[Closed] Lance Armstrong... love him or hate him. .. ...

Bully and a liar. Nice guy

strong & charismatic would be an alternative view?

Total karnt.

Oh no........

I know I should just leave this alone, but:

[quote=Poggy ]certainly more for [s]cancer[/s] Lance Armstrong PR funds than any individual!

FTFY

inspirational in his era? just look at the wet blankets of today... froom? & omg 'wiggins'

armstrong turned over £30 million via livestrong... what an impact for cancer research!

Research? Or cancer 'awareness'?

The none cheating, none bullying wet blankets of today?

I feel sorry for him.

He faced a very tough situation...

He trained hard all of his life to be a professional cyclist and when he finally made it he found that he was expected to cheat and take drugs or lose any chance of winning EVER.

He made a choice that, in hindsight, helped no-one. He has my sympathy and I wish all those that forced this choice upon him as much misery as they've brought him.

Can you point to any significant research funded by livestrong?

they were all 'doing it' back in the day ferv, he was pretty much made a scape goat, sad stuff really... doc well worth a watch, eye opener...

He is a lying, cheating, thieving see you next tuesday.

[quote=Poggy ]armstrong turned over £30 million via livestrong... what an impact for [s]cancer research![/s] Lance Armstrong's PR

FTFY (I can do this all night)

[quote=JAG ]He trained hard all of his life to be a professional cyclist and when he finally made it he found that he was expected to cheat and take drugs or lose any chance of winning EVER.

Yeah, just like Chris Boardman, which is clearly why he didn't win anything EVER.

aracer... well done, crosssing out stuff like a propper grown up? ha

doc... defo worth a see, a different perspectice for sure!

strong & charismatic would be an alternative view?

He is undoubtedly that, but he is also a liar and a cheat, and cheats should have no place in sport at any level. So I'm glad he got found out. What I don't like is the way he is treated as the devil incarnate whilst all the other cheats and liars are treated as poor misguided souls that were victims of cycling's PED culture. Treat them all the same, life bans, 2 years, 4 years? whatever the punishment for cheating should be, it should be applied evenly and universally.

Livestrong is his pension. He's the biggest beneficiary by way of appearance fees for cancer 'awareness' events. Not too shabby either at a $500m pension fund!

mw... perfect overview! love it

& '6 month ban, out of season' was the general punishment for dropping la in dock!

all about money, everyone wanting a bit back... very sad

I thought Livestrong booted him out?

Fantastic, haven't had a good troll thread on here for ages. 😀

[quote=muppetWrangler ]What I don't like is the way he is treated as the devil incarnate whilst all the other cheats and liars are treated as poor misguided souls that were victims of cycling's PED culture. Treat them all the same, life bans, 2 years, 4 years? whatever the punishment for cheating should be, it should be applied evenly and universally.

You're suggesting that all of those he coerced into doping (because those who didn't found they no longer had a place on his team, with its carefully coordinated drugs programme headed by him) should be treated in exactly the same way as the bully/ringleader/drugs pusher? The thing is, there is a lot more to this than him just having taken drugs, and it's all those other aspects of his personality (bully, sociopath etc.) which makes him so much worse and so deserving of any punishment which comes his way. There's a pretty clear case that he helped to perpetuate and increase the use of drugs in sport in a way which wouldn't have happened without him, and that's certainly not something you can say about the vast majority of the other drugs takers. Happy to accept the concept of Ulrich being a victim, but it just doesn't wash with somebody as manipulative as LA.

after watching doc, got to love him, all his opponents back in the day did & they were all 'at it'... at least it was exciting times! unlike our gb wiggins... dour

I felt let down. After years of thinking what an inspiration he was and hearing how he was the most tested athlete in history, it felt like an utter betrayal in my faith in him to find out he was lying/cheating the system all that time.

I get that a lot of people were doing it at the time, but to me that's not the point. It's a kick in the nuts for everyone who believed in him and supposedly what he stood for.

The bullying just made it worse.

Cancer awareness does save lives in the here and now. Much of what Livestrong does is in America and doesn't really come up on our radar. Stuff like dealing with insurance companies can mean life or death in the US. Pretty much agree with the "level playing field" argument as well. What completely sets Armstrong apart was his rabid attacks on people who dared challenge him. People who were as it's been proved were telling the truth. Untill he can personally reconcile himself with these "victims" there's no way back IMHO.

they were all 'doing it' back in the day ferv, he was pretty much made a scape goat, sad stuff really... doc well worth a watch, eye opener.

Yes, but I don't understand your reasoning that it makes our most recent champions 'wet blankets'. Are you suggesting that the sport is now lacking without the cheating, lying, manipulating, bullying, controlling and vindictive behaviour of Armstrongs like?

I can accept that Armstrong has been made an enormous scapegoat for the sports past ills but Armstrong was the enormous star with the enormous global following and the enormous bank balance as a result. His fall from grace is entirely of his own making and is only as spectacular as it is due to the fact he had such a high place to fall from. I have no sympathy.

aracer.: I think my post may be in danger of being misconstrued.

I don't buy the idea of any of them as victims, Ullrich, Pantani, Riis, Hamilton, Hincapie, Landis etc. All liars and cheats, all should face the same punishment.

It's widening the debate a bit but I also think that punishment should be universal to anyone that makes their living from any sport not just cycling. The idea that cycling should push for 4 year or life bans when rugby, tennis, football, baseball, ice hockey etc are apparently making very little effort is a disgrace.

EDIT:

after watching doc, got to love him, all his opponents back in the day did & they were all 'at it'... at least it was exciting times! unlike our gb wiggins... dour

I also think that is bullshit propagated by the liars and cheats to win public support and ease their consciences. I don't doubt that it was rife and that a high percentage of riders undermined their sport and their supporters by cheating but somewhere in every race there would have been people riding clean. Sadly we'll never know who they were or how good they were because we can't ever be certain of having seen a fair fight. It may be that given a level playing field the Pantani's, LA's and Ulrich's would have risen to the top anyway or maybe someone we've barely heard of should have been one of the great cyclists of his generation.

Yup , liar , bully , manipulative , arrogant etc etc. That said (and Im not a fan) he probably did more for cycling and cancer awareness at the time than anyone in history.

I watched 'The Armstrong Lie' and have read every book on the subject but couldn't help but almost feel sorry for him even knowing he has the ability to avoid the truth at every cost. He was still with or without PED's the greatest grand tour cyclist for a decade.

Name more than 5 clean cyclists in Armstrong's time. ?

It wasn't just the fact he was a cheat and a liar. It was that he had the legal clout to ruin the lives of anyone who dared to challenge him. That's why he is seen as worse than others I think. No pity for him at all.

tenfoot - Member
I felt let down. After years of thinking what an inspiration he was and hearing how he was the most tested athlete in history, it felt like an utter betrayal in my faith in him to find out he was lying/cheating the system all that time...

+1

I'd like to go through this forum and delete the posts in which I defended him up to the bitter end.

Life bans for all drug cheats. No redemption, no weaselling back in.

A cheat, plain and simple.

Anyone who thinks livestrong wasn't about lance, for lance, needs to take a long hard look at their lpersonal assessment criteria.

Maybe the world needs to be grateful he found cycling to express himself in. Otherwise it could have been politics.

And, if his PR machine gets enough momentum, could still become one.

[img] [/img]
Considering the depth of Chemistry in the field, I reckon he did fairly well!

I've got mixed feelings about this.

I'm completely with the 'no place for performance enhancing drugs', but as various have posted, if you're going to bring the ban hammer down, then it has to be even or else it's not justice, it's bullying in itself. The singleminded pursuit and takedown of Armstrong felt just like he was personally being removed because someone wanted it done as opposed to any high and mighty reasons of fairness.

Take Mercxx. Greatest cyclist ever etc. Except out of several dope fails he even held his hands up at one, and the first was popularly blamed on a scam to help the Mafia win a bet. Lively life, domineering, attacked on Tour, politely asked not to race one year ... it goes on.

Armstrong is a product of our system. Give it 20 years and see what happens. Possibly his biggest mistake after starting doping was not owning up soon enough when the strident voices began.

Maybe it's time to really get the brush out and clean up all the questionable activity (not just doping) in sport - but at least be even handed about it.

Godwin incoming...

You might as well say Hitler did more for the founding of the State of Israel than any individual.

This is not meant, in any way, as a direct comparison.

I don't buy the idea of any of them as victims, Ullrich, Pantani, Riis, Hamilton, Hincapie, Landis etc. All liars and cheats, all should face the same punishment.

Bllx. Each individual should be punished relative to the scale of cheating, their influence in that cheating, and the level of reward gained. And finally, the last factor to consider. Did they admit what they did, apologise, and how much time did they take to do so.

Are you new here OP?

Do the "right" things we do in life mitigate the "wrongs"? Not really in my opinion.

I don't think any one who is competitive at a world level is a nice person. Every action is calculated to increase their chances to win. Armstrong did this better than the rest.

Cheater/liar/inspiration/hero - it's a fine line between them in an ultracompetitive world.

Funny thing is we would never even hear of this if the cycling was organised like every other professional sport (with the teams controlling the money rather than the organisers).

[i]I personally think he's done more for cycling 'in general'[/i]

I wish he'd chosen to stick with Tri.

Lance didn't advance cycling, he advanced Lance. he just happened to be a cyclist. The media were obsessed with the cancer survivor-comeback to glory story and the UCI let that happen, and too many people who made too much money from that story chose to look the other way as well.

Like all sociapaths, he could be generous and affable, and could at the same time behind the scenes be bullying conniving and manipulative and more importantly probably still is. I think one should view any report/documentary/article that attempts to reconstruct him with a measure of perspective and scepticism

I've not seen the film as I don't want to add to his ego/pension fund in any way, but does it cover his bullying of Frankie and Betsy Andreu? His destroying of Emma Reily? His public humiliation and career ending of Christophe Basson? His public abuse even of Tyler Hamilton?

These acts are what sets him apart from the other drug cheats of the time and the reason why he has been treated differently.

And as for raising money for cancer, well I think that has now been shown that a substantial proportion of that money was paid to LA for appearance fees for after dinner speaking etc. Not what most people thought their money was going to when they bought their yellow wristbands...

He should go to prison then live out his life in obscurity and poverty.

Godwin incoming...

You might as well say Hitler did more for the founding of the State of Israel than any individual.

This is not meant, in any way, as a direct comparison.

Yeah, just like Chris Boardman, which is clearly why he didn't win anything EVER.

Well he didn't really compare did he iirc he never even finished a tour and only won stages which he was rolled out for in comparison a Scottish bloke who made his own gear did equally well at racing the boards though didn't get to go to the olympics

Drugs or not the bloke never survived 3 weeks in France (edit ok he did in 1999) preferring to go and sit in the car

Depends on the definition of doing more for cycling I suppose. The middle aged women at my work make jokes about being lance Armstrong "on steroids" as I do the SPD clunk into my room in the morning,so yes more people are aware of cycling. Depends on if you believe the adage of no publicity being bad publicity.

This has got to be a troll, right?

It wasn't that he just did drugs, it was the way he destroyed people around him who didn't toe the line.

And he has done nothing for cancer research other than draw money away from charities who might fund it.

Poggy. 1/10

And he has done nothing for cancer research other than draw money away from charities who might fund it.

Yep, although there was one year when Livestrong gave something like $20m for research, about 5% of their takings that year.

Well to be fair, I'm glad they raised awareness of cancer. I'd never heard of it until Armstrong talked about it... 🙄

He just like most politicians in my book

Lying cheating thieving twonks, the lot of them.

These acts are what sets him apart from the other drug cheats of the time and the reason why he has been treated differently.

Exactly. All the others participated in it, took advantage of it and lied to get out of positive tests if possible but nobody was more damaging to other people or the sport than Lance. The strange thing is, it took the USADA report to open most people's eyes despite almost all the info (other than the testimonies of contemporaries) was in the public domain before.

Erm spoiler alert!!!! Don't tell me how the documentary ends !!!! Arrrrgh 😆

None of this would have happened if cyclists were registered and had to pay road tax.

When was this Documentary on?

[quote=epicyclo ]I'd like to go through this forum and delete the posts in which I defended him up to the bitter end.

At least you're not hora 😆

You can't directly compare Armstrong to Hitler and then say you're not directly comparing them!

He he...bound to be a few Lance supporters about - even Hitler had his fans....

konabunny - Member
You can't directly compare Armstrong to Hitler and then say you're not directly comparing them!

Yes I can - I can do what I like! If this was a Nazi controlled state, however, then I probly couldn't. And oblivious troll threads like this one would probly be verboten too.

So, which way would YOU have it then Lemmy?

[quote=vincienup ]Armstrong is a product of our system.

Not really - he helped to create the system.

[quote=misinformer ]

Yeah, just like Chris Boardman, which is clearly why he didn't win anything EVER.

He won the Criterium International, was 2nd in Dauphine Libere and Tour of Romandie, 3rd in Paris Nice in addition to numerous stage wins in those and other major stage races, World TT Champion, winner of GP des Nations. By any standards that was a highly successful racing career, far more successful than most professional cyclists, and arguably at least as good as LA pre-cancer. My comment about him was in reply to a suggestion that LA deserved sympathy as he had to take drugs in order to win anything, when quite clearly that isn't true. Well maybe it was for LA, maybe he wasn't as good as CB. The point remains that even in the LA era it was quite possible to be a very successful pro cyclist without drugs, it wasn't a choice which was forced on anybody.

Alternatively I could have suggested Cuddles, who didn't suffer from the issues which made it impossible for CB to perform well over 3 weeks, but CB is a plenty good enough example of somebody winning pro bike races clean.

Lance was an exceptional cyclist, and must have had exceptional strength of character to get back to the top of his game after months of Chemo etc.
You could almost forgive the drug use considering everyone was at it..
However, the fact he targeted and bullied those who doubted him so aggressively, abused his position in such a big way just to better himself and kept the lies going for years is unforgiveable, and for that, I hope he gets sued for every penny he has and lives out his days in sad obscurity...

armstrong turned over £30 million via livestrong... what an impact for cancer research!

My £4 a month Direct Debit does more for Cancer [b]Research[/b] than Lance Armstrong's £30 million did. 🙄

I've not seen the film as I don't want to add to his ego/pension fund in any way, but does it cover his bullying of Frankie and Betsy Andreu? His destroying of Emma Reily? His public humiliation and career ending of Christophe Basson? His public abuse even of Tyler Hamilton?

These acts are what sets him apart from the other drug cheats of the time and the reason why he has been treated differently.

This sums it up. I couldn't care too much about the fact he cheated. At the time, the whole system was broken, which is what led to the majority cheating. Can't really blame Lance for that.

The only reason he is where he is, is because he made so many enemies at the time. It's all of his own making.

Some of this stuff is covered in The Armstrong Lie by the way. In fact I'd say it's fairly balanced. Not anti-Lance, and not pro-Lance. It's worth watching.

This has got to be a troll, right?

I love all this Lance was an exceptional/phenomenal cyclist shit.

So good he had to take drugs though right?

He was average, although probably good classics, rider but shit at grand tours.

He was, however, a phenomenal responder to EPO.

He didn't invent doping but not being able to beat them he joined them. And he did do it professionally.

And all this cancer shit, go read about how much fun the charity ride guys had....

I had almost forgotton about him ,almost. Sorry for the film crew ,but I hope it flops.

the wanderer - Member
I don't think any one who is competitive at a world level is a nice person. Every action is calculated to increase their chances to win.

We were doing a private uplift on illegal tracks in deepest darkest North Wales and Peaty and Ratboy turned up on the invite of one of the riders.
We had so much fun, truly joining in the banter and frivolity that you can imagine in the back of a van. Really nice guys.

Tracey Moseley came several times to another track as it's a brutal track from top to bottom. This is on private land and one day the landowner turned up. That meant that day's dh riding was stopped.
I went round Coed y Brenin with her and her boyfriend. She's such a lovely person.

Both Peaty and Moseley have been champions.

Yep, although there was one year when Livestrong gave something like $20m for research, about 5% of their takings that year.

Which year was that ?

He is scum. Cycling's John Terry.

A couple of points, then I'm out...

armstrong turned over £30 million via livestrong... what an impact for cancer research!

No money goes to cancer research, it goes to cancer 'awareness', and paying Lance Armstrong's Legal fees, and his 200k personal appearance fee, every time he turned up at a Livestrong event.

This statement "everyone was at it" is simply not true, at least when you look at 1999, his first win. the festina affair of 1998 had riders and teams scared, it was a very clean tour, apart from US Postal, who effectively kick started the arms race again. I don't know the exact figures, but when those 1999 sample were re tested for EPO in 2005, out of 36 (?) samples, 12 (?) were positive, 6 (?) of those were Armstrongs.

[quote=iolo ]Tracey Moseley came several times to another track as it's a brutal track from top to bottom. This is on private land and one day the landowner turned up. That meant that day's dh riding was stopped.
I went round Coed y Brenin with her and her boyfriend. She's such a lovely person.
Both Peaty and Moseley have been champions.

Moseley dominated the Enduro World Cup last year, so I think it's fair to say she's currently competitive at a world level. In between jetting around the world to those she found time to coach mini-aracer, amongst many other juniors helped by her at our club, and she regularly turns out to club events which I doubt are a huge benefit to her personal performance. Good call. I think it's fair to say that Liam Killeen is/was also competitive at a world level, and he's also been involved with coaching the juniors at our club - quite quiet, but also a genuinely nice bloke, and somebody I'm proud to say I know.

I think this idea that you have to be a ruthless sociopath to succeed at world level is part of the LA mythology, an attempt to excuse his behaviour, when clearly it's not actually true.

The guy was clearly a nasty piece of work. Not at all bothered about the drug taking aspect though, this appears to be the least of his sins.

Well he beat lots of other junkies.

He did win it 7 times though, whatever anyone says. 7 Tour wins will be remembered even when it's pointed out that he cheated.

He did win it 7 times though, whatever anyone says. 7 Tour wins will be remembered even when it's pointed out that he cheated.

He hasn't won the TDF, he's been disqualified from 7. But not won them.

Which year was that ?

The foundation gave out a total of $20 million in research grants between 1998 and 2005, 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.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/athletes/lance-armstrong/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html

What bugs me most about him is that he perpetuated the myth that you have to be a **** to be a winner.

It is complete bullshine, there are many many highly successful athletes, world record holders and champions who are "nice guys". But because of a few nasty little bastards coaches and parents are teaching the young the very worst habits of a few notorious winners.

I know the op is a troll, but I just hate hearing the stupid idea that to be a success you have to be a nasty bastard rolled out, many actually seam to believe it.

You get EPO abuse at all levels and not just the winners. Local road races, local running clubs. It's rife throughout sport. Local rider got a two year ban and he wasn't winning anything special. [url= http://road.cc/content/news/20965-british-cyclist-dan-staite-gets-two-year-ban-positive-epo-test ]Dan Staite, Drugs cheat[/url].

Which year was that ?

The foundation gave out a total of $20 million in research grants between 1998 and 2005, 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.

It's very simple. Sport runs within a framework of rules. Everyone participating agrees to play within that framework, and if you break the rules you will be sanctioned.
An individual's "charity" work is not relevant in any way.

Lance Armstrong? Text book psychopath:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare_Psychopathy_Checklist

glib and superficial charm,
grandiosity
need for stimulation
pathological lying
cunning and manipulating,
lack of remorse
callousness
poor behavioral controls
impulsiveness
irresponsibility
denial
parasitic lifestyle
sexual promiscuity
early behavior problems
lack of realistic long-term goals
failure to accept responsibility for own actions
many short-term marital relationships
juvenile delinquency
revocation of conditional release
criminal versatility

lack of realistic long-term goals

Not so sure about that one!

I love him and hate him but I think I hate him more.

Armstrong for cancer, or this bloke?

FaceBook - [url=

]"Love your sister"[/url]

(I recommend you go to the FaceBook page before making smart STW comments on its name.)

Doping is one thing, but he then denied it, intimidated and threatened other people to keep quiet, used his power and money to bully people and continued to lie throughout it all.

Like I say, doping is one thing, but Armstrong is a ****. He always will be.

Poggy, you're only seeing half the picture. The documentary (I haven't seen it) must have been from HIS perspective. Read more, such as David Miller's autobio. Then come back onto this thread and reply saying you STILL agree with your first post.

The documentary glosses over the damage he did. The only people who get much air time are Frankie and Betsy Andreu, Simeoni gets a brief mention and appearance as does Emma O'Reilly but nothing about Bassons, LeMond or other people.

The whole documentary comes across as Gibney trying to rescue something from all the stock footage he had more than a really open portrayal of Armstrong and his behaviour. It still perpetuates the lie that everyone doped so Lance had to. It doesn't really go into any of the Livestrong stuff nor his financial fraud (although it shows the video testimony without explaining why it was made). I wouldn't show it to someone who thinks Lance was pretty awesome really as it's still casting Lance in a relatively positive light considering.

That said, the best part is seeing Lance setting off for a ride with his daughters riding around outside the house on what look like Halfords BSOs.