They are totally responsible for that themselves.

Yes, but if the UCI had had any integrity whatsoever they could have popped him in 2001. Suisse positive, EPO, boom. Yeah ok, a two-time Tour de France winner tests positive, big negative vibes for the sport, but it would've been considerably less damaging than protecting him for a further 10 years.

Would it have moved things forward if Lance had been banned in 2001?

 

[peterst6906]

Yes, but if the UCI had had any integrity whatsoever they could have popped him in 2001.

That's exactly why they are responsible for their own downfall when it comes (writing of downfall, how long before a Hitler meme hits YouTube).

No integrity will be their undoing.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Would it have moved things forward if Lance had been banned in 2001?

Probably not. Hein and Pat were still trying to monetize cycling every day. Hein dragged his feet as long as possible to do better testing, did and said nothing before that when riders were dying from EPO overdoses.

What better way to monetize cycling than create a myth in a market where the local federation owner has cash to burn?

 

[sniper]

Good to hear Kimmage has a new ally.

 

[D-Queued]

"Armstrong will continue to do what he has always done - the right thing for him and him only."

yep.

The OP raises a very interesting question.

But, for years and years, some of us have observed that: You cannot fix cycling until Armstrong is exposed.

Armstrong is thus not the savior of cycling and never can be. He is the personal embodiment of the problem.

Cancer Jesus is not and cannot be Cycling Jesus.

If he can get away with it, then he personally represents the message on how to succeed.

Dave.

 

[Basecase]

The tide is turning.

Lance will indeed save cycling.

He was only 1 man, a pawn, albeit a big one, in the game.

He will spill the beans, and partly rectify his reputation.

 

[D-Queued]

The tide is turning.

Lance will indeed save cycling.

He was only 1 man, a pawn, albeit a big one, in the game.

He will spill the beans, and partly rectify his reputation.

Great.

Will he set up Cyclestrong so that we can all contribute to his appearance to gain awareness of cheating in cycling?

Dave.

 

[hrotha]

I suppose Armstrong might save cycling the same way Gollum saved Middle-earth.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I suppose Armstrong might save cycling the same way Gollum saved Middle-earth.

Be careful, you don't want to give Wonderboy any ideas for a made-for-television mini-series where he plays all the characters.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

OK, so Armstrong has got his just deserts for his doping, bullying and lies. However, the sickening performance of Pat McQuaid on Monday makes it clear that, as far as the UCI is concerned, it is 'business as usual' and there seems to be no force big enough to do what has to be done: effect a wholesale clear out of the UCI with McQuaid and Verbruggen being the first to go. No force big enough other than Armstrong himself that is.

Is there any chance that Armstrong will do the honourable thing and tell all with regards the complicity of the UCI in the USP / Discovery doping conspiracy? After all, the UCI were quite happy to 'throw him under the bus' when they were forced into a corner. If he did this I see no way in which McQuaid and Verbruggen could survive and then there would be a possibility of really building a better future for the sport.

I am sure that this is one action where we could all bring ourselves to support, and maybe even forgive Armstrong. So for the first time ever I find myself saying:

'Come on Lance!'

No, no he didn't.

 

[Cobblestoned]

I suppose Armstrong might save cycling the same way Gollum saved Middle-earth.

Like Biff saved our future, or at least McFly's.

 

[xrayvision]

There is only 1 person in Lance´s world, and it´s Lance.
He´s not gonna do anything for anybody or for any other cause than Lance.
Will he confess? NO
Will he blow the whistle? Oh yes.

The best is yet to come.

 

[Huckleberry]

What is there left to save? It's no longer a sport....its show business.

 

[ElChingon]

What is there left to save? It's no longer a sport....its show business.

Have to agree, its beyond saving, its more like the next layer of thin plaster to be applied to sell it.

 

[gjdavis60]

What is there left to save? It's no longer a sport....its show business.

When wasn't it show business? The Tour was started by a newspaper as a self-promoting publicity stunt.

When you put on an event and people pay to watch or to advertise, it's called entertainment, and those who are paid to participate in the event are called entertainers. Pro cycling is and always was an entertainment business; just like pro football and pro baseball, pro wrestling, and Cirque de Soleil.

The introduction of money into the equation fundamentally changes the nature of the activity. Those who impute more significance to pro sports; especially those who claim to be inspired by, or who live vicariously through, their "heroes", are destined to be disappointed and disillusioned because their heroes are never what they appear to be.

It is no coincidence that in many pro sports - even some of the "serious" ones - "show" is exactly the term used by competitors when they refer to their profession.

It's all a show; all produced for nothing else but to get us to watch and buy stuff. Everything else, including the rules, is secondary to this objective and the bottom line. Organizers - honest ones - will freely admit this.

Imo, the transcendental elements of cycling - and they DO exist - can only be experienced from the saddle.

 

[Huckleberry]

When wasn't it show business? The Tour was started by a newspaper as a self-promoting publicity stunt.

When you put on an event and people pay to watch or to advertise, it's called entertainment, and those who are paid to participate in the event are called entertainers. Pro cycling is and always was an entertainment business; just like pro football and pro baseball, pro wrestling, and Cirque de Soleil.

The introduction of money into the equation fundamentally changes the nature of the activity. Those who impute more significance to pro sports; especially those who claim to be inspired by, or who live vicariously through, their "heroes", are destined to be disappointed and disillusioned because their heroes are never what they appear to be.

It is no coincidence that in many pro sports - even some of the "serious" ones - "show" is exactly the term used by competitors when they refer to their profession.

It's all a show; all produced for nothing else but to get us to watch and buy stuff. Everything else, including the rules, is secondary to this objective and the bottom line. Organizers - honest ones - will freely admit this.

Imo, the transcendental elements of cycling - and they DO exist - can only be experienced from the saddle.

Dude, Muchas gracias! I also suffer from saddle sores...... Aye Carumba!

 

[DirtyWorks]

When wasn't it show business? The Tour was started by a newspaper as a self-promoting publicity stunt.

When you put on an event and people pay to watch or to advertise, it's called entertainment, and those who are paid to participate in the event are called entertainers. Pro cycling is and always was an entertainment business; just like pro football and pro baseball, pro wrestling, and Cirque de Soleil.

I generally disagree with this. The fundamental game elements of football/baseball are the basis of it's legitimacy. There is a reasonable expectation that it is actually athlete vs. athlete on the field and there is not someone who has pre-determined the outcome of the game.

The same cannot be said for entertainment wrestling and now cycling. We've had the UCI instrumental in making the 7x myth, and specifically avoid testing suspicious riders. Based on that, it is reasonable to assume the 2012 Sky myth is another case of Pat and Hein picking winners through a combination of doping and hiding doping positives.

Pre-epo, there was a legitimate cycling game. Now? Not so much.

 

[gjdavis60]

I generally disagree with this. The fundamental game elements of football/baseball are the basis of it's legitimacy. There is a reasonable expectation that it is actually athlete vs. athlete on the field and there is not someone who has pre-determined the outcome of the game.

The same cannot be said for entertainment wrestling and now cycling. We've had the UCI instrumental in making the 7x myth, and specifically avoid testing suspicious riders. Based on that, it is reasonable to assume the 2012 Sky myth is another case of Pat and Hein picking winners through a combination of doping and hiding doping positives.

Pre-epo, there was a legitimate cycling game. Now? Not so much.

Really, we just require the appearance of legitimacy, nothing more. Cycling has failed to provide even that much.

 

[sars1981]

I think the OP might be on to something. The uber-technical term for this is known as "passing the buck". His own selfish motives might actually benefit cycling---don't you love the invisible hand.

The problem is that exposing doping culture is not going to stop it. As long as the will to cheat exists, and the technology to enable it, it's going to go on.

There is no hope for cycling to become a clean sport.

 

[TheEnoculator]

Why would Armstrong ever want to save cycling? He's moved on to other stuff and he's made way too many enemies in the peloton for anyone to actually listen to him.

Besides, in front of the soft Oprah, he didn't even come clean, he's only "confessing" to try to reduce his ban and not lose too much money, so he's still the self-serving SOB we have come to know him. He doesn't care about cycling. He cares about only himself and the cancer patients idolizing him.

 

[DirtyWorks]

There is no hope for cycling to become a clean sport.

Not true. The problem is bigger than the UCI. The IOC permits the doping because it makes dramatic events.

If you want to just focus on cycling, then the UCI could give WADA the authority to open cases on their own. That, combined with back-dated testing with current consequences would severely limit the doping.

It won't eliminate the cheating as the bio-passport is still an IQ test, but you would see more human-scale performances. But, Hein and the IOC don't want that. They want to minimize doping controversy.

 

[broken chain]

Lance will resurrect himself by becoming chief of WADA.