Lance
-
@Catogrande said in Lance:
I've never really been into cycling as a spectator sport, save when Bradley Wiggins was around as I found him a very engaging person. I followed his latter career but lost a large slice of interest once he retired and we had Frome who is just not as appealing. Now that there are clouds over Brad's TdF victory I am really saddened in a way that i wouldn't be with Frome or for that matter Armstrong, so I guess for some it is all about the person, their hero if you like and that will likely polarise views on someone like Armstrong who has extremes to his achievements.
Like many I wasn't at all surprised to hear that Armstrong had been doping, I sort of took it for granted (and not just him), so that in itself was not enough to downplay his achievements. His behaviour to those around him, the bullying and the ruining of peoples' lives to my mind has tarnished him. His interview with Oprah did him no favours either. It showed him as completely unrepentant and still a cruel and heartless person. I also find that picture of him posing with his yellow jerseys as continuing with the unrepentant stance.
Having said all that can you really take away what he underwent to get to that summit that he reached? Doping or not, I don't think so. For sure, you can strip him of his titles but you cannot take away what the man did. Tour cycling is probably the most unrelenting test of endurance, will and self sacrifice in sport. To complete a TdF is an accomplishment in itself. To paraphrase Alan Minter "sure there have been deaths in cycling, but none of them fatal".
I feel the same about Geraint Thomas.
I really hope he did it clean.
-
@MajorRage said in Lance:
@MajorRage said in Lance:
@mariner4life said in Lance:
also, i, for what ever reason, really dislike that David Walsh. Which is weird, but he comes across as such a smug, condescending fuckwit.
The same Walsh that wrote the piece about the All Black myth around 2004?
Genuine question: was it?
You're not getting muxed ip with Simon Barnes?
There was two wasn't there. One by Walsh, another by Barnes? Could be wrong, long time ago, and even I don't hold grudges that long.
And you call yourself a Kiwi ...
-
@antipodean said in Lance:
@mariner4life said in Lance:
The winner v champion thing is an interesting question. My instant thought was "agree" but even with as much reflection time as typing this post, i'm wondering if i do agree. He won 7 fucking Tours, straight. That's extraordinary. Yes, drugs bla bla, and i get that. But if you can accept that all his challengers were on it...
He still had to beat his peers. You could give me enough drugs to wipe out a pod of blue whales and I still wouldn't peddle up some of those climbs in a month of Sundays.
See this story is open to interpretation. It took me too long to realise you meant the drugs would wipe out the whales.
I originally imagined you getting given a shitload of drugs and then annihilating them whales in a frenzy.
Either or. They are a hazard to international shipping.
-
@Catogrande said in Lance:
Like many I wasn't at all surprised to hear that Armstrong had been doping, I sort of took it for granted (and not just him), so that in itself was not enough to downplay his achievements. His behaviour to those around him, the bullying and the ruining of peoples' lives to my mind has tarnished him. His interview with Oprah did him no favours either. It showed him as completely unrepentant and still a cruel and heartless person. I also find that picture of him posing with his yellow jerseys as continuing with the unrepentant stance.
I just gotta say - that whole "ruined peoples lives" is yet another example of the over dramatised bollicks that surrounds the Armstrong saga.
is there anyone involved that is desitute, living under a bridge, killed themselves? Cause when you say "life ruined" that means to this day, and to then end of their life. It's a big statement.
I always ask people who say this to name 5 people whose 'life is ruined' by Armstrong - should be easy right since there was so many. Haven't got one yet.
At best you could say it was a temporary employment dispute with a cnuty co-worker or boss that harmed your career.
You know what does ruin peoples lives? Getting fucking cancer.
That's what I don't get - the sheer volume of people who absolutely HATE Armstrong because of this whole - he "ruined the lives" of a handful of cyclists - but completely ignore the THOUSANDS of cancer sufferers whose lives he postively impacted - and we're talking about people who went to their graves happy that he reached out to them. Why don't they count? Why are a handful of cyclists more important. (also kinda find that amusing as 99% of the worlds population HATE cyclists but as soon as they find out LA was a prick to them they're right on the bandwagon to support them..)
If you had to choose a manner of having your 'life ruined' - what would you pick? shitty employment situation or getting cancer?
Anyway - I'll always say that there is no way you can't say that LA hasn't positively impacted this world more than his negative impacts.
Actually one other thing I would say is maybe people need to look at things from his perspective.. Betsy Andreu for example.. he went after her big time.. but he was on what he thought at the time was his death bed, with his best mate and wife there... he comes clean to the docs about what he's been taking. She takes that and gives it to the papers, specifically to the guy that's your 'mortal enemy'.. would that piss you off!!? I farking know it would me and I'd be out to get that person.
Anyway at the end of the day I can totally understand why he's unrepentant. Easy for those outside of cycling to just say he shouldn't have taken drugs, but it's been part of the culture and normality since day 1 or the sports existence. These guys are just in a bubble all year interacting with nothing but other cyclists, the general public pays attention for 3 weeks during TDF. He did nothing different than anyone else, and the guys that did the same are welcomed with open arms at the tour e.g. Mercxk Conti etc.. whereas the only guys excluded are basically him and Ullrich.
-
@MajorRage said in Lance:
It's the determination and single-mindedness that I admire. Do I sustain this position largely because I believe all his fellow competitors were at it? Probably, yes. If he was a complete outlier I would most likely be in the majority camp.
it's probably the main thing that people ignore and what made LA as good as he was.. the "top 2 inches".
He had no off switch. One of the only guys that could just ignore his body and push through situations where other guys would sit up. Evans for example - having a bad day he'd just crack.. Remember a day when he went out the back before Cav on a climb which takes a special effort!
Also was what made him a massive prick, and impossible to measure the 'benefits' so people often just jump on the 'he took drugs that's all he had to do'
-
@WillieTheWaiter said in Lance:
@MajorRage said in Lance:
It's the determination and single-mindedness that I admire. Do I sustain this position largely because I believe all his fellow competitors were at it? Probably, yes. If he was a complete outlier I would most likely be in the majority camp.
it's probably the main thing that people ignore and what made LA as good as he was.. the "top 2 inches".
He had no off switch. One of the only guys that could just ignore his body and push through situations where other guys would sit up. Evans for example - having a bad day he'd just crack.. Remember a day when he went out the back before Cav on a climb which takes a special effort!
Also was what made him a massive prick, and impossible to measure the 'benefits' so people often just jump on the 'he took drugs that's all he had to do'
A great bit on his podcast from the Tour a couple of years back where he was talking about what pissed him off about the whole thing was people instantly wrote off all shit he said he did in his book with regards to training and prep. His take is, "i still did all of that, it's just he left the last bit off the list". He mentioned it in the documentary as well.
-
@WillieTheWaiter that's fair about the ruined lives thing mate. They weren't ruined. It's hyperbole
But it's not really in our human wiring to accept such a foundation of intentional lying to smear someone else.Is doping more or less prevalent these days. I'd accept any answer, just curious what the word in the industry is.
-
@WillieTheWaiter said in Lance:
@MajorRage said in Lance:
It's the determination and single-mindedness that I admire. Do I sustain this position largely because I believe all his fellow competitors were at it? Probably, yes. If he was a complete outlier I would most likely be in the majority camp.
it's probably the main thing that people ignore and what made LA as good as he was.. the "top 2 inches".
He had no off switch. One of the only guys that could just ignore his body and push through situations where other guys would sit up. Evans for example - having a bad day he'd just crack.. Remember a day when he went out the back before Cav on a climb which takes a special effort!
Also was what made him a massive prick, and impossible to measure the 'benefits' so people often just jump on the 'he took drugs that's all he had to do'
Similar reasons (obviously sans drug scandals) why Tiger, Kobe and MJ were so great. And why they were seen by many as total assholes especiall in their primes
-
As I mentioned “likely to polarise views”. Which is fair enough. You have a lot of admiration for the guy, others less so. Both are understandable viewpoints. The ruined lives thing is of course relative and so yeah some hyperbole there. Having your career taken away from you is not the same as cancer, but then again I don’t know of many examples where someone has gone out of their way to systematically give someone cancer on a personal level ie tobacco and the like aside.
I’m not arguing for or against the man here, something that I thought I’d made clear.
-
@Catogrande said in Lance:
As I mentioned “likely to polarise views”. Which is fair enough. You have a lot of admiration for the guy, others less so. Both are understandable viewpoints. The ruined lives thing is of course relative and so yeah some hyperbole there. Having your career taken away from you is not the same as cancer, but then again I don’t know of many examples where someone has gone out of their way to systematically give someone cancer on a personal level ie tobacco and the like aside.
I’m not arguing for or against the man here, something that I thought I’d made clear.
If you aren't with us, you're against us.
-
Is doping more or less prevalent these days. I'd accept any answer, just curious what the word in the industry is.
2005 was the fastest tour ever. Since then it's got slower ... read into that what you will
-
@Catogrande said in Lance:
examples where someone has gone out of their way to systematically give someone cancer on a personal level
Think I'm reading that correctly. And I think I agree with you ...
... Am not sure though ...
-
@Catogrande said in Lance:
examples where someone has gone out of their way to systematically give someone cancer on a personal level
Think I'm reading that correctly. And I think I agree with you ...
... Am not sure though ...
Assuming you were looking for clarification. ..
Cancer is very much worse than someone deliberately shafting your career but no one deliberately sets out to give you cancer. So to compare Armstrong’s actions to cancer you would need to take that into account.
-
I just finished the doco. I really enjoyed it, I found it quite compelling. Lance came across as pretty candid to me. It did not try to cast him in a more favourable light, he clearly was a hugely gifted athlete, a cheat, a bully, and a liar and fraud. He did huge things with his livestrong foundation that benefited millions of people. While trying to appear contrite, other times he is unrepentant and sometimes he was enraged at the way he was treated despite everything he did. As with many things in life, he is a multifaceted complicated figure
-
-
-
@WillieTheWaiter said in Lance:
@Catogrande said in Lance:
Like many I wasn't at all surprised to hear that Armstrong had been doping, I sort of took it for granted (and not just him), so that in itself was not enough to downplay his achievements. His behaviour to those around him, the bullying and the ruining of peoples' lives to my mind has tarnished him. His interview with Oprah did him no favours either. It showed him as completely unrepentant and still a cruel and heartless person. I also find that picture of him posing with his yellow jerseys as continuing with the unrepentant stance.
I just gotta say - that whole "ruined peoples lives" is yet another example of the over dramatised bollicks that surrounds the Armstrong saga.
is there anyone involved that is desitute, living under a bridge, killed themselves? Cause when you say "life ruined" that means to this day, and to then end of their life. It's a big statement.
I always ask people who say this to name 5 people whose 'life is ruined' by Armstrong - should be easy right since there was so many. Haven't got one yet.
At best you could say it was a temporary employment dispute with a cnuty co-worker or boss that harmed your career.
You know what does ruin peoples lives? Getting fucking cancer.
That's what I don't get - the sheer volume of people who absolutely HATE Armstrong because of this whole - he "ruined the lives" of a handful of cyclists - but completely ignore the THOUSANDS of cancer sufferers whose lives he postively impacted - and we're talking about people who went to their graves happy that he reached out to them. Why don't they count? Why are a handful of cyclists more important. (also kinda find that amusing as 99% of the worlds population HATE cyclists but as soon as they find out LA was a prick to them they're right on the bandwagon to support them..)
If you had to choose a manner of having your 'life ruined' - what would you pick? shitty employment situation or getting cancer?
Anyway - I'll always say that there is no way you can't say that LA hasn't positively impacted this world more than his negative impacts.
Actually one other thing I would say is maybe people need to look at things from his perspective.. Betsy Andreu for example.. he went after her big time.. but he was on what he thought at the time was his death bed, with his best mate and wife there... he comes clean to the docs about what he's been taking. She takes that and gives it to the papers, specifically to the guy that's your 'mortal enemy'.. would that piss you off!!? I farking know it would me and I'd be out to get that person.
Anyway at the end of the day I can totally understand why he's unrepentant. Easy for those outside of cycling to just say he shouldn't have taken drugs, but it's been part of the culture and normality since day 1 or the sports existence. These guys are just in a bubble all year interacting with nothing but other cyclists, the general public pays attention for 3 weeks during TDF. He did nothing different than anyone else, and the guys that did the same are welcomed with open arms at the tour e.g. Mercxk Conti etc.. whereas the only guys excluded are basically him and Ullrich.
I don't get the moral relativism from a lot of the Lance / cycling fanboys on this. Just because he wasn't the only one doping doesn't make him any less dirty. Two wrongs don't make and a right and all that and it's bit like a rapist saying he was raised in a village full of rapists so we shouldn't judge him too harshly.
-
I just finished the doco. I really enjoyed it, I found it quite compelling. Lance came across as pretty candid to me. It did not try to cast him in a more favourable light, he clearly was a hugely gifted athlete, a cheat, a bully, and a liar and fraud. He did huge things with his livestrong foundation that benefited millions of people. While trying to appear contrite, other times he is unrepentant and sometimes he was enraged at the way he was treated despite everything he did. As with many things in life, he is a multifaceted complicated figure
You actually make him sound like a psychopath when you describe hime like that.
-
I just finished the doco. I really enjoyed it, I found it quite compelling. Lance came across as pretty candid to me. It did not try to cast him in a more favourable light, he clearly was a hugely gifted athlete, a cheat, a bully, and a liar and fraud. He did huge things with his livestrong foundation that benefited millions of people. While trying to appear contrite, other times he is unrepentant and sometimes he was enraged at the way he was treated despite everything he did. As with many things in life, he is a multifaceted complicated figure
You actually make him sound like a psychopath when you describe hime like that.
I wasn't trying to be complimentary. I remember him at the time, he really put cycling on a whole greater level. But he shares many traits with other super athletes, who are all a little bit sociopathic in their own ways
-
@WillieTheWaiter said in Lance:
@Catogrande said in Lance:
Like many I wasn't at all surprised to hear that Armstrong had been doping, I sort of took it for granted (and not just him), so that in itself was not enough to downplay his achievements. His behaviour to those around him, the bullying and the ruining of peoples' lives to my mind has tarnished him. His interview with Oprah did him no favours either. It showed him as completely unrepentant and still a cruel and heartless person. I also find that picture of him posing with his yellow jerseys as continuing with the unrepentant stance.
I just gotta say - that whole "ruined peoples lives" is yet another example of the over dramatised bollicks that surrounds the Armstrong saga.
is there anyone involved that is desitute, living under a bridge, killed themselves? Cause when you say "life ruined" that means to this day, and to then end of their life. It's a big statement.
I always ask people who say this to name 5 people whose 'life is ruined' by Armstrong - should be easy right since there was so many. Haven't got one yet.
At best you could say it was a temporary employment dispute with a cnuty co-worker or boss that harmed your career.
You know what does ruin peoples lives? Getting fucking cancer.
That's what I don't get - the sheer volume of people who absolutely HATE Armstrong because of this whole - he "ruined the lives" of a handful of cyclists - but completely ignore the THOUSANDS of cancer sufferers whose lives he postively impacted - and we're talking about people who went to their graves happy that he reached out to them. Why don't they count? Why are a handful of cyclists more important. (also kinda find that amusing as 99% of the worlds population HATE cyclists but as soon as they find out LA was a prick to them they're right on the bandwagon to support them..)
If you had to choose a manner of having your 'life ruined' - what would you pick? shitty employment situation or getting cancer?
Anyway - I'll always say that there is no way you can't say that LA hasn't positively impacted this world more than his negative impacts.
Actually one other thing I would say is maybe people need to look at things from his perspective.. Betsy Andreu for example.. he went after her big time.. but he was on what he thought at the time was his death bed, with his best mate and wife there... he comes clean to the docs about what he's been taking. She takes that and gives it to the papers, specifically to the guy that's your 'mortal enemy'.. would that piss you off!!? I farking know it would me and I'd be out to get that person.
Anyway at the end of the day I can totally understand why he's unrepentant. Easy for those outside of cycling to just say he shouldn't have taken drugs, but it's been part of the culture and normality since day 1 or the sports existence. These guys are just in a bubble all year interacting with nothing but other cyclists, the general public pays attention for 3 weeks during TDF. He did nothing different than anyone else, and the guys that did the same are welcomed with open arms at the tour e.g. Mercxk Conti etc.. whereas the only guys excluded are basically him and Ullrich.
I don't get the moral relativism from a lot of the Lance / cycling fanboys on this. Just because he wasn't the only one doping doesn't make him any less dirty. Two wrongs don't make and a right and all that and it's bit like a rapist saying he was raised in a village full of rapists so we shouldn't judge him too harshly.
That analogy is retarded. Rape? Really?
Tour de France records and statistics - Wikipedia
