86TDFWinner said:
However, I do agree with you that if they didn't know about Wonderboy being on the sauce, then I find that extremely hard to believe. The sponsors dumping him almost in unison, was a tell tale sign IMO, they knew and didn't want to tarnish their brands anymore obviously.
Yeah, wonder how that would unfold. The CEO of US Postal Service watching that 2000 Mont Ventoux stage where Armstrong made a mockery of convicted doper Pantani. What would that CEO be thinking at that time?
a: ''Hey, wasnt that little Italian guy disqualified from the Giro last year for having a too high hematocrit? He must have stopped doping otherwise Lancey boy wouldnt be able to match him''
b: "Hey, Lancey boy is sprinting up the Ventoux like he is Mario Andretti. Those training schedules of Chris Carmichael do work! Gotta get me some!''
c: ''What's that on tv? Why is that guy wearing a shirt that says US Postal Service?Oh, it is pro - cycling and we sponsor the ladd? He has had cancer? Wow. He got cured and now is the best cyclist in the world? Wow. Great. That is good advertising, I will give myself a big fat raise for sponsoring the ladd!''
Sponsors dont care. They are out for one thing: exposure.
They make these great contracts where they state they will not tolerate doping in the team or otherwise they will pull the plug.
So, why didnt they pull the plug when Joachim got popped? Mondini? Del Moral and the masseur dumping products at the roadside?
It is just like the Rabo - Rasmussen case. Only a fool couldnt see what was going on with the chicken, yet the Rabo top were cheering in the DS car when Rasmussen sprinted with Contador up the Peyresourde.
86TDFWinner said:
Wonderboy's "Everyone else made me do it" routine is rich to say the least. He certainly wasn't saying this when he was cashing those large checks was he? nope. Cancer Jesus was acting as if he was totally innocent. He's becoming more and more delusional by the day.
Look, I dont like Armstrong, he is an arrogant mtf. He has done a lot of bad things but what I do know he didnt invent doping. He was very good at it, that thing is for sure. He played 'the game', didnt take prisoners.
The good side on that is his own arrogance has led to his own downfall, the whole
'when Sastre can win the Tour, when vandeVelde can top ten I shall return' arrogance is what has made the case. Not letting Landis get on his team; major fail.
But does that mean the sponsor should be hypocritical aholes?
A very quick google search on
''us postal service corruption'' gave me quite a few hits.
https://www.google.nl/search?q=us+p...0.69i57j69i62.8877j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Funny how those things work.
I am not saying Armstrong is a victim, he played along with the system at the time, according to this article he was shooting even when he entered the Euro scene:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180944/1/index.htm
Lance Armstrong entered the Olympic world around 1990, at age 19, after a transition from competing in the triathlon. Two of his teammates on the 1990 U.S. junior team, Greg Strock and Erich Kaiter, claimed in a suit against USA Cycling in 2000 that coaches administered steroids to them in 1990, damaging their immune systems and cutting short their careers, according to documents from the suit. Neither Strock nor Kaiter ever tested positive. The suit was settled in November 2006; USA Cycling paid each rider $250,000.
From 1990 to 2000, Armstrong was tested more than two dozen times by Catlin's UCLA lab, according to Catlin's estimate. In May 1999, USA Cycling sent a formal request to Catlin for past test results—specifically, testosterone-epitestosterone ratios—for a cyclist identified only by his drug-testing code numbers. A source with knowledge of the request says that the cyclist was Lance Armstrong. In a letter dated June 4, 1999, Catlin responded that the lab couldn't recover a total of five of the cyclist's test results from 1990, 1992 and 1993, adding, "The likelihood that we will be able to recover these old files is low." The letter went on to detail the cyclist's testosterone-epitestosterone results from 1991 to 1998, with one missing season: 1997, the only year during that span in which Armstrong didn't compete. Three results stand out: a 9.0-to-1 ratio from a sample collected on June 23, 1993; a 7.6-to-1 from July 7, 1994; and a 6.5-to-1 from June 4, 1996. Most people have a ratio of 1-to-1. Prior to 2005, any ratio above 6.0-to-1 was considered abnormally high and evidence of doping; in 2005 that ratio was lowered to 4.0-to-1.
That might have worked for the US tri - scene but the Euro pro - scene needed some other injections.
He, for me, is in the same book as that Vaughters fellow. The difference between them is Armstrong is an ahole and Vaughters is good at playing the victim and has grown some sort of a conscience over the years whereas Armstrong was a mental patient from the start.