BBC: Lance Armstrong to have his 7 titles stripped. - Page 24

Marcus · 19th January 2013, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by Peephole

People keep saying it's the cleanest it's ever been. But at least in the Tour the top riders of the past years (Schlecks and Contador) have been caught. Maybe 2012 and Wiggins was the first largely clean tour, but you'd have to wait at least a couple of years to make that conclusion.

The average time of the whole tour doesn't seem to be remarkably lower.

Climbing times were definitely up in the last tour.

Marcus · 19th January 2013, 07:46 AM

Officials here have been reluctant to withdraw all of Lance's honors, citing his charity work, so an anonymous citizen has chipped in to help with a can of spray paint, renaming the Lance Armstrong Bikeway the Lying Cheat Bikeway.

Damien Evans · 19th January 2013, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by Peephole

People keep saying it's the cleanest it's ever been. But at least in the Tour the top riders of the past years (Schlecks and Contador) have been caught. Maybe 2012 and Wiggins was the first largely clean tour, but you'd have to wait at least a couple of years to make that conclusion.

The average time of the whole tour doesn't seem to be remarkably lower.

I've not heard of any substantiated allegations against Andy, but Frank is certainly highly suspicious at best. Scarponi and several other Italian based riders have been implicated with Ferrari recently as well.

ddt · 19th January 2013, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by zooterkin

Perhaps I was too subtle.

On rereading your post, I notice indeed the subtle use of the singular with respect to a certain part of male anatomy.

Dutch public radio this morning asked a psychiatrist for his opinion. The interviewer mentioned that some Dutch cyclists had called Lance a "psychopath". The psychiatrist said he was not allowed to say that, it being a medical opinion from his mouth. He added, though, that the interview reminded him of Joran van der Sloot.

Vortigern99 · 19th January 2013, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by Marcus

Officials here have been reluctant to withdraw all of Lance's honors, citing his charity work, so an anonymous citizen has chipped in to help with a can of spray paint, renaming the Lance Armstrong Bikeway the Lying Cheat Bikeway.

Really? This is the first I've heard of this! And I can't find any corroborating news stories. Care to share a link?

Marcus · 19th January 2013, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Vortigern99

Really? This is the first I've heard of this! And I can't find any corroborating news stories. Care to share a link?

They have been running the story on KLBJ AM all day, usually at the top of the hour when they have news. Perhaps it will also be on Channel 8, although I haven't looked, on local evening news and in the Statesman tomorrow, I'm not sure where to go online to find it.

ETA: Actually it's two stories, one about the City Council being reluctant to rename the bikeway, and another about the defacement.

ETA2: Just checked the radio and they ran the story again at 6:03.

ddt · 19th January 2013, 04:25 PM

The Dutch newspaper NRC has disclosed, after dozens of (anonymous) interviews with Dutch cyclists, managers and soigneurs, that Rabobank started organized use of EPO right in their first season of 1996. After disastrous results in the spring classics, manager Jan Raas called his best cyclists together and they started using EPO for the 1996 Tour (Dutch article, English summary). The cyclists put 10% of their prize money in a pool from which the doping was bought.

Thomas Dekker admitted having used EPO and blood doping all through 2006 and 2007. He was caught in 2009 for doping in 2007 and suspended for two years; at the time he claimed it was a one-time affair.

Later tonight, Danny Nelissen who rode for Rabobank in 1996 and 1997, admitted on TV having structurally used EPO at the time. He also implicated the team doctor for administering it (link in Dutch). In an interview with NRC in 1999, he still said:

Quote:

I have no respect for people who write I used doping without proof. I never tested positive. There is no better proof of my innocence. No positive test, no guilt, simple as that.

Sound familiar?

Marcus · 19th January 2013, 04:39 PM

Austin update: There is now an online petition asking the City Council to rename the Lance Armstrong Bikeway.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/c...trong-bikeway/

Laeke · 20th January 2013, 02:41 AM

Originally Posted by Peephole

People keep saying it's the cleanest it's ever been. But at least in the Tour the top riders of the past years (Schlecks and Contador) have been caught. Maybe 2012 and Wiggins was the first largely clean tour, but you'd have to wait at least a couple of years to make that conclusion.

The average time of the whole tour doesn't seem to be remarkably lower.

It's been 15 years that every year is the cleanest ever, until we find out that it is not. This year and the next will be no different.

Originally Posted by Marcus

Climbing times were definitely up in the last tour.

Climbing or total Tour times are not the most precise metric though, since the race is different every year. But it is true that overall times were slighty slower and that may be indicative that the most outrageous excesses have been curbed temporarily.

Peephole · 20th January 2013, 07:35 AM

Quote:

In 2005, right after publishing his soon-to-be bestseller, Lance Armstrong’s War, journalist Daniel Coyle was asked, “What’s our biggest misconception about Lance Armstrong?”

Coyle, who had spent more than a year shadowing Armstrong, gave a curious reply: “That he’s a nice guy,” he answered.

Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe.

Nessie · 20th January 2013, 08:19 AM

I feel really sorry for Phil Liggett the British commentator who defended Armstrong throughout and was repeatedly lied to by Armstrong himself. Liggett, who is highly respected stated Armstrong won because he was talented, competitive and a great tactition on a superb team. That sort of endorsement unwittingly helped Armstrong get away with the lie for so long.

Marcus · 20th January 2013, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by Peephole

Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe.

The only people who thought this were people who aren't interested in cycling and don't follow it, which is the majority of the US population. To them Lance was a celebrity who did charity work and occasionally rode his bike. Only recently have most people discovered that he was always a prick.

When Lance was winning his tours, I knew he was a prick, but he was our prick, and some slack can be cut for a champion, many of them are high strung.

zooterkin · 20th January 2013, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

I feel really sorry for Phil Liggett the British commentator who defended Armstrong throughout and was repeatedly lied to by Armstrong himself. Liggett, who is highly respected stated Armstrong won because he was talented, competitive and a great tactition on a superb team. That sort of endorsement unwittingly helped Armstrong get away with the lie for so long.

He wasn't the only one in exactly that situation. Rick Reilly of ESPN shares Phil's pain.

Quote:

Armstrong always told me he was clean.

On the record. Off the record. Every kind of record. In Colorado. In Texas. In France. On team buses. In cars. On cell phones.

I'd sit there with him, in some Tour de France hotel room while he was getting his daily postrace massage. And we'd talk through the hole in the table about how he stared down this guy or that guy, how he'd fooled Jan Ullrich on the torturous Alpe d'Huez into thinking he was gassed and then suddenly sprinted away to win. How he ordered chase packs from the center of the peloton and reeled in all the pretenders.

And then I'd bring up whatever latest charge was levied against him. "There's this former teammate who says he heard you tell doctors you doped." "There's this former assistant back in Austin who says you cheated." "There's this assistant they say they caught disposing of your drug paraphernalia."

And every time -- every single time -- he'd push himself up on his elbows and his face would be red and he'd stare at me like I'd just shot his dog and give me some very well-delivered explanation involving a few dozen F words, a painting of the accuser as a wronged employee seeking revenge, and how lawsuits were forthcoming.

Guybrush Threepwood · 20th January 2013, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by Peephole

Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe.

There are a few people in the US who saw that many years ago:

Originally Posted by Paul Kimmage in today's Observer

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 *******. He doesn't care about anyone."
"Well," LeMond replied. "I can't help you there."

bruto · 20th January 2013, 04:23 PM

To do well in this sport it's not such a bad idea to be shallow and obsessive and selfish, and there was a point where some of us figured that bad personality might be the reason why Lance could win without drugs. Now he's just a regular old ******* instead of a slightly admirable one.

Monketey Ghost · 20th January 2013, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by Peephole

Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe.

Uh... he said misconception. "That he's a nice guy."

appalling · 20th January 2013, 05:05 PM

The journalist said that people thinking he was a nice guy was the biggest misconception that people had.

Therefore, he's saying a lot of people believed him a nice guy.

Monketey Ghost · 20th January 2013, 05:09 PM

Knew my comprehension was askew.

appalling · 20th January 2013, 05:15 PM

Nihilianth · 20th January 2013, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Peephole

Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe.

The word "American" is apparently a naughty word in Europe.

Damien Evans · 20th January 2013, 11:54 PM

Originally Posted by bruto

To do well in this sport it's not such a bad idea to be shallow and obsessive and selfish, and there was a point where some of us figured that bad personality might be the reason why Lance could win without drugs. Now he's just a regular old ******* instead of a slightly admirable one.

Depends what your role in a team is. For example, I'd be surprised indeed to find out Adam Hansen, Lotto-Belisol domestique was like that, and yet last year he achieved the rare feat of finishing all three Grand Tours in one season, something only 32 people have done.

angrysoba · 21st January 2013, 04:26 PM

I don't know how many people here are familiar with Sp!ked, but in true-to-form style they have a piece up complaining about how Lance Armstrong was considered guilty before any evidence came in and the writer explicitly asks if a pursuing journalist is happy now that his "witch hunt" has finally got his witch.

Quote:

As sporting officialdom condemned, large swathes of the media spat. Gossipy stories of Armstrong’s bullying, his lying, his alleged sociopathology were published without nuance; op-eds assassinating Armstrong’s character, inflating his wrongs to Biblical proportions, were rushed off without perspective....And then this week, that finally happened - in the interview with Oprah Winfrey. Caught and unavoidably contrite, Armstrong acted out the role of the doping sportsman. Yes, he was saying, I am everything that the Dopefinder Generals say I am: I am that witch.

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/re...preview/13272/

It's actually a review of a book that's been written about Armstrong and just published now by a journalist called David Walsh. I don't know the Sp!ked writer, Tim Black, but in an earlier article he complains that Armstrong's been put in the stocks and how the sporting administrators have now spread suspicion through the sporting world.

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/12980/

Strangely, Black doesn't seem to think that Armstrong bears much responsibility for it and whines that it is a shame that no one will believe his great story anymore.

Vortigern99 · 21st January 2013, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Marcus

They have been running the story on KLBJ AM all day, usually at the top of the hour when they have news. Perhaps it will also be on Channel 8, although I haven't looked, on local evening news and in the Statesman tomorrow, I'm not sure where to go online to find it.

ETA: Actually it's two stories, one about the City Council being reluctant to rename the bikeway, and another about the defacement.

ETA2: Just checked the radio and they ran the story again at 6:03.

Right, I'm seeing on-line reports now. Thanks for the updates.

Patricio Elicer · 21st January 2013, 09:17 PM

At the 32:40 minute mark he's asked about the financial cost of the affair.

He speaks about 75 million dollars a day. Did I get it correctly?. Is he losing 75 million dollars a day?.

Could someone clarify to me the context of this, I don't get exactly what he's talking about.

Thanks.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

appalling · 21st January 2013, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Patricio Elicer

At the 32:40 minute mark he's asked about the financial cost of the affair.

He speaks about 75 million dollars a day. Did I get it correctly?. Is he losing 75 million dollars a day?.

Could someone clarify to me the context of this, I don't get exactly what he's talking about.

Thanks.

He was saying he had a day (the day the report of his doping came out) where he lost $75 million dollars in future endorsements.

She was asking how much he had really, and he was responding with something about what he could have had in the future if not exposed.

He was talking about future earnings.

It's still unclear how well he's doing with what he made on endorsements vs. lawsuits. Most think he's still well ahead.

lionking · 21st January 2013, 10:05 PM

Enjoy:

Patricio Elicer · 21st January 2013, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by appalling

He was saying he had a day (the day the report of his doping came out) where he lost $75 million dollars in future endorsements.

She was asking how much he had really, and he was responding with something about what he could have had in the future if not exposed.

He was talking about future earnings.

It's still unclear how well he's doing with what he made on endorsements vs. lawsuits. Most think he's still well ahead.

OK, thanks!. That was a bit confusing of him not responding what he's been actually asked.

appalling · 21st January 2013, 10:24 PM

Oh it was a telling point, to be sure.

If he accepts that he was defrauding people (at least saying so publicly), then at that point he is seeking a little sympathy, from Oprah, that he wasn't able to get a little more (on top of what he already got) for his crime.

"Look at what I lost, by being exposed. My future earnings from all my victories."

AdMan · 21st January 2013, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by appalling

Oh it was a telling point, to be sure.

If he accepts that he was defrauding people (at least saying so publicly), then at that point he is seeking a little sympathy, from Oprah, that he wasn't able to get a little more (on top of what he already got) for his crime.

"Look at what I lost, by being exposed. My future earnings from all my victories."

Exactly. That was a particularly sickening part of the interview. He was expecting to eventually receive $75 million, based on his cheating and lies, and on that day he learned he wouldn't be getting that, because his lies were exposed. And he's actually trying to make people feel sorry for him?

ddt · 22nd January 2013, 12:44 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I don't know how many people here are familiar with Sp!ked, but in true-to-form style they have a piece up complaining about how Lance Armstrong was considered guilty before any evidence came in and the writer explicitly asks if a pursuing journalist is happy now that his "witch hunt" has finally got his witch.

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/re...preview/13272/

It's actually a review of a book that's been written about Armstrong and just published now by a journalist called David Walsh.

David Walsh is not just a journalist. He is one of the main critics of Armstrong. In 2004, he wrote L.A. Confidential - a book that only has been published in French, not in English because of legal threats. In 2005, Armstrong started a libel suit against David Walsh and the Sunday Times for an article he wrote.

angrysoba · 22nd January 2013, 02:11 AM

Originally Posted by ddt

David Walsh is not just a journalist. He is one of the main critics of Armstrong. In 2004, he wrote L.A. Confidential - a book that only has been published in French, not in English because of legal threats. In 2005, Armstrong started a libel suit against David Walsh and the Sunday Times for an article he wrote.

What I find interesting/weird about the Sp!ked article is that the author, Tim Black, seems to be bemoaning the fact that David Walsh was correct for the wrong reasons almost as if Black was saying "I was right to be wrong and you were wrong to be right!"

Damien Evans · 22nd January 2013, 06:40 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

I don't know how many people here are familiar with Sp!ked, but in true-to-form style they have a piece up complaining about how Lance Armstrong was considered guilty before any evidence came in and the writer explicitly asks if a pursuing journalist is happy now that his "witch hunt" has finally got his witch.

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/re...preview/13272/

It's actually a review of a book that's been written about Armstrong and just published now by a journalist called David Walsh. I don't know the Sp!ked writer, Tim Black, but in an earlier article he complains that Armstrong's been put in the stocks and how the sporting administrators have now spread suspicion through the sporting world.

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/12980/

Strangely, Black doesn't seem to think that Armstrong bears much responsibility for it and whines that it is a shame that no one will believe his great story anymore.

What a load of rubbish. The writer appears to be even further up Lances arse than Lance is.

Denver · 22nd January 2013, 10:27 AM

Just heard this on the radio, but the radio folks left out the prank part:

Quote:

A sign telling users of an Australian library that books written by the disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong would be moved to the fiction section has been revealed as a joke.

Australian library's Lance Armstrong 'fiction' notice revealed as a hoax

dudalb · 22nd January 2013, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by lionking

Enjoy:

http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/...86319aa5a0.jpg

Damien Evans · 22nd January 2013, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by Denver

Just heard this on the radio, but the radio folks left out the prank part:

Australian library's Lance Armstrong 'fiction' notice revealed as a hoax

They could be moved to the 800s as literature though.

Toontown · 23rd January 2013, 08:14 PM

Who are they going to give the 7 titles to? Other dopers?

Oh well. At least the other dopers haven't lied as much. Well, not until they have to explain why they came in second behind Armstrong so many times.

Molinaro · 23rd January 2013, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by Toontown

Who are they going to give the 7 titles to? Other dopers?

Oh well. At least the other dopers haven't lied as much. Well, not until they have to explain why they came in second behind Armstrong so many times.

Evidence?

qayak · 23rd January 2013, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by Toontown

Who are they going to give the 7 titles to? Other dopers?

Oh well. At least the other dopers haven't lied as much. Well, not until they have to explain why they came in second behind Armstrong so many times.

The titles are vacant and will remain so.

davefoc · 23rd January 2013, 10:44 PM

Is it possible that this thread has moved farther into the land of Armstrong bashing than is justified by what is knowable about the situation?

There was a huge legal incentive for Armstrong to not admit to the doping. Yes, the various people pursuing Armstrong probably had enough evidence available to win a decision based on a preponderance of evidence but it was not going to be easy evidence to get at and defend. A lot of the people that might have testified against Armstrong had large incentives to rat Armstrong out and no matter what, their testimony would have been subject to attack. The physical evidence against Armstrong, while compelling, might not have been admissible against him. And even if one could prove a specific incident, extrapolating that to all seven Tour de Frances that Armstrong won would have been difficult. It is likely that if Armstrong had just kept his mouth shut from here on about this stuff that he would have been in a strong enough position legally to negotiate favorable terms in any kind of settlements, but now his legal position is weak enough that one might even imagine that the people going after him will be looking for penalties attached to any kind of settlements.

Armstrong might have come clean at this juncture because of what he said, he didn't want to continue to lie to his son, and that seems like a noble reason.

At this juncture Armstrong denies that he used drugs in his third place finish in his tour come back effort. Is it possible that he isn't lying about this?

Damien Evans · 23rd January 2013, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by davefoc

Is it possible that this thread has moved farther into the land of Armstrong bashing than is justified by what is knowable about the situation?

There was a huge legal incentive for Armstrong to not admit to the doping. Yes, the various people pursuing Armstrong probably had enough evidence available to win a decision based on a preponderance of evidence but it was not going to be easy evidence to get at and defend. A lot of the people that might have testified against Armstrong had large incentives to rat Armstrong out and no matter what, their testimony would have been subject to attack. The physical evidence against Armstrong, while compelling, might not have been admissible against him. And even if one could prove a specific incident, extrapolating that to all seven Tour de Frances that Armstrong won would have been difficult. It is likely that if Armstrong had just kept his mouth shut from here on about this stuff that he would have been in a strong enough position legally to negotiate favorable terms in any kind of settlements, but now his legal position is weak enough that one might even imagine that the people going after him will be looking for penalties attached to any kind of settlements.

Armstrong might have come clean at this juncture because of what he said, he didn't want to continue to lie to his son, and that seems like a noble reason.

At this juncture Armstrong denies that he used drugs in his third place finish in his tour come back effort. Is it possible that he isn't lying about this?

Not, it is not possible (well, unless you start accusing him of murdering babies I suppose), and no, it is not possible. There is no reason to trust a single word that comes out of his mouth and ample reason not to.

19th January 2013, 07:42 AM	#921
Marcus Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 1,840	Originally Posted by Peephole People keep saying it's the cleanest it's ever been. But at least in the Tour the top riders of the past years (Schlecks and Contador) have been caught. Maybe 2012 and Wiggins was the first largely clean tour, but you'd have to wait at least a couple of years to make that conclusion. The average time of the whole tour doesn't seem to be remarkably lower. Climbing times were definitely up in the last tour.
	Last edited by Marcus; 19th January 2013 at 08:45 AM. Reason: semantics

19th January 2013, 08:51 AM	#923
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,268	Originally Posted by Peephole People keep saying it's the cleanest it's ever been. But at least in the Tour the top riders of the past years (Schlecks and Contador) have been caught. Maybe 2012 and Wiggins was the first largely clean tour, but you'd have to wait at least a couple of years to make that conclusion. The average time of the whole tour doesn't seem to be remarkably lower. I've not heard of any substantiated allegations against Andy, but Frank is certainly highly suspicious at best. Scarponi and several other Italian based riders have been implicated with Ferrari recently as well.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

19th January 2013, 11:09 AM	#924
ddt Mafia Penguin Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,314	Originally Posted by zooterkin Perhaps I was too subtle. On rereading your post, I notice indeed the subtle use of the singular with respect to a certain part of male anatomy. Dutch public radio this morning asked a psychiatrist for his opinion. The interviewer mentioned that some Dutch cyclists had called Lance a "psychopath". The psychiatrist said he was not allowed to say that, it being a medical opinion from his mouth. He added, though, that the interview reminded him of Joran van der Sloot.
	__________________ Proud member of the Solipsistic Autosycophant's Group

19th January 2013, 12:29 PM	#925
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,010	Originally Posted by Marcus Officials here have been reluctant to withdraw all of Lance's honors, citing his charity work, so an anonymous citizen has chipped in to help with a can of spray paint, renaming the Lance Armstrong Bikeway the Lying Cheat Bikeway. Really? This is the first I've heard of this! And I can't find any corroborating news stories. Care to share a link?
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes

19th January 2013, 03:49 PM	#926
Marcus Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 1,840	Originally Posted by Vortigern99 Really? This is the first I've heard of this! And I can't find any corroborating news stories. Care to share a link? They have been running the story on KLBJ AM all day, usually at the top of the hour when they have news. Perhaps it will also be on Channel 8, although I haven't looked, on local evening news and in the Statesman tomorrow, I'm not sure where to go online to find it. ETA: Actually it's two stories, one about the City Council being reluctant to rename the bikeway, and another about the defacement. ETA2: Just checked the radio and they ran the story again at 6:03.
	Last edited by Marcus; 19th January 2013 at 04:04 PM.

19th January 2013, 07:46 AM	#922
Marcus Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 1,840	Officials here have been reluctant to withdraw all of Lance's honors, citing his charity work, so an anonymous citizen has chipped in to help with a can of spray paint, renaming the Lance Armstrong Bikeway the Lying Cheat Bikeway.

19th January 2013, 04:25 PM	#927
ddt Mafia Penguin Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,314	Fallout around Rabobank The Dutch newspaper NRC has disclosed, after dozens of (anonymous) interviews with Dutch cyclists, managers and soigneurs, that Rabobank started organized use of EPO right in their first season of 1996. After disastrous results in the spring classics, manager Jan Raas called his best cyclists together and they started using EPO for the 1996 Tour (Dutch article, English summary). The cyclists put 10% of their prize money in a pool from which the doping was bought. Thomas Dekker admitted having used EPO and blood doping all through 2006 and 2007. He was caught in 2009 for doping in 2007 and suspended for two years; at the time he claimed it was a one-time affair. Later tonight, Danny Nelissen who rode for Rabobank in 1996 and 1997, admitted on TV having structurally used EPO at the time. He also implicated the team doctor for administering it (link in Dutch). In an interview with NRC in 1999, he still said: Quote: I have no respect for people who write I used doping without proof. I never tested positive. There is no better proof of my innocence. No positive test, no guilt, simple as that. Sound familiar?
	__________________ Proud member of the Solipsistic Autosycophant's Group

19th January 2013, 04:39 PM	#928
Marcus Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 1,840	Austin update: There is now an online petition asking the City Council to rename the Lance Armstrong Bikeway. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/c...trong-bikeway/
	Last edited by Marcus; 19th January 2013 at 04:49 PM.

20th January 2013, 02:41 AM	#929
Laeke Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: France Posts: 443	Originally Posted by Peephole People keep saying it's the cleanest it's ever been. But at least in the Tour the top riders of the past years (Schlecks and Contador) have been caught. Maybe 2012 and Wiggins was the first largely clean tour, but you'd have to wait at least a couple of years to make that conclusion. The average time of the whole tour doesn't seem to be remarkably lower. It's been 15 years that every year is the cleanest ever, until we find out that it is not. This year and the next will be no different. Originally Posted by Marcus Climbing times were definitely up in the last tour. Climbing or total Tour times are not the most precise metric though, since the race is different every year. But it is true that overall times were slighty slower and that may be indicative that the most outrageous excesses have been curbed temporarily.
	__________________ "The idea of justice is not a result of the social pact, as some pretended ; on the contrary, it is the very foundation of society" Prince Adam Jerzy Czartoryski, Essay on diplomacy

20th January 2013, 07:35 AM	#930
Peephole Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 2,242	Quote: In 2005, right after publishing his soon-to-be bestseller, Lance Armstrong’s War, journalist Daniel Coyle was asked, “What’s our biggest misconception about Lance Armstrong?” Coyle, who had spent more than a year shadowing Armstrong, gave a curious reply: “That he’s a nice guy,” he answered. Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe.
Peephole Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 2,242	__________________ 911science

20th January 2013, 08:19 AM	#931
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,732	I feel really sorry for Phil Liggett the British commentator who defended Armstrong throughout and was repeatedly lied to by Armstrong himself. Liggett, who is highly respected stated Armstrong won because he was talented, competitive and a great tactition on a superb team. That sort of endorsement unwittingly helped Armstrong get away with the lie for so long.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

20th January 2013, 08:30 AM	#932
Marcus Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 1,840	Originally Posted by Peephole Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe. The only people who thought this were people who aren't interested in cycling and don't follow it, which is the majority of the US population. To them Lance was a celebrity who did charity work and occasionally rode his bike. Only recently have most people discovered that he was always a prick. When Lance was winning his tours, I knew he was a prick, but he was our prick, and some slack can be cut for a champion, many of them are high strung.

20th January 2013, 10:36 AM	#933
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Moderator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 24,533	Originally Posted by Nessie I feel really sorry for Phil Liggett the British commentator who defended Armstrong throughout and was repeatedly lied to by Armstrong himself. Liggett, who is highly respected stated Armstrong won because he was talented, competitive and a great tactition on a superb team. That sort of endorsement unwittingly helped Armstrong get away with the lie for so long. He wasn't the only one in exactly that situation. Rick Reilly of ESPN shares Phil's pain. Quote: Armstrong always told me he was clean. On the record. Off the record. Every kind of record. In Colorado. In Texas. In France. On team buses. In cars. On cell phones. I'd sit there with him, in some Tour de France hotel room while he was getting his daily postrace massage. And we'd talk through the hole in the table about how he stared down this guy or that guy, how he'd fooled Jan Ullrich on the torturous Alpe d'Huez into thinking he was gassed and then suddenly sprinted away to win. How he ordered chase packs from the center of the peloton and reeled in all the pretenders. And then I'd bring up whatever latest charge was levied against him. "There's this former teammate who says he heard you tell doctors you doped." "There's this former assistant back in Austin who says you cheated." "There's this assistant they say they caught disposing of your drug paraphernalia." And every time -- every single time -- he'd push himself up on his elbows and his face would be red and he'd stare at me like I'd just shot his dog and give me some very well-delivered explanation involving a few dozen F words, a painting of the accuser as a wronged employee seeking revenge, and how lawsuits were forthcoming.
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

20th January 2013, 10:48 AM	#934
Guybrush Threepwood Trainee Pirate Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: An Uaimh Posts: 1,559	Originally Posted by Peephole Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *****, at least in here in Europe. There are a few people in the US who saw that many years ago: Originally Posted by Paul Kimmage in today's Observer 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 *****. He doesn't care about anyone." "Well," LeMond replied. "I can't help you there."

20th January 2013, 04:23 PM	#935
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 11,180	To do well in this sport it's not such a bad idea to be shallow and obsessive and selfish, and there was a point where some of us figured that bad personality might be the reason why Lance could win without drugs. Now he's just a regular old ******* instead of a slightly admirable one.
	__________________ "Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding.(Samuel Johnson) The gods are less for their love of praise....(Wendell Berry)

20th January 2013, 04:53 PM	#936
Monketey Ghost Body of Work Join Date: May 2003 Location: I'm on your screen! Posts: 14,806	Originally Posted by Peephole Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous ******, at least in here in Europe. Uh... he said misconception.* "That he's a nice guy."
	__________________ _{The membership of this forum is henceforth to refer to me as potato-headed Bobby} _{SSKCAS, member in long standing}

20th January 2013, 05:05 PM	#937
appalling Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Beyond the reach of your cars. Posts: 320	The journalist said that people thinking he was a nice guy was the biggest misconception that people had. Therefore, he's saying a lot of people believed him a nice guy.

20th January 2013, 05:09 PM	#938
Monketey Ghost Body of Work Join Date: May 2003 Location: I'm on your screen! Posts: 14,806	Knew my comprehension was askew.
	__________________ _{The membership of this forum is henceforth to refer to me as potato-headed Bobby} _{SSKCAS, member in long standing}

20th January 2013, 05:15 PM	#939
appalling Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Beyond the reach of your cars. Posts: 320

20th January 2013, 10:56 PM	#940
Nihilianth Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 2,224	Originally Posted by Peephole Did people really think this? He always came over as an enormous *******, at least in here in Europe. The word "American" is apparently a naughty word in Europe.

20th January 2013, 11:54 PM	#941
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,268	Originally Posted by bruto To do well in this sport it's not such a bad idea to be shallow and obsessive and selfish, and there was a point where some of us figured that bad personality might be the reason why Lance could win without drugs. Now he's just a regular old ******* instead of a slightly admirable one. Depends what your role in a team is. For example, I'd be surprised indeed to find out Adam Hansen, Lotto-Belisol domestique was like that, and yet last year he achieved the rare feat of finishing all three Grand Tours in one season, something only 32 people have done.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

21st January 2013, 04:26 PM	#942
angrysoba Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 8,500	I don't know how many people here are familiar with Sp!ked, but in true-to-form style they have a piece up complaining about how Lance Armstrong was considered guilty before any evidence came in and the writer explicitly asks if a pursuing journalist is happy now that his "witch hunt" has finally got his witch. Quote: As sporting officialdom condemned, large swathes of the media spat. Gossipy stories of Armstrong’s bullying, his lying, his alleged sociopathology were published without nuance; op-eds assassinating Armstrong’s character, inflating his wrongs to Biblical proportions, were rushed off without perspective....And then this week, that finally happened - in the interview with Oprah Winfrey. Caught and unavoidably contrite, Armstrong acted out the role of the doping sportsman. Yes, he was saying, I am everything that the Dopefinder Generals say I am: I am that witch. http://www.spiked-online.com/site/re...preview/13272/ It's actually a review of a book that's been written about Armstrong and just published now by a journalist called David Walsh. I don't know the Sp!ked writer, Tim Black, but in an earlier article he complains that Armstrong's been put in the stocks and how the sporting administrators have now spread suspicion through the sporting world. http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/12980/ Strangely, Black doesn't seem to think that Armstrong bears much responsibility for it and whines that it is a shame that no one will believe his great story anymore.

21st January 2013, 04:39 PM	#943
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,010	Originally Posted by Marcus They have been running the story on KLBJ AM all day, usually at the top of the hour when they have news. Perhaps it will also be on Channel 8, although I haven't looked, on local evening news and in the Statesman tomorrow, I'm not sure where to go online to find it. ETA: Actually it's two stories, one about the City Council being reluctant to rename the bikeway, and another about the defacement. ETA2: Just checked the radio and they ran the story again at 6:03. Right, I'm seeing on-line reports now. Thanks for the updates.
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes

21st January 2013, 09:58 PM	#945
appalling Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Beyond the reach of your cars. Posts: 320	Originally Posted by Patricio Elicer At the 32:40 minute mark he's asked about the financial cost of the affair. He speaks about 75 million dollars a day. Did I get it correctly?. Is he losing 75 million dollars a day?. Could someone clarify to me the context of this, I don't get exactly what he's talking about. Thanks. He was saying he had a day (the day the report of his doping came out) where he lost $75 million dollars in future endorsements. She was asking how much he had really, and he was responding with something about what he could have had in the future if not exposed. He was talking about future earnings. It's still unclear how well he's doing with what he made on endorsements vs. lawsuits. Most think he's still well ahead.

21st January 2013, 10:05 PM	#946
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 29,643	Enjoy:
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

21st January 2013, 10:18 PM	#947
Patricio Elicer Obsessed with Reality Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 4,350	Originally Posted by appalling He was saying he had a day (the day the report of his doping came out) where he lost $75 million dollars in future endorsements. She was asking how much he had really, and he was responding with something about what he could have had in the future if not exposed. He was talking about future earnings. It's still unclear how well he's doing with what he made on endorsements vs. lawsuits. Most think he's still well ahead. OK, thanks!. That was a bit confusing of him not responding what he's been actually asked.
	__________________ "Well, I've never discussed it before on the forum, but, Patricio, you're the real reason I didn't show up at TAM I. Once I found out you were going, I cancelled all my plans, knowing that you would likely hunt me down and ask me questions about English language usage. I finally decided that I wouldn't be able to handle the pressure of your questions ..." - Mr. Skinny on 5th April 2007.

21st January 2013, 10:24 PM	#948
appalling Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Beyond the reach of your cars. Posts: 320	Oh it was a telling point, to be sure. If he accepts that he was defrauding people (at least saying so publicly), then at that point he is seeking a little sympathy, from Oprah, that he wasn't able to get a little more (on top of what he already got) for his crime. "Look at what I lost, by being exposed. My future earnings from all my victories."

21st January 2013, 11:36 PM	#949
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,157	Originally Posted by appalling Oh it was a telling point, to be sure. If he accepts that he was defrauding people (at least saying so publicly), then at that point he is seeking a little sympathy, from Oprah, that he wasn't able to get a little more (on top of what he already got) for his crime. "Look at what I lost, by being exposed. My future earnings from all my victories." Exactly. That was a particularly sickening part of the interview. He was expecting to eventually receive $75 million, based on his cheating and lies, and on that day he learned he wouldn't be getting that, because his lies were exposed. And he's actually trying to make people feel sorry for him?
AdMan Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 7,157	__________________ It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan

22nd January 2013, 12:44 AM	#950
ddt Mafia Penguin Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,314	Originally Posted by angrysoba I don't know how many people here are familiar with Sp!ked, but in true-to-form style they have a piece up complaining about how Lance Armstrong was considered guilty before any evidence came in and the writer explicitly asks if a pursuing journalist is happy now that his "witch hunt" has finally got his witch. http://www.spiked-online.com/site/re...preview/13272/ It's actually a review of a book that's been written about Armstrong and just published now by a journalist called David Walsh. David Walsh is not just a journalist. He is one of the main critics of Armstrong. In 2004, he wrote L.A. Confidential - a book that only has been published in French, not in English because of legal threats. In 2005, Armstrong started a libel suit against David Walsh and the Sunday Times for an article he wrote.
	__________________ Proud member of the Solipsistic Autosycophant's Group

22nd January 2013, 02:11 AM	#951
angrysoba Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 8,500	Originally Posted by ddt David Walsh is not just a journalist. He is one of the main critics of Armstrong. In 2004, he wrote L.A. Confidential - a book that only has been published in French, not in English because of legal threats. In 2005, Armstrong started a libel suit against David Walsh and the Sunday Times for an article he wrote. What I find interesting/weird about the Sp!ked article is that the author, Tim Black, seems to be bemoaning the fact that David Walsh was correct for the wrong reasons almost as if Black was saying "I was right to be wrong and you were wrong to be right!"

22nd January 2013, 06:40 AM	#952
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,268	Originally Posted by angrysoba I don't know how many people here are familiar with Sp!ked, but in true-to-form style they have a piece up complaining about how Lance Armstrong was considered guilty before any evidence came in and the writer explicitly asks if a pursuing journalist is happy now that his "witch hunt" has finally got his witch. http://www.spiked-online.com/site/re...preview/13272/ It's actually a review of a book that's been written about Armstrong and just published now by a journalist called David Walsh. I don't know the Sp!ked writer, Tim Black, but in an earlier article he complains that Armstrong's been put in the stocks and how the sporting administrators have now spread suspicion through the sporting world. http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/12980/ Strangely, Black doesn't seem to think that Armstrong bears much responsibility for it and whines that it is a shame that no one will believe his great story anymore. What a load of rubbish. The writer appears to be even further up Lances arse than Lance is.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

22nd January 2013, 10:27 AM	#953
Denver Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 6,595	Just heard this on the radio, but the radio folks left out the prank part: Quote: A sign telling users of an Australian library that books written by the disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong would be moved to the fiction section has been revealed as a joke. Australian library's Lance Armstrong 'fiction' notice revealed as a hoax
	__________________ Dreams inevitably lead to hideous implosions -- Invader Zim

22nd January 2013, 10:53 AM	#954
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,782	Originally Posted by lionking Enjoy: http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/...86319aa5a0.jpg

22nd January 2013, 09:37 PM	#955
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,268	Originally Posted by Denver Just heard this on the radio, but the radio folks left out the prank part: Australian library's Lance Armstrong 'fiction' notice revealed as a hoax They could be moved to the 800s as literature though.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

23rd January 2013, 08:14 PM	#956
Toontown Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 3,555	Who are they going to give the 7 titles to? Other dopers? Oh well. At least the other dopers haven't lied as much. Well, not until they have to explain why they came in second behind Armstrong so many times.
Toontown Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 3,555	__________________ SEARCH NOW THE SPHERES PROBE THE UNIVERSE SEND BACK WORD WHAT FORCE SO IRRESISTIBLE AS THE WILL OF FREE MEN