The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[johnr]

Kimmage reaction to interviews in Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/19/lance-armstrong-cycling

But this had to be copied in full:
In the autumn of 1993, Greg LeMond and his wife, Kathy, were sitting at home in the suburbs of Minneapolis, when they received a visit from Linda Mooneyham, the three-times Tour de France winner has recalled. Her 21-year-old son, Lance Armstrong, had just become the world champion and she had travelled from her home in Texas for advice.
"What does he do now?" she asked. "What does he do with his money?"
"Well, let him find an agent – a good one with an attorney," LeMond replied. "And one word of advice – just be his mom."
They sat on the porch for a while and then moved inside to the kitchen. Linda had something else on her mind: "How do I make him less of an peanut. He doesn't care about anyone."
"Well," LeMond replied. "I can't help you there."

 

[Crankarm]

Looks like those wanting their pound of flesh will bankrupt him. US Gov from the cash US Postal Service paid Armstrong to set up and run his team will be looking for around $30 million, Sunday Times $2 million, Tour Down Under $4 million, SCA Promotions $12 million plus lots of others. A real feeding frenzy. The sad thing is peoples' lives he destroyed like Frankie and Betsy Andreu will probably get nothing as they don't have a team of crack lawyers to sue Armstrong like the corporates.

He won't even be able to afford to buy an Appollo bike when he has had to give all the cash he has earned back.

 

[Crankarm]

Do they need something?

What do you mean and who?

 

[raindog]

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y5OwTizq7o&ap=%2526fmt%3D18

 

[Hotblack Desiato]

None so zealous as the convert.

Former smokers, born-again Christians, now some pro-cycling fans too.

Sorry.... It's just the way it seems to me.

Whatever happened to the middle ground?

There is no middle ground. You either accept cheating or you don't. Crushing Armstrong is a necessary part of sorting it out. Whilst he continues his crusade to shrug off his venality the cheats and their retinues of doctors will remain.

 

[Boris Bajic]

There is no middle ground. You either accept cheating or you don't. Crushing Armstrong is a necessary part of sorting it out. Whilst he continues his crusade to shrug off his venality the cheats and their retinues of doctors will remain.

A perfectly reasonable view. I disagree, but I respect that viewpoint.

My slightly mocking post was in response to one where the author had admitted to flipping from 'Fanboy' to thinking Armstrong a four-letter word.

Its tone reminded me a little of former smokers who cough theatrically when a cigarette is taken from a packet.

One poster was offended by my post and seemed to think it merited an apology.

To my mind, going from Fanboy (with all that the word implies in this case) to calling Armstrong a total four-letter word invites a slightly mocking comparison to the zealous religious convert. I don't equate one mindset absolutely with the other, but I cannot ignore an unavoidable similarity in tone.

As to your conviction that Armstrong must be 'crushed', I disagree, but I respect the view.

 

[kedab]

he's managed to keep people talking about him and that will have been part of his strategy, imho. going on oprah does nothing for him in terms of cycling, i think even he knows that he's been set adrift and that the sport will have nothing more to do with him but, in america, as far as the general public go, he'll be forgiven by many that don't have much of an interest in cycling and his force of personality will most likely see to it that, after the lawsuits, he'll manage to live more than comfortably - i think he'll probably get back on the board of Livestrong in time (albeit quietly) and he'll most likely become a tv personality of some description and that'll be that for L.A...

here's what L.A did for cycling as i see it...i had always known of the TdF, i was a sporty child and grew up watching every sport i could - from my first love footy, to crown green bowls...i'd watch it all - i knew of Roche and Kelly and what they meant to Irish cycling, I knew of Boardman and the Lotus bike etc and i'd watch the TdF knowing who Indurain and Hinault and Lemond were and never thought of doping outside of the Olympics and only then in terms of the old 'East v West' - East Germany, USSR etc took steroids and 'of course' the West didn't...until Ben Johnson L.A transcended the sport, his cancer survival and then his 1st TdF 'win' brought cycling to a whole new audience - the yellow wristbands were worn by some of my mates whod knew nothing of cycling, as such, and as a cancer survivor myself, i thought he was a phenomenal man. i know what chemo and radiotherapy do to your body...in recent years as i've become a huge cycling convert and devoured as much knowledge of the history sport as i've been able to, L.A stands out as the single most dangerous cheat/fraud that a sport has ever seen and beyond that, because he and others around him used cancer as a shield, he makes my blood boil

 

[rich p]

A perfectly reasonable view. I disagree, but I respect that viewpoint.

My slightly mocking post was in response to one where the author had admitted to flipping from 'Fanboy' to thinking Armstrong a four-letter word.

Its tone reminded me a little of former smokers who cough theatrically when a cigarette is taken from a packet.

One poster was offended by my post and seemed to think it merited an apology.

To my mind, going from Fanboy (with all that the word implies in this case) to calling Armstrong a total four-letter word invites a slightly mocking comparison to the zealous religious convert. I don't equate one mindset absolutely with the other, but I cannot ignore an unavoidable similarity in tone.

As to your conviction that Armstrong must be 'crushed', I disagree, but I respect the view.

For someone who has no strong opinions about Armstrong you certainly manage to spread your lack of interest widely

 

[Boris Bajic]

For someone who has no strong opinions about Armstrong you certainly manage to spread your lack of interest widely

I do, don't I?

I have views (opinions) but I've never seen him as a saint and don't want him burnt at the stake. I have no extreme opinions, but I do take a keen interest in stage racing and have for many years. Similarly, I like Arsenal without feeling the need to hate Spurs.

I confess that prior to his illness he was just that Yank (inaccurate, but I didn't know where he was from) who'd won the Stripey Jersey very young. I didn't even know he's had a stage win in the TdF until he won the whole thing in '99. I didn't know he'd been diagnosed with cancer. For me, all that came after his recovery. He was below my radar.

When he won his forst TdF, I thought him clean, as I'd thought Pantani the year before and as I'd thought Indurain and Roche when they won. I'd thought Ullrich was dodgy because he was born in the old East Germany. There's nothing quite as strong as an opinion based on national stereotyping.

I believed cycling was dirty, but for absolutely no clear reason I thought those guys were clean and others were dopers. When it became clear that they were not, I didn't feel the need to crucify anybody or get very cross about it.

I quite understand that others do.

I get jolly cross about political corruption in the Balkans, but I am content that to most other people this is a mosquito they don't even bother to brush away.

 

[rich p]

I do, don't I?

I have views (opinions) but I've never seen him as a saint and don't want him burnt at the stake. I have no extreme opinions, but I do take a keen interest in stage racing and have for many years. Similarly, I like Arsenal without feeling the need to hate Spurs.

I confess that prior to his illness he was just that Yank (inaccurate, but I didn't know where he was from) who'd won the Stripey Jersey very young. I didn't even know he's had a stage win in the TdF until he won the whole thing in '99. I didn't know he'd been diagnosed with cancer. For me, all that came after his recovery. He was below my radar.

When he won his forst TdF, I thought him clean, as I'd thought Pantani the year before and as I'd thought Indurain and Roche when they won. I'd thought Ullrich was dodgy because he was born in the old East Germany. There's nothing quite as strong as an opinion based on national stereotyping.

I believed cycling was dirty, but for absolutely no clear reason I thought those guys were clean and others were dopers. When it became clear that they were not, I didn't feel the need to crucify anybody or get very cross about it.

I quite understand that others do.

I get jolly cross about political corruption in the Balkans, but I am content that to most other people this is a mosquito they don't even bother to brush away.

Sorry BB, you went all verbose again and my attention wandered.

 

[ufkacbln]

All these companies getting money back is not automatic in all these cases.

There is a defense that at the time they got what they wanted, and therefore there was no "disbenefit' at the time

What would have to be proved is that there was something in the contract that stated he would not cheat, take drugs etc.... and that this was a specific breach, and of course there is the question over whether monies should also be recovered from the others who were cheating on the same contract

The only ones "guarranteed" are those where it can be proved that he told lies like the Times case

Not a pleasant thought, but the US legal system is notoriously fickle on financial matters

 

[Radchenister]

So, is this thread now debating whether:

a. He's just a cheat.
b. He's a nasty vindictive cheat.
c. He's a total **** .

?

 

[Boris Bajic]

Sorry BB, you went all verbose again and my attention wandered.

I was born all verbose and it's just getting worse.

 

[PpPete]

So, is this thread now debating whether:

a. He's just a cheat.
b. He's a nasty vindictive cheat.
c. He's a total **** .

?

d.

 

[Radchenister]

Ah no, it's the 'Other' section that requires some thought, go on then, you go first ...