Not exactly a surprise at this point. Also fuck this guy.
Would you give up your left nut for success?
Not exactly a surprise at this point. Also fuck this guy.
Meh, that whole sport is dirty, all sports are. People who wanna be a champion will use every advantage they can. Who gave a fuck about Road Cycling till he started winning? I still don't. Last Olympics a bunch popped dirty, luck of the draw if they catch you, it's a risk they all take. If you think doping isn't everywhere you are kidding yourself.
Also he fucked Cancer his into Cheryl Crow, I give him a thumbs up for that one.
Quite a long discussion went on about this subject on FOH before it died. On one hand you had the "Who cares?" crowd like Merkins and others who thought he was a total piece of shit.
I'm firmly in the latter camp, it was never about him being dirty in a sea of dirt. It was his conduct then and until now that makes him a piece of shit. He successfully sued the arse off multiple people, ruined careers and acted like a complete cunt in pursuit of his holier than thou saintly duties compared to all the other rapscallions. Now his world is crashing in on him, he's the one being sued all other the place for his bullshit and who knows, maybe they'll go after him for perjury?
As for the current crowd doing it, I hope not and numbers seem to suggest if they are it's bloody lightweight. Times are down, performance is way down. They did some stats during the last TDF which appeared to show the output during some of the hill climbing stages was showing a 40% dropoff.
If it ever came out that Wiggins, Froome and Cavendish etc were cheats the whole sport of cycling would be destroyed in the UK and as Team Sky is sponsored in part by our Olympic movement I'd like to think they aren't stupid enough to do anything like that.
Anyways, Fuck Armstrong. Anyone who thinks the charity stuff wasn't blatant PR deflection over what he was doing is plain blind. Journo's were repeatedly fed that line over the years that if they went ahead with a story about drugs they'd be killing kids etc along with the usual threats to sue them into the ground. For a long time it worked.
Hey Lance it's called a car lol! Am I right guys like leave the bike at home get your license already haha ok I'm gonna go kill myself now see you guys later
France is the only country that gives a shit because this is the only sport they have cred in.
-shrugs- If the sport wasn't as dirty as it was I might care, but until they strip everyone from the last 20+ years of a title, I don't really care that he doped what so ever.
I doubt you'll pay attention this time, either.
Fuck Armstrong. As Fazana said it wasn't so much the doping as his conduct during that time and right up until this day that is so disgusting. He assassinated the character of anyone who spoke against him, destroyed careers, and repeatedly sued people. He's fucking scum. Nothing will absolve him of his past. And I hope he remains banned from any competitive athletics for the rest of his life to serve as an example to everyone else.
The guy is a massive egomaniac. At this point his best course of action is to just fade into obscurity. There is zero possibility of him restoring any of his reputation. All he'll do by admitting it (and probably coming up with a million excuses along the way) is confirm that everyone was right all along. There's no coming back from what he did.
Yet he just can't leave it alone. His gigantic ego won't let him.
Last edited by Eomer; 01-05-2013 at 09:23 PM.
the more i think about it and place it in context, the more ridiculous this whole thing iks
an international crisis and uproar over people doping TO RIDE BICYCLES
I wasn't talking about any of the recent races. I'm not a huge cycling fan or anything.
I wasn't referring to drug testing now being an empty symbolic gesture, I was referring to doing it in regards to decades old tests. Those races are long since gone and past to me at least. It might bother fans of the sport more though.
Like the 60's olympics that were all full of steroids use, I don't give a shit that they didn't go back and strip all the medals from people. Whatever, that shits gone and passed.
I'm sure everybody is sick of the drug debate or they have already become polarized and picked their side on the matter.
My opinion, if there existed a performance enhancing drugs without negative side affects that was tested for safety / side affects, I wouldn't be against the idea of such a drug being used.
Whatever armstrong was hopped up on must have been good shit though, he doesn't seem unhealthy. Why aren't we all using that kind of shit if it can make you win a fucking race after getting cancer lol.
Not going to even touch on how such a drug would be approved for human testing or any of the ethics behind it. Shit would be way to lengthy a discussion to have in this thread.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-05-2013 at 10:32 PM.
He wasn't doing anything too fancy. EPO (which wasn't detectable for the first part of his career), testosterone, cortisone, and a whole lot of blood doping. Maybe there were some steroids in there as well, but really for the Tour the biggest thing is increasing the body's ability to supply oxygen to muscles, which as far as I understand it steroids don't really do anything for.
these dudes must have estrogen dominance if they need to dope for cycling
Also, its a fucking bike race, calm your shit.
WE could have live action Blood Bowl!
His charity is a fucking scam. Seriously who needs to be aware of cancer. Fuck him.
Just make steroids legal in all drugs cut the shit and yOLLLO like DRAKE!!
As usual this topic is full of people who have no fucking clue what they are talking about, and no interest in learning. I don't give enough of a fuck to argue anymore, the issue is finally dead. Once the official confession arrives though, I can spam the fuck out of obnoxious holier than thou roadies on FB who have clung to Lance's integrity. Cockwallets.
We could look at it another way - think of the medical and scientific breakthroughs we'd find watching people push themselves to the absolute limit. It may sound like science fiction, but imagine them trying to find any advantage possible. They might even dabble in genetic research, cloning, limb replacement, cybernetics, drug enhancement...whatever.
I mean, I'm nerding out on the possibilities, but damn that would be awesome.
Kaige#1128 - Battle.net
Kaige - Steam
Who cares, he's a cheat and a fraud. Not even worth my attention.
I'd do it if it meant I got to fuck her.
I think it will certainly be a softball interview. I think I don't give a shit about bicycles, people who ride them, French trophies, cancer awareness, Lance Armstrong, Oprah, money, justice, closure...none of it. I want to watch what it looks like when a completely egomaniacal selfish failure of a human has to publicly acknowledge it. I don't care so much what he says or what it means to the 'story' of cycling and sports, only in so much as I want to see what a man in his position will do. Will he own his behavior or continue to be a weakling about it? I'm putting vegas odds at him being weak and trying to curry favor or make excuses. He will be 'sorry for the outcome' (and will say it in many different ways) but won't actually be sorry that he failed as a human member of civilization. Won't give anything to anyone. Sorry he was exposed is about all I expect to hear. I think most people faced with similar situations in life (albeit not nearly as grandiose or public) also do not own it, in general. They hide and run. I expect this will be that same difficult life situation we have all experienced in some small way or another inflated to a much larger scale and put in the center of the Coliseum with lights and lions for our amusement.
I can hear it now. Everyone was doing it at the time, and anyone involved in the sport knew it, and if you wanted to compete you had to do it. The epic level of covering up the whole situation I expect to hear next to nothing about from this douche.
I think Lance and Oprah will likely just have sex on camera. Afterward, she'll look straight into the camera, and say, "He took the little blue pill. Typical." And he'll look into the camera and say, "Sorry."
The media will rejoice in this athlete's integrity, as he apologized for taking performance enhancing drugs.
I'm not making an excuse, all I'm saying is the part I quoted is true, show me where it wasn't.
You must love losing money to bet against tears.
The fact that everyone did it is nearly irrelevant... no one really gives a shit that he did it. It's the fact that he's a piece of shit person and has been completely exposed as being so that's of interest.
That's not totally true, while yes he is a piece of shit, you can't for half a second pretend like it's not his doping that's being rammed down our throats as the reason he's a piece of shit person, not his personality.
Last edited by Tarrant; 01-11-2013 at 03:21 PM.
As a sports fan, I've had to see and hear thousands upon thousands of stories about how fucking amazing he is and what a great person he is. What I'd like to see is once he admits he used PEDs, Oprah pulls one of her big surprises and has a panel of all the people he sued, bullied, and slandered for having the audacity to tell the truth ready to ask him questions.
Okay, this debate is getting silly. Let's review some things:
This guy had a major fight with cancer, and won. Good for him.
This guy started an organization that is amazing, and does a lot of very good things for a lot of people. Rather than tarnish it, he stepped away from it when the scandal broke, in order to allow that organization to continue functioning.
The guy is an amazing athlete. Like it or not, with or without the drugs, the guy is a machine.
He fucked up. He did use performance enhancing drugs, as was nearly everyone in the industry. Doesn't make it right, doesn't excuse his behavior. But calling him a piece of shit when he has been one hell of an outstanding individual is just not right, in my opinion. I wish more people gave to, and worked for, causes they believe in like he does.
Just my $0.02
Not Sure if serious.jpg
And for some general reading about everyone's hero and superman:
This thread is more exciting than any Tour De France.
Don't mind Famm, he's just upset that Lance turned out to be a better troll then him.
It's french bicycling, less fucks cannot be given.
I'm so very sorry you don't share my view. It is not, however, ill informed, nor is it an opinion formulated from American talk radio. I'm also sorry that you can't see that the LiveStrong foundation has done a lot of good, regardless of Lance Armstrong's reasons for forming and supporting said foundation.
Thank you for selecting the only part of what I said that you were able to respond to, as well. It solidifies just how intelligent you are to all who read it.
I hope all your shits are angry hedgehogs,
Lance is a complete piece of shit. LiveStrong is a complete piece of shit, regardless of the message, because the company was created to profit off the name/recognition of Lance before doing anything beneficial with the money. I forget the numbers, but the amount donated to cancer research was a fucking joke.
Honestly, I think he's looking for a way to confess without looking like the con-artist he is: Go before The Oprah, kiss her rings, and spout some shit about the cancer fucking with his head and his need to raise awareness by cheating to get money to feed the kids. Or some contrived bullshit.
We can go one of two ways: Actually test/ban for EVERY possible PED like a Republican trying to cut welfare, or open the whole thing up under doctor supervision and let the monsters have their fix. This middle path we're on, where we pretend to test and punish, while pretending like there's some moral honor we uphold to the past, etc, is laughable. The owners/leagues know that if they were honest and banned PEDs, their product would decline; at least until it normalizes back down to realistic levels. We know that won't happen because owners need their money.
Livestrong did provide some funding for research, but that stopped in 2005 as Famm's article said. They also continue to help people cope with cancer and have various support programs for it, but again that article indicates that the majority of it is farmed out to other organizations. For the most part, Livestrong's mission is to raise "awareness" of cancer and little else, and has been for the better part of the decade.
Everyone heard of cancer? Yeah? Well, I guess we can shut it down now.
Seriously though, I think it's going a bit far to say that Livestrong is a "complete piece of shit", but that Outside article did lay out what it is and what it does. 10% of it is about raising awareness about cancer and helping people deal with it. The other 90% was marketing/PR for Armstrong, unfortunately. Your money would be put to much better use donating to just about any other cancer organization.
I'm not clear on what middle ground you seem to think that athletics in general is on. Athletes are regularly banned for incredibly minute quantities of PED's/substances that they inadvertently ingested with supplements and hair growth formulas and shit. It's not possible to test for "EVERY possible PED" because the dopers will always be a step or two ahead, like with EPO back in the late 90's and early oughts. Am I missing some PED that athletes are allowed to use or a blind eye is turned to?Originally Posted by Beef Supreme
I agree that the North American pro sports leagues are an exception to greater and lesser degrees (some have no off season testing, or allow heavy doses of painkillers or cortisone and the like). But most other competitive athletes are tested like fucking crazy these days.
Last edited by Eomer; 01-12-2013 at 04:06 AM.
INB4 he maintains his innocence and all the cycling "crazies" blow a gasket. This is honestly in the who gives a shit category.
I'm trying to think of this somewhat logically. What possible reason would this person you are describing as a "self serving egomaniac" have to confess when it would mean having to give up a ton of cash?
Don't tell me out of the goodness of his heart. The loudest outcry is from people who already expressed their view that there is no redemption for this man.
He confesses or not, either way, science has given him the sack. what a disgrace for the sport.
Did anyone watch cycling before lance started winning his titles?
he won't confess, he would have to forfeit lots of sponsor/prize money I believe. But he also will never be allowed to compete again at a high level if he doesn't confess. Me, I appreciate what he did for the sport, brought it into the main stream in the US, he was competitive and so what about the doping, everyone was doing it back then. I am glad that he is busted though and that this whole shitstorm happened because it is cleaning the sport up (as much as is possible). However, that does suck a little too since the tour is not as fun to watch due to the lack of superhuman efforts on a day to day basis...
whats the over / under on 'cancer is back' sympathy card distraction?
I tried to find the blood tests or urine tests that implicate Lance but I was unable too.
Where is the evidence of his guilt? Idc if Lance is guilty or not I just find it strange that people would push so hard for his guilt but not show any proof.
Most of what I was able to google was people cutting deals to be able to compete again in exchange for saying Lance did drugs.
I'm a bit skeptical of testimony given in exchange for leniency unless it's physicall corroborated elsewhere in some manner. Nothing to do with this case specifically, just something I feel in general.
I will be super pissed if he comes out and says he didnt know what they were giving him.. i mean really...
Saint Armstrong obviously was the only one on the Postal Team and pretty much all of cycling who didn't use. He is the 2nd son of God, sent down to bring us all with him to the heavenly kingdom. Duh
He sure knows how to make bank, whatever happens.
I realize you are super invested in cycling and all that. To me witness plea bargain / settlement statements alone aren't enough to convince me of anything in the absence of physical evidence of some sort. They should work together to tell a story where the individual pieces of evidence alone might not be conclusive or make sense. It's not that I'm particularly fond of armstrong, I know nearly jack shit about him. It's just a general way I view evidence.
Witnesses can be so unreliable for so many reasons especially when they are trying to gain leniency for wrong doing.
That's the thing I don't understand, I read somewhere when I was looking for any physical evidence, that there was allegation that he did test positive but bribed an official.
I'm sure a money trail would exist for that if it happened. That would be a great way to completely destroy him. Find those buried drug tests or trace the money used to cover them up.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-14-2013 at 03:07 AM.
LoL @ Emoer getting angry over something totally unreleated to what the post was about that he was angry about. Eomer you rage so hard about Armstrong it's borderline creepy.
Did he dope? probably, but if they can't prove it through tests and their only evidence is testimony of dopers they cut a deal with they need to STFU. This reeks of Jose Conseco level shenanigans. If you are gonna publicly burn a man down, you better have him dead to rights before you tie him to a pillory.
Conseco was right about everyone he called out as far as I know. I always wonder if the Armstrong defenders also defend Barry Bonds. Somehow I doubt it.
Clearly Oprah Winfrey is the place to open up all your darkest secrets.
Conseco being 'right' wasn't my point. Aw fuckit, I dont have a dog in this fight. Cycling is silly imo, Armstrong is a complete tool. Doping in sports is never going away and should probably be embraced. My problem with all of this is I would want concrete evidence presented against me if people were trying to take away my livelihood, faggots crying 'he did it too' failed at being men and their testimony is tainted to say the least.
I thought there was an actual test which had been retroactively looked at which he had failed? A French lab blind tested some old samples after developing a test for EPO and found a few which had said previously untraceable EPO in them. It was only later on that a journalist went through the published results and matched up the sample numbers from the study with the sample numbers done by the TourDeFrance and realised one of them was Armstrongs. His response was of course to claim variously that the sample was tainted, the journo was doing a hatchet job and the laboratory was a front for Al Queda etc etc
The USADA isn't a court of law. He hasn't been criminally or civilly prosecuted yet as far as I know. I don't think the evidence requirements to ban someone from sports are at quite the same level as a criminal court.
Did he dope, I have no idea. I certainly think it's in the realm of possibility but I don't know. We can see what he says when he does the Oprah thing. I also can't seem to find any source for the "leak" that he is going to confess, it seems to be the media speculation feeding upon itself.
Looking at all the lawsuits filed against him with the expectation of him confessing makes me wonder why he would admit to doping.
Going with the assumption that he did dope and is a media savvy egomaniac as portrayed by his detractors.
Step 1: Set up Oprah Interview.
Step 2: Have close friend "leak" news he will confess to build up interest.
Step 3: Deny everything and make counter accusations.
Step 4: Release book amid controversy detailing his "struggles" and persecution.
Step 5: Buy Tropical Island and Livestrong?
It could be all fantasy but It would certainly have that polarization that makes for good book sales lol. Maybe he can take a page from the OJ Simpson playbook and write in in the "If I Did It" style.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-14-2013 at 07:06 PM.
The reason I get all RAGE about Lance Armstrong is that the same people in this thread have been saying the same stupid, ill-informed shit on the previous threads as well and obviously have no interest in educating themselves on the full story. You want evidence? Go read USADA's report. It was enough for even Nike, who stood by him for a decade, to go "yeah, that fucker doped, we're out."
But no, there's no solid evidence, just a lot of people stabbing him in the back, right?
There were no protocols for that in cycling until very recently. And I think even in WADA sanctioned events that's only been something relatively recent. But since you asked, yes, a sample of his re-tested several years after did indeed test positive for EPO. This has been mentioned at least a dozen times in this thread, and threads on previous boards. See above in this post. Of course Armstrong denied everything, and since proper protocols were not in place, it wasn't enough to sanction him on it's own.Originally Posted by Merkins4Brazil
Why should the burden of proof be the same as a criminal proceeding?Originally Posted by Merkins4Brazil
Last edited by Eomer; 01-14-2013 at 07:10 PM.
A company withdrawing sponsorship is not proof of guilt or innocence as you seem to imply. Many companies stay away from controversial topics to minimize risk. The USADA banning Armstrong was a new level of controversy and seems to have bypassed the risk / reward factor for Nike. It's this sort of self referential "guilt" logic that people are using that intrigues me about this.
I looked up the highlights of the USADA report here.
It really is just a bunch of witness statements that they used to conclude armstrong was lying. "He said she said" comes to mind. They wrote it in a manner that implied they had physical evidence, but when it comes down to the substance, it's just statements.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-14-2013 at 07:43 PM.
If he was faster while doping than all the other cyclists, who have almost all been found guilty also, wouldn't that still make him the fastest?
The whole sport is a sham.
It was a doping competition as well as a cycling competition. Armstrong presumably won the doping competition due to the immense resources and doctors available to him (as well as his relentless dedication).
"The person also said Armstrong apologized for letting the staff down and putting Livestrong at risk but he did not make a direct confession to using banned drugs. He said he would try to restore the foundation's reputation and urged the group to continue fighting for the charity's mission of helping cancer patients and their families."
Gonna ride that controversy as long as he can~~~
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)