[Closed] So Lance Armstrong is going to confess...

It would suprise me,any confession will cost him the thick end of 14m US in the bonus and Times cases alone,and the potential of spending some of his tri competition time in the "big hoose." Would he make more than that back having also cut the legs from under the Lance fanbois who are also in denial? I think he is going to become a marginal figure as time goes on and road cycling sorts itself out. A Symbol of the bad old days if you like.

I would have thought a "Lance, I confess" book with all the gory details would make a lot of dosh.

Complete with a section on how to continue a top level training schedule while in a fed max....

Remember kids, cheaters never prosper.

If only that were true.

[img] [/img]
Lance's house

To be honest at this point does anyone care

Instead we should be worrying about Paul Kimmage's attack on Wiggo. He's gone too far for most people but some poop will always stick when thrown.

If only that were true.

Lance's house

He is separated from his wife and kids, he has alienated every friend in his life, he's facing prison, everything he ever archived in his life is a lie, etc.

Can't say I'd swap that for a big house.

He is separated from his wife and kids, he has alienated every friend in his life, he's facing prison, everything he ever archived in his life is a lie, etc.

Can't say I'd swap that for a big house.

What about if it had a pool?

On to Kimmage,he is less a crusader and more a freeloader IMO. I think he is needing something new to keep himself in the public eye,hence his increasingly frequent attacks on Sky.

Lets be honest its going to be quite funny when Sir Wiggo gets stripped of the nighthood.

I dont understand OP have you read the piece? Its written in the sameway as Heat and Now gossip magazines.

Spun conjecture.

Tbh we all know that he did it howevwr that article is misleading.

I have to say I agree with duckman, the kimmage article was "unconvincing",

Any links to kimmage article

Kimmage....tbh Im unconvinced about the track performances being totally clean.

Lance is worth 100s of $m, paying out a few 10s $m won't hurt him at all, plus he has a $500m pension fund (Armstrong Foundation).

Lance who?.......

😉

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage-unconvinced-by-sky-and-wiggins

I went on a charity ride which kimmage was on once, well I say he was on it, he wouldn't get out of the support range rover and his bike was transferred in one of the lorries.

I'd be gutted if Wiggins was Dirty. I really don't think he is TBH. If you looked at the tour it was controlled, and at the time there were complaints about the lack of attacking, or panache. It was a controll your losses in the mountains, hammer them in the TT's.

Further to. That Froome was off form in the vultea, clearly fatigued, not something the usage of PED's would really allow? It's how it will pan out when 'Berty returns will be interesting.

Actually the story looks legit, and the NYT is pretty reputable.

Don't get me started on that headline and the torturous way most of the piece is written though!

That house looks ugly. Also he doesn't need a pool as there is a local water hole to swim in........actually that's been destroyed by him as well (see lance's dispute with neighbours http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Neighbors-say-Armstrong-ruined-swimming-hole-1889551.php)

Hmm NYT isn't really a glossy mag Hora-it is still conjecture at this point though I agree. Frank Schleck's TdF positive is due to be ruled on soon his dad and uncle are on the panel that decides his fate 😯 quite why it's taken this long is ridiculous, they're obviously just going to give him a backdated 6 month ban and let him carry on.

I think rather than Froome being off form at the Vuelta I think it may have been a case of Contador and Valverde being so well "prepared".

Lets be honest its going to be quite funny when Sir Wiggo gets stripped of the nighthood.

Yes, really top level humour 🙄

I read Paul Kimmage's Rough Ride, and started off with the impression that he was quite a bitter, negative person, then I warmed to him as I got further through the book, but unfortunately he really disappointed me at the end in his chapter where he took the pee and made disparaging comments about normal cyclists attempting the Marmotte. So these days I am not inclined to take any notice of his sniping at Team Sky.

On to Kimmage,he is less a crusader and more a freeloader IMO. I think he is needing something new to keep himself in the public eye,hence his increasingly frequent attacks on Sky.

+1
The guy's an arse. Problem now is he's been proven right so he's now throwing more shit round the place, either to be controversial and keep his name in the papers or on the premise that if you throw enough shit, some of it will stick.

He will come clean, tell all...be forgiven.

Ditto negative stuff on Kimmage. He was right but needs to quit whilst ahead maybe?

I read The Secret race over the hols and found it fascinating. I had disliked Lance ever since reading 'Its Not About The Bike' (sub text - 'its all about ME'!) and so Hamilton's descriptions of LA tallied with my prejudices; i.e. LA was a bully and an egotist. And a big bully.

But regarding the OP it does rather suggest that most riders were not cleann and the Schleck / Contador and other more recent cases suggest that we should still all be v sceptical of riders claiming to be clean. Brits can cheat as well as anyone else surely? WE may all want Brad and CCav to be clean but we cannot prove that hey are clean - only someone else ca prove perhaps that they are not. Its unfairly cynical but no other way i can see. Doper's cant own up to it.

I liked Lance at first, then bit by bit I lost faith - too many amazing performances which then turned out to be against the likes of a doped Ulrich, inconclusive failed drugs tests, testamony by ex-team members, a prolonged relationship with dodgy doctors etc. So in the end I concluded there must be something dodgy going on (this was at least 4 years ago - how come the UCI were so slow on the case?). At the moment Wiggins has not done anything to arouse my suspicions. He won the tour putting out beleivable performances in terms of physiology in a year when most beleive it has got cleaner. The downer was the Sky team's relationship with a dodgy doctor and some team member have owned up to having doped in the past. In this case Sky responded by clearing these people out. If all teams did this the sport would be a very different place with no Contador, Riis, Schlecks etc.

So for now I am enjoying the fact that Wiggins has won.

Either Sky's whole mantra, the marginal gains, the power meters, the training methods, the riding style... everything they do, is one big con for the benefit of giving them plausible deniability for a doping program, or they are clean.

It's a bit like going to the moon, it's probably easier to just go that fake it and keep the secret for ever. Even Lance's "most sophisticated doping program in sport" was found out fairly easily.

With Lance right back as far as 1999 there were bits of evidence that they were on drugs,combine that with their VAM and power to weight ratios and it is obvious they were doping. With Wiggins there is none of this, nothing. So while we can't be 100% sure I think we can have enough confidence in Wiggo's performances to enjoy it and believe he is clean.

So while we can't be 100% sure I think we can have enough confidence in Wiggo's performances to enjoy it and believe he is clean.

I'm surprised he hasn't already. Yes, there are plenty of people out there who want to right and royally shaft him and they will be on the case the minute he confesses. But for someone who is quoted to have £127 million, plus whatever he has tied up elsewhere, you'd think a clean conscience and a fresh start would motivate more than losing a few million and perhaps shaming the few deluded believers that remain.

Then again, it ties in with the character he's alleged to be. It would just be nice to believe he's human.

Was he not just the best of a bunch who were all on drugs.?

neilsonwheels - Member
Was he not just the best of a bunch who were all on drugs.?

/facepalm

Even if everyone was doing drugs, it still doesn't make it a level playing field because individuals respond differently to drugs, or so I understand from what I've read.

vickypea - people also respond differently to different training stimulus.

I say that Lance is the valid champion of that era and here's hoping the confession allows him to compete again!

neilsonwheels - Member
Was he not just the best of a bunch who were all on drugs.?

Essentially yes.

He was not the only cyclist working with Dr Ferrari.

Ferrari was team Dr with the Gewiss team when they swept all before them in 1994....Ferrari then set up private practice in 1995 and worked with many other cyclists.

The 'most sophisticated doping program in sport' should be taken with a pinch of salt....it may be the biggest thing USADA uncovered but this kind of thing was going on in Europe already.
The Festina affair in 1998 when 250 bottles of EPO were found in a team car (with steroids too)....the same year the TVM team got busted with 100+ ampoules of the stuff....the team director of Festina admits systematic doping in the team....the Festina team Dr admits there was a special doping fund within the team used to procure doping products, at the time of their bust it had 60,000 euros in it....

Read 'The Death of Marco Pantani', the author uncovers evidence and records from various sports/health institutions that worked with Pantani (and others) which essentially points to state sponsored doping in the 90s around Italian cycling.

This was all going on before Lance won his first TdF, yes he doped....he was continuing a rich tradition among cycling's elite.
Whether he was using steroids, EPO or transfusions is largely irrelevant, he wasnt the first and he didnt have some magic formula that nobody else had....he came to europe, saw what was going on (massive drug use for those who still believe doping starts and ends with LA) and played the game better than the others.

Please tell me we're not going to go through the whole LA thing all over AGAIN...

The thing is Lance is "hinting" at wanting to confess but ONLY if he can come back and race again he wants to do a "DEAL". How that can ever be possible in my opinion is beyond me? They previously made it clear when he swore under oath he wasn't on drugs that he was under oath and did he fully understand what is meant. Lance isn't worrid about money he has ample it'e the prison sentence for perjury and the fact he wants to come back and compete in other sports. There should be no deal, treat him with the contempt he deserves. And as Crazy-legs says there was me hoping this was all over and I could say "LAnce Who?" but hey ho reality dictates it'll never be over.

As for Wiggo I believe he's clean the ascent times of the mountains they climbed this years TdF versus 90's and 00's have increased by 20 minutes!! that's down to pure training and not drugs IMO.

Can't imagine Lance will confess, his whole character is built around being a defiant winner, it would be weird to see him own up.

Hadn't seen the Kimmage story - good to see he continues his love affair with cycling.

So, with respect to him wanting to come back and race...

What's the difference between him admitting doping, serving a ban, and coming back to race, and David Millar admitting doping, serving a ban, and coming back to race?

I'm no fan of the man, but do the crime, do the time, clean slate should apply to all.

those who still believe doping starts and ends with LA

Who thinks that?

What's the difference between him admitting doping, serving a ban, and coming back to race, and David Millar admitting doping, serving a ban, and coming back to race?

Perjury I think.

What's the difference between him admitting doping, serving a ban, and coming back to race, and David Millar admitting doping, serving a ban, and coming back to race?

Miller used EPO on a few occasions, he certainly didn't rely on it 100%. Nor did he bully others into drug use or win the worlds biggest bike race 7 times.
When caught, he admitted his crime, served his ban and came back a reformed rider. Personally I think it was actually one of the best things that happened to him. He's a top bloke and now a very outspoken critic not just of doping but the whole culture surrounding it.

LA relied on bullying and intimidation to run one of the most sophisticated sports doping programmes ever seen in cycling, made tens of millions of dollars from it and still denies any wrongdoing.

Not really any comparison.
This isn't just one rider, it's the WHOLE culture of cycling from grass roots right up to the UCI. Even the journalists are in on it. You don't rock the boat cos if you do then all your interviews with the star riders disappear. It's way bigger than one athlete (even if that athlete is the biggest cycing superstar of the modern era).

I agree though that the way it's handled rider to rider varies wildly and that shouldn't be the case. I don't necessarily think LA should be stripped of his wins cos lets face it, you could strip virtually every other winner of their title. No consistency. 🙁

Back to the topic of the thread though, I can't see him confessing. He's not really got any need to unless he can secure some sort of million dollar live TV tell-all and somehow escape going down for perjury at the same time.

He's not really got any need to