[Closed] Lance is still a hero

all this stuff about Lance and the wins

I've watched the tdf for years, since 1987 ish and my earliest memories are of Lemond vs Fignon

Lance wins were boring, his team would neutralise as much as they possibly could, tow the entire peloton to the last mountain and then LA would sit in the wheels until the domestiques were all spent and he would go with the other dopers trying to catch him. DULL. The drugs made the racing dull because the other teams couldn't counteract the strength of USPS

(Indurain was also boring to watch because the huge TT every year before the mountains played right into his hands, Jean-Marie Leblanc course design sucked)

Re Pantani, he was entertaining because he wasn't strong on the TTs so would have to attack the other riders, so the tactics would have more variety

I know people think that he's been great for cycling globalisation (The UCIs mandate), because the US love the against the odds story but the down side is that they've turned a blind eye to the dopage and this is the fallout

so no, not a hero, not a likeable man either when you consider the coercion of Zabriskie into doping

Why the hell are they selling Pantani T shirts in Cycling Weekly still ?

Because he was one of the most awesome climbers ever.

Because he was one of the most awesome [s]climbers[/s] dopers ever.

Irrespective of whether Jimmy Saville was a doper or not, he probably came first.

Boom boom

My Livestrong hoodie is pretty comfy and if some of the money from it might have possibly gone somewhere near helping someone with cancer, that's a win in my book.

I know it's made by Nike.

More importantly, can we now expect a significant price reduction on all Trek Madones??? 😀

The reality is that people who have achieved a lot in life are not particularly likeable.

Yeah, everybody hates Wiggo. Sir Chris Hoy has no friends. Sir Steve Redgrave is universally disliked.

The last time I checked, Steve Peat and Tracy Moseley were neither arrogant, nor pains in the arse. Quite the opposite in fact.

I've never met Steve Peat, but if you want to have a chat with Tracey just turn up and help out at one of our little local MTB events - the ones held on her family's land where she designs the course. At the event I went to recently she was out on the course marshalling for the kids events - she also often does kids coaching.

The only name I can drop as somebody I've known personally is Emma Pooley - she seems to have achieved quite a bit, yet is very likeable and not at all arrogant.

This idea that you have to be an arrogant manipulative bully to win is just another one of those Lance myths the deniers have taken in hook line and sinker.

My Livestrong hoodie is pretty comfy and if some of the money from it might have possibly gone somewhere near helping someone with cancer, that's a win in my book.

Is it also a win that just as large a proportion of the money from it was spent on fighting Lance's legal denials?

The reality is that people who have achieved a lot in life are not particularly likeable.

Something wrong with a system that rewards this then ?

Hero
Ali, hero!! He was a tosser.

if some of the money from it might have possibly gone somewhere near helping someone with cancer

Junkyard you need to take off those rose tinted specs you wear. And no I do t think he is universally liked. Ali was far from a pleasant man, in the same vein that Armstrong is getting maligned.

Just my opinion as I have not met either, but then that never stopped the stw nobbers from spotting forth did it.

I'm not sure he ever was a hero. Its an odd word really. I think it has something to do with sacrifice for the benefit of others. The charity work might qualify but not the cycling. Forget the doping he raced to win and got paid to win. Nice life but it doesn'take you hero.

I found the book didn't portay him well. The I love my wife stuff was very hollow, OK hind site for me, he'd already left her. But still odd.

If he comes clean it will be easier to see if he can come up with a good, why he did it story. Was he on the ropes desperate for succes but blocked at every corner by cheats. Or was he the leader. Hay guys I've worked how to win. We need the best drugs, the best doctors and the best doping regime and we can win. It looks like the latter at the moment

I think the idea that being the best means being horrible is a myth some people like to hold onto. Single minded and determined certainly. But thats not the same as being an unpleasant bully. That the tough bit for Armstrong he is now seen as an unpleasant bully. I know I'm judging from a far but I don't think that label fits Roche, Indurain or Wiggins....

Well there was plenty of stories around Indurain at the time.
You just dont know anymore.Look at the winners this year in various races EX-drug cheats hopefully!!!!.
All a mess really.

Junkyard you need to take off those rose tinted specs you wear.

And no I do t think he is universally liked.

I know you dislike him i wondered why

Ali was far from a pleasant man, in the same vein that Armstrong is getting maligned.

Excellent could you now elaborate to the extent that you have actually explained your reason for holding this view?

Well he stung like a bee didn't he? I don't think that is very nice.

Is it also a win that just as large a proportion of the money from it was spent on fighting Lance's legal denials?

He should have set up LIESTRONG instead.

The below quote from previously linked Outside article sums up what Ive read previously about Livestrong; all marketing and fluff and little on really tackling cancer. I'm not sure cancer really suffers from a lack of awareness, which is Livestrong's main goal. Or to build a legacy for a bullying egomaniac, to put a "haterz" spin on it.

The foundation gave out a total of [b]$20 million in research grants between 1998 and 2005,[/b] the year it began phasing out its support of hard science. A note on the foundation’s website informs visitors that, as of 2010, it no longer even accepts research proposals

so thats $20m, from a total of $470million raised; from

http://www.livestrong.org/Who-We-Are/Our-Strength/Financial-Information

Since our inception in 1997, the Lance Armstrong Foundation has raised more than $470 million to support our mission to inspire and empower people affected by cancer.

so $450million spent on seminars, conferences etc with the likes of Phil Liggett appearing as (paid) speakers.

http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/06/lance-armstrongs-business-links-a-flowchart-by-dimspace/ shows how well connected and influential he is.

Yeah. Go Lance.

Re lack of awareness and support, you'd be surprised. Livestrong also offers one on one support worldwide where victims are assigned to Livestrong nurses and counsollers.

Much needed and appreciated.

[i]Re lack of awareness and support, you'd be surprised. Livestrong also offers one on one support worldwide where victims are assigned to Livestrong nurses and counsollers[/i].

Evidence of this "worldwide" support please.

Hard evidence, rather than PR spin..

Thank god music, film, art or literature doesn't have to be drug free! It'd be a boring world. Regulations and morality aside, Lance is a pretty good example of how amazing the human body/mind can be on the right drugs!

Of course he's a Bully, manipulative, single minded, win at all costs......This is a criteria for winning. Many, many business people have the same mentality. What..do you want all your champions to be virtual mates, to be people to have a drink with? To be nice

The reality is that people who have achieved a lot in life are not particularly likeable.

Errr, no. Chris Hoy and Chris Paterson to name but two. Doubt you could meet two nicer blokes, yet both total champions. Steve Redgrave too.

The reality is that people who have achieved a lot in life are not particularly likeable.

That's the sort of shitty attitude that makes the world a worse place. I've met a lot of really good people in business who do VERY well but you never hear much about them because they also tend not to be self aggrandising pricks. There seem to be lots of people like that in every walk of life. If I have to have a hero, I'd pick one of those.

I think if you're listening to Radio 5 right now Lance's hero status might be torn to shreds in the next few minutes...

Is it also a win that just as large a proportion of the money from it was spent on fighting Lance's legal denials?

Yes. For three reasons.
1. I might have helped someone with cancer.
2. I can't see a way in which Armstrong raising awareness of cancer and supporting those with it is a bad thing.
3. I have a nice hoodie.

I have a Livestrong running top, nice piece of kit.

On a more serious note, the guy does seem to have over achieved on a scale no other doper has even come close do. Possibly corrupting the UCI, running the largest cycling doping racket, crushing all opposition. You have to admire the scale of the operation - probably the biggest scandal cycling will ever see (other than Jimmy Saville narrowly losing the 2009 Giro).

[b]CRIKEY[/b]

[i]Re lack of awareness and support, you'd be surprised. Livestrong also offers one on one support worldwide where victims are assigned to Livestrong nurses and counsollers.[/i]

Evidence of this "worldwide" support please.

Hard evidence, rather than PR spin

Yes okay, ME.

So before assuming things eg that my assertion is just me gullibly falling for "pr spin" maybe you can pop your head outta the feeding frenzy and information up.

I guess my living in Scotland and Livestrong being in the USA makes the help I get [b]worldwide[/b]

Too many smart asses.