[Closed] He's back, hiya Lance whats kicking chicken?

I can't believe how driven he is to compete.

Most people would just say 'right well that's a chapter of my life closed' and move on to sheep farming or something.

Same old but doing a good job of diverting attention from the fact that he went after everyone with the biggest lawyers available to shut them up, even when they were telling the truth. Happy that he's not in the news so much any more

Looks like the floodgates are about to open again.
For me ive just accepted that a majority were on the juice anyway, so nothing will suprise or shock anymore.

How can you ride that fast for that long without it?

Ask yourself the question.

He's got a point.

Cav has a very interesting chapter on the whole Lance thing in his new book "At Speed" which has just come out, well worth a read.

Shame they aren't more law suits to keep him tied up so he hasn't got time to do interviews...

Just goes to show how crap the BBC has become, he is a compulsive liar, who has barely uttered an honest word in his lifetime. The article (if worth printing at all) should be pointing out that this is just likely to be another pack of lies and pr, rather than just being his mouthpiece.

they have massively underestimated his wealth. at it's peak, his art collection alone was valued at approx $100 million.

He's done an interview for cyclingnews website too:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview-part-1
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrong-exclusive-interview-part-2
and so on.

Regardless of what you think of him, whether he's still lying or not, it's all interesting reading.

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy ]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy[/url]

they have massively underestimated his wealth. at it's peak, his art collection alone was valued at approx $100 million.

Not to mention the $500m Livestrong foundation whole main expense is paying attendance fees to Lance for raising cancer awareness. He's a very clever guy, he has cancer patients paying his pension for him.....

No eyed deer

I was going to suggest much the same - he definitely ticks all the boxes

He should leave himself with enough money for a bike and a cabin in Montana and give the rest to charity imo. It's what I'd do I reckon.

Well, two bikes maybe, road and MTB.

Most people would just say 'right well that's a chapter of my life closed' and move on to sheep farming or something.

the only thing i would say, is all the other dopers would have acted EXACTLY THE SAME AS HIM had they not been offered a free lunch to dob him , each other and everyone else in. If they thought they would never be found out , all our cycling heroes would be taking everyone and anyone to court to keep their "innocence" intact.

That is dire. Half of them (including him) seem to get distracted and forget to play!

While he may have been the most objectionable of them, he's almost certainly not the first person to have won the tour while doping. When are the UCI or whoever going to ask the awkward questions of everyone else?

While I don't think he should be given any sympathy, it does feel wrong that there's not been a general investigation into everyone involved in the sport. God knows there's enough books on the subject, it's not as if they don't know who to start asking.

the only thing i would say, is all the other dopers would have acted EXACTLY THE SAME AS HIM had they not been offered a free lunch to dob him

100%

"It's been tough," he said. "It's been real tough. I've paid a high price in terms of my standing within the sport, my reputation, certainly financially because the lawsuits have continued to pile up.

"I have experienced massive personal loss, massive loss of wealth while others have truly capitalised on this story."

The poor dear. 😥

He cannot live with anonymity and just being forgotten and rotting in ignominy

Please lets all turn our back on him and ignore his every utterance ...nothing will hurt the lying, bull shitting, bullying, egomiester more than than being ignored and forgotten

**** him and everything he has to say on anything

Him complaining about losing money to lawsuits is HILARIOUS.

footflaps - Member

Not to mention the $500m Livestrong foundation whole main expense is paying attendance fees to Lance for raising cancer awareness

Source pls.

The poor dear.

For me, what I'll remember is guy (who's name, ironically, I can't recall) who was a never-quite-made-it-at-the-top-level pro from the nineties, he was in a newspaper when I think The Secret Race came out saying "well Tyler, and Floyd and all the other guys coming out of the woodwork now with your book deals - thank you for your honesty, that's much consolation to me in my three bed semi as you contemplate your failings in palatial comfort". Written a lot better than that, of course.

Nicole Cooke said pretty much the same when she retired, a scathing attack on the cheat, win, make a profit, confess, make more money circle that's doing the rounds in pro-cycling at the moment. Point being that these cheats are making more from one book deal than she made in her entire life which lead on to another attack about the imbalance between Men's & Women's cycling. And you can see why she's bitter!

The was a good line somewhere (I think in the CN interview but maybe not) where Lance complained about it being a witch hunt where the interviewer simply stated "but weren't you the witch?".

Seems about right, if you gained the most from doping it seems only fair that you also lose the most.

To trot out a famous old quote "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Forgetting about Lance and that era of cycling would be a bad thing IMO. Ok, it may fuel his hubris but that's a small price to pay if it results in real positive change.

While we all know that there were plenty, probably even the majority, of the top flight who were 'juicing', as far I know LA was the only one who actively tried to destroy innocent people in his attempt to keep it under wraps. For that reason, I hope he suffers.

Not got a link to hand, but for whoever it was querying the criticism of "Livestrong" earlier in the thread, Google is your friend: there's been more than one critical analysis done, and for those wondering what the foundation has actually, really done to help cancer sufferers, or help cancer research, well, that's a very good question from what I've read...

(And if the answer comes back: Well, they've raised awareness, well, you know what, I think most people are already aware of cancer, thanks very much.)

The sooner he disappears from public eye the better, self-important fame chaser. He's just bricking it because he knows that within the next 2-3 years he will be bancrupt.

(And if the answer comes back: Well, they've raised awareness, well, you know what, I think most people are already aware of cancer, thanks very much.)

Can see for yourself what they spend it on:
http://www.livestrong.org/What-We-Do/Our-Approach/Where-the-Money-Goes

And their Annual Reports
http://www.livestrong.org/Who-We-Are/Our-Strength/Financial-Information

Still pretty woolly in places admittedly...

And on the opposite side is this (slightly old now) article which appeared in Outside Magazine in early 2012 (before he'd confessed).
http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/athletes/lance-armstrong/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html?page=all

he knows that within the next 2-3 years he will be bancrupt.

And then a year or two after that he'll be discharged, then he can sell the movie rights and then he'll be minted again.

Well I still think he was clean. They are all just out to get him. They are just baddies. Lance cures cancer FFS. Leave him alone.

edlong - Member

Not got a link to hand, but for whoever it was querying the criticism of "Livestrong" earlier in the thread, Google is your friend: there's been more than one critical analysis done, and for those wondering what the foundation has actually, really done to help cancer sufferers, or help cancer research, well, that's a very good question from what I've read...

I was referring to the very specific claim that their "main expense is paying attendance fees to Lance"

But no, they didn't do much for cancer research, not their bag. People are scathing about cancer awareness, but it doesn't mean "telling people there's a thing called cancer". I saw a nice comment, "we used to be cancer victims, now we're survivors" And it seems widely accepted that Livestrong and Armstrong did a lot for that perception in America- cancer for a lot of people became a thing you could beat and go on and take on the world, rather than a pitiable thing.

(I can't think of a better way to put it than "cancer advocacy" which isn't quite right. Go cancer!)

It's a shame the role model of post-cancer success was a cheating **** mind, but good has been done despite that.

But no, they didn't do much for cancer research, not their bag. People are scathing about cancer awareness, but it doesn't mean "telling people there's a thing called cancer". I saw a nice comment, "we used to be cancer victims, now we're survivors" And it seems widely accepted that Livestrong and Armstrong did a lot for that perception in America- cancer for a lot of people became a thing you could beat and go on and take on the world, rather than a pitiable thing.

Haven't they also done a lot to further the bullshit concept that those that survive cancer are 'winners' that have 'beaten' cancer (thus defining all those who don't survive as losers who just didn't want to live enough)?

it may fuel his hubris but that's a small price to pay if it results in real positive change.

If you think he has had an epiphany and cares about things beyond LA then I suspect you are very much mistaken

grum - Member

Haven't they also done a lot to further the bullshit concept that those that survive cancer are 'winners' that have 'beaten' cancer (thus defining all those who don't survive as losers who just didn't want to live enough)?

I can see how stupid people might draw that conclusion, but then stupid people don't need help to come to stupid conclusions.

But no, they didn't do much for cancer research, not their bag. People are scathing about cancer awareness, but it doesn't mean "telling people there's a thing called cancer". I saw a nice comment, "we used to be cancer victims, now we're survivors" And it seems widely accepted that Livestrong and Armstrong did a lot for that perception in America- cancer for a lot of people became a thing you could beat and go on and take on the world, rather than a pitiable thing.

The other thing you've got to take into account is the general cock-up that passes for a medical system in the US - not like here where you get cancer, go to a hospital and get treated; over there it involves insurance, private healthcare and a very confusing system and has further ramifications re employment, paying the bills etc.

As far as I understand it, LiveStrong helped people negotiate that system - their thoughts (allegedly) being that lots of charities raise money for cancer research, no-one at the time really helped someone with cancer get through the system, get effective treatment, find out about their options.

I don't doubt that it was a mutually beneficial agreement between LA and LiveStrong, I guess the truth is exactly where that boundary lies between it being a publicity machine for LA and it actually doing something useful for "the cancer community".

I'd like to see him back on a bike, do the Leadville again, do TazChallenge stuff, you know long distance racing, as proven he's pretty nifty at that sort of thing, he can come do the SDW with me if he likes.
😉

He makes a good point about the other dopers, why havent the results of Riis, Ulrich, Pantani etc been expunged from the results book too?

As things stand at the moment cycling gets to paint Armstrong as the bad guy but if the rules applied to him are applied fairly across all dopers from the 90s and 00s then cycling has a massive gaping black hole in its history lasting about 15 years....then its the sport that looks bad and not Armstrong (who could claim he was just caught up in it)....going after Armstrong takes some attention away from the ills that pervaded european cycling long before Lance appeared on the scene.

It means people dont have to go into the uncomfortable realities of the the Conconi institute using Italian government money to experiment with EPO on Italian cyclist in the early 90s, or Dr Ferrari's amazing Gewiss team of the early 90s and his use of EPO that predates his dealings with Lance etc etc....the sport is/was dirty....Lance can expect to cop some flak as the biggest fish in the pond but letting everybody else get a free pass is a joke.

Also interesting that just about everybody wriggling and squealing at the moment (Rasmussen, O'Grady, Hamilton etc etc) is quick to name names but Lance hasnt actually dropped anybody else in it.

He makes a good point about the other dopers, why havent the results of Riis, Ulrich, Pantani etc been expunged from the results book too?

Mr 60% Riis would be top of my hit list. Quite how he still has the position he has in cycling is beyond me. Heavily doped (even by the standards of the time) he comes from nowhere to win the Tour. Clear from his denials and later "confession" that he doesn't see anything wrong in what he did. Then goes on to (alleged by many) actively promote similar doping practices within the team he runs (which also racks up numerous GT victories.) And still he's in charge of a ProTour team!

A massive +1 for what deviant and mrblobby both say ^^.

What bugs me is the total hypocrisy and lack of consistency about it.
Everyone goes on about LA bullying, suing etc and yes, he was more aggressive than anyone else in that respect but to think he was the only rider doing that is naive in the extreme.

Every other team had a manager, a doctor, older riders all telling younger riders to dope. If they didn't they were quietly dropped. Everyone cites the Christophe Bassons case although there are conflicting reports over the exact circumstances of him quitting the sport - some say it was LA, some that it was a cumulative stress of everyone doping and the overall pressure on him.

There are so many formerly doped riders who have now moved on in the sport to beocme team managers, coaches etc or who have created business interests based on that - Mario Cippolini with his line of bikes, Bjarne Riis running a team etc.

To lay it all at the door of Lance is to miss the point somewhat. Only thing is of course that for a time at least, LA was bigger than cycling - the UCI and the sport needed him so it's created an image and aura all of it's own.

The fact that he still seems bemused at his status as number one target says all you need to know about how deluded he really is.

Of course he wasn't the only one. Of course he was in the majority, not the minority. But he was one who employed the most lawyers to close down the truth. He was the most sanctimonious shit of the lot. He was the biggest bully. And guess what, now he's reaping what he has sown and he doesn't like it. Well boo ****ing hoo.

What a brat.

He still won 7 tour though.

deviant - Member

Also interesting that just about everybody wriggling and squealing at the moment (Rasmussen, O'Grady, Hamilton etc etc) is quick to name names but Lance hasnt actually dropped anybody else in it.

Why do you think that's laudable?

Ok, let him spill, get it out. Say it all.

Now can be ban all topics on Lance on here?

I guess his argument is that he's happy to tell all and name names in a proper TRC forum, not just to satisfy the media's desire for a bit of gossip. It does sometimes seem that a lot of the naming and finger pointing that does go on is an attempt to deflect attention and somehow lessen the crime (as look, he was doing it too!) rather than to improve the understanding of what went on and to prevent reoccurrence.

Either that or he understands the value of the information he has and will only divulge when it can be best monetized 😕

No, Hora, I don't think so - not until the LA story is closed out - lawsuits over, etc.

Mario Cippolini with his line of bikes

There's plenty who'd buy Armstrong bikes in a couple of years I reckon. Mostly in the US but that's a fairly big market.

Anyway, as Dr Hutch posted on twitter, he's complaining that he was targeted. Given limited resources, surely targeting the biggest fish is the right way to go about things.

Many others doped. Not very many behaved the way Lance did (I'm struggling to think who) with targeted threats, bullying, character defamation, etc. He's not being punished so harshly because he doped but rather for all the other things he did around that to keep it quiet.

Either that or he understands the value of the information he has and will only divulge when it can be best monetized

That's my bet. He'll never do anything unless it suits him even if it's the right thing to do.

Only thing is of course that for a time at least, LA was bigger than cycling

this x 1000. He trancended his sport like few other sports stars have, and had massive political influence and connections which no other cyclist (and arguably other sportsman) ever did-first name terms with world leaders etc. He had more power and abused it far more than any other cheating sportsman, setting out to destroy the careers, reputations, livelihoods and lives of anyone (Lemond, Bassons, Simeoni, the Andreus, Emma O'Reilly, David Walsh to name ones of the top of my head) who got in the way of what he now simply refers to as "the narrative", as if it had a life of its own.

No he wasnt the only one doping. No he isnt being singled out unfairly. Recently read Jon Ronson's The Psychopath Test, LA ticks all the boxes.

Say it all.

He won't say it all. He is adamant he didnt dope in his comeback which is still covered by US statutes of limitation, which beggars belief.

The implication that he was the one who nudged the UCI on Tyler (as he saw Tyler as trouble) says it all to me. The man needs to come 100% clean then piss off.

Lance was involved in cycling in some way? Did he race before he got sick or something? 😉

http://www.livestrong.org/Our-Founder

In 2012, Lance resigned his leadership role with the Foundation. He remains the Foundation’s single biggest donor and the progress he has helped generate within the field of cancer survivorship stands as a lasting legacy.

Wow! I wonder why he resigned 😕

clubber - Member

Given limited resources, surely targeting the biggest fish is the right way to go about things.

For the sake of argument, let's say that maybe if resources are limited, people who're still part of the professional game are the bigger fishes than retired cheats. Your team bosses, doctors, etc etc.

and the progress he has helped generate within the field of cancer survivorship

WT actual F does that mean ?

I asked him if he'd do the SDW with me, he's not answered yet, so he still might.. 8)

For the sake of argument, let's say that maybe if resources are limited, people who're still part of the professional game are the bigger fishes than retired cheats. Your team bosses, doctors, etc etc.

I don't disagree with that actually but really, who? Bruyneel has been done, many older dopers have had to admit to what they did. Riis seems to be clinging on though I'm hopeful that his team's financial struggles are connected to his links to Hamilton, etc. USADA had to go after American teams/riders (the clue's in the name 🙂 ) so who else? JV? He's been a force for good IMO and I can't think of anyone else high profile.

He's basically trying to angle it so that they (USADA/WADA/UCI) allow him permission to compete (at triathlon) in return for him testifying.

He's been given plenty of chances to testify, as his ex colleagues did in order to earn their lenient 6 month sentences, but refused to and thus got banned. Hence the discrepancy.

As to the money angle, I certainly have sympathy with those he sued and slandered (and lost their jobs as a result) and believe they should get their money back.

As for prize money and sponsorship, that's a bit harder to justify, a lot of the other pros still have theirs, along with their reputations.

He's been given plenty of chances to testify, as his ex colleagues did in order to earn their lenient 6 month sentences, but refused to and thus got banned. Hence the discrepancy.

WADA have come out and said just that, he had his chance to come clean, now its too late.

In his latest interview on cyclingnews, LA is claiming that he wasn't actually given that chance...

I know which side I feel is likely to be telling the truth.

I know which side I feel is likely to be telling the truth.

Frankly, I think the truth got lost somewhere in the depths of the doping murk quite a while ago. I think all sides have their own agenda.

LA obviously wants to return to competition.
USADA need to justify the staggering sums of money they spent going after him.
WADA need to try and prove that they're not totally incompetent while explaining away how he and the team passed hundreds of doping controls.
All the sponsors need to explain how they all believed while reaping the profits at the time.

Basically, all sides are telling whatever version of the truth suits them at that particular time while simultaneously trying to avoid perjury, contempt of court, lying under oath and perverting the course of justice.

Should keep everyone occupied for the next couple of years. 😉

clubber - Member

I don't disagree with that actually but really, who?

For myself, pretty much everyone who was in any position of authority through the doping years, tbh.

Well yes but that's rather beyond [b]USA[/b]DA's remit isn't it?

He needs to move to a tax haven with no extradition treaties and give the world a big "F-you" and enjoy the rest of his years....thats what i'd do anyway!

....and if he hasnt stashed some of his money away somewhere that it's untouchable and untraceable then he's been very very silly since retirement.
I read the book about Pantani's decline and despite his personal troubles with PEDs and recreational drugs he had his head screwed on financially and was still raking it in up until his death.

I include them in my list of scalps tbh.