The Armstrong Lie

[shouldbeinbed]

Millers book is good if a little self serving IMO.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

Come and post in Pro Racing.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

Personally I'd rather not, I've dipped a toe in there before and found a little clique of people who tend to be rather up themselves. Same reason I avoid the politics section on here, they're generally less fun places for the not quite so intense/precious about it all.

I quietly lurk & may post occasionally from something I see in new posts but that's as close as I want to get TBH.

 

[bicycling_nurse]

I really enjoyed the movie and found it really interesting and revealing, especially the behind the scenes insights like when Contador attacked the Schlecks and Bruyneel was cursing him in the team car.

Absolutely - watched it last week and there are loads of clips and insights into stuff like this which fascinate me greatly and I've watched cycling for years. The bit that really struck me was LA being TV interviewed going on about how white as snow he was with George Hincapie sitting beside him looking massively uncomfortable throughout the whole thing. It looks horribly suspicious now with the power of hindsight!
I also don't see this issue as totally black and white - I can really see how easily impressionable young men who were desperate to impress and be a valued part of their team ended up doing stuff they never imagined doing. As others have said it's difficult, if not impossible, to include LA in this. The weird thing for me is that, despite it all, there is still something about the man that kind of hooks me in. I think he is incredibly charismatic a person - just with incredible flaws as well. The whole thing is depressing but the books (David Millar's, Tyler Hamilton's) and The Armstrong Lie are fascinating IMO.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

I find it hard to include LA in my compassionate view because if he did get drawn in to doping/cheating reluctantly at first (I don't know either way), once he was there it didn't seem to make him at all uncomfortable. In fact he bullied and coerced people who challenged him about it, and in effect wholeheartedly joined the structure that made the cheating so endemic in the first place. The other riders I've been reading about seem to have been dismayed and full of regret, in Pantani's case with devastating results.

Of course I wouldn't dare post anything so naïve in Pro Cycling - I've seen other people get flamed by the mafiosi in there for as much (sound familiar?).

I think that is mostly the view of those in the Pro Racing section. Apart from a few who know bugger all.

 

[ufkacbln]

Come and post in Pro Racing.

I think that is mostly the view of those in the Pro Racing section. Apart from a few who know bugger all.

Which really sums up the attitude in that forum

Unless you fit the mafioso view than you know nothing

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

Which really sums up the attitude in that forum

Unless you fit the mafioso view than you know nothing

If I remember correctly you posted some nonsense and repeated it over and over which demonstrated you had no desire to engage in discussion unless everyone accepted you were correct, which you weren't. And I see you still can't let it go...

 

[ufkacbln]

If I remember correctly you posted some nonsense and repeated it over and over which demonstrated you had no desire to engage in discussion unless everyone accepted you were correct, which you weren't. And I see you still can't let it go...

I rest my case.... only the Omerta were allowed opinions..... suggesting that Armstrong needed to be brought down by proof and dealt with formally by the authorities did not fit with the lynch mob mentality

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

I rest my case.... only the Omerta were allowed opinions..... suggesting that Armstrong needed to be brought down by proof and dealt with formally by the authorities did not fit with the lynch mob mentality

You clearly read something that was not there then if that is what you think.
Anyway, I have no intention of resurrecting that one here. Move on.

 

[ufkacbln]

You clearly read something that was not there then if that is what you think.
Anyway, I have no intention of resurrecting that one here. Move on.

I would recommend people looking at the Pro Racing site and make up their own minds.....

 

[Andrew_P]

I find it hard to include LA in my compassionate view because if he did get drawn in to doping/cheating reluctantly at first (I don't know either way), once he was there it didn't seem to make him at all uncomfortable. In fact he bullied and coerced people who challenged him about it, and in effect wholeheartedly joined the structure that made the cheating so endemic in the first place. The other riders I've been reading about seem to have been dismayed and full of regret, in Pantani's case with devastating results.

Of course I wouldn't dare post anything so naïve in Pro Cycling - I've seen other people get flamed by the mafiosi in there for as much (sound familiar?).

I fully understand the bullying aspect of the hate for LA, but I don't understand why no one understands why he felt he had to challenge every time something looked like it was about to burst out in to the open. He like all the others was earning a substantial income from doing something he appears to really enjoy doing (cycling and winning) the lie was far too out of control to come clean without being caught in the act.

I can't off the top of my head recall one athlete in any sport that has raised their head above a parapet and owned up to be taking drugs at their peak without being caught in the act first or long since retired with a book to sell.

He is very manipulative and defended his position very aggressively but as I say I can kind of understand why you would defend so aggressively when you are at your peak especially as most of it was hearsay evidence. He was fairly unusual as he still had massive earning potential and sponsorship deals even in retirement so the lie had to continue, add to that all the lawsuits it is no big surprise he had to wait until he was put in to a corner to "come clean".

For the record I do not believe he will ever tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth as he appears to still be protecting himself and others.

I wouldn't post this in pro cycling either, most of this angle comes from reading pro and anti books I got back in to cycling in 2010 and LA was barely on my radar until I started reading cycling books.

 

[yello]

Well and truly moved on here. I keep half an eye on the whistleblower stuff but the proof has long since been established and accepted as far as I can tell.

Were there other factors? Of course. Few things exist in a vacuum. On the question asked, was he guilty as charged? Yes.

 

[ufkacbln]

The real danger with Armstrong is the way that he has been allowed to dominate the whole agenda on drugs.

The have always been drug cheats even in the early days

Tom Simpson was a cheat, as were others

Yet anyone would think that the only person who ever cheated was Armstrong

What we need to do is remove him from the pedestal he has been placed on as the arch-villian, and concentrating the efforts

He was not the only one cheating, and unless we start looking at the wider picture or we are never going to understand the whole picture.

If films like this and the Pantani one serve to widen the agenda then they will also serve the cycling community

 

[Dayvo]

Having seen the Pantani film and read David Millar's book I find it much more difficult than I might have thought to simply condemn them as 'cheats' in such a black-and-white way. I thought both the film and the book showed how insidious were the pressures to conform on relatively young, enthusiastic, and naïve riders, and how step by small step they were drawn into behaving in ways that they might previously have shunned.

I think I ended up with a more compassionate view of their mistakes, and a feeling that many of us have flaws that can be exploited by power, competitiveness, and money. The riders who refused to cheat, and whose careers suffered as a result, are obviously much more admirable, but I don't necessarily despise outright the ones I've learned about who succumbed. I'm not including LA in any of that though.

Best 'non funny' post I have read in a LONG time!

 

[MacB]

I find it hard to include LA in my compassionate view because if he did get drawn in to doping/cheating reluctantly at first (I don't know either way), once he was there it didn't seem to make him at all uncomfortable. In fact he bullied and coerced people who challenged him about it, and in effect wholeheartedly joined the structure that made the cheating so endemic in the first place. The other riders I've been reading about seem to have been dismayed and full of regret, in Pantani's case with devastating results.

Of course I wouldn't dare post anything so naïve in Pro Cycling - I've seen other people get flamed by the mafiosi in there for as much (sound familiar?).

Well if you are naïve then I am also and in the same way. I never warmed to Armstrong though I admired his ability but I would have had him pegged as someone that would get ahead. To me he seems to have that demeanour that most of us encounter in our working lives, albeit fleetingly as they climb far beyond us on the ladder.