I couldn't believe he was serious when he said that bit. His personality is going ot appear as a case study for university students in years to come.
Lance Armstrong to be charged with doping offences - Washington Post
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
I couldn't believe he was serious when he said that bit. His personality is going ot appear as a case study for university students in years to come.
No doubt, but the part I highlighted in the post is what you highlight as well - "people like him". Fact is that back then a cheater would've won it no matter what. I'm sure that there were clean riders in the race, but I highly doubt that any of them were anywhere close to the top.
I know that times are slower thee days, however i am nto knowledgeable enough on the Tour to be in a position to offer names from that era.
And yes, due to his profile there is an element o him taking the fall for others in terms of public opinion.
He's not taking the fall for anyone. Many of the riders he competed with have already admitted to doping. He's only admitting it now because the evidence stacked up against him.
A poor choice of words on my part. Armstrong transcended the sport and the Tour, and now will embody the drug culture and rightly be the target of blame and anger, yet as you say it existed elsewhere.
I was pleasantly surprised with the interview Oprah conducted, it looks like the next show will be more human interest than sport.
Yeah, I thought she did well. Had no problems asking direct questions and followed up on quite a few when she didn't like the answer. Never really watched her before (apart from the odd clip here and there), but I can see why she's gotten so famous - she's brilliant at interviewing.
I sort of feared it'd be all about feelings and shit and that she'd let him get away with vague answers, but - as you say - I was pleasantly surprised.
Really?
'Did you think that the clean riders were..............suckers?'
'You sued people knowing that they were telling the truth...........what is that!?'
There are far better ways of framing those questions that would have made Lance have to dig far deeper than he did.
It may have seemed to Oprah that if she kept feeding the rope he'd continue to hang himself every other minute or so, which he then proceeded to do more often than not.
Anywhere I can watch this?
But I don't know when it will be blocked.
If this one is blocked, just type 'lance armstrong oprah' in YouTube search box.
It was Daily Mail level. She is obviously good at what she does but it can be done better, from an investigative point of view.
Just watched part 1 and I am not sure what to say. He is just so candid about the whole thing it's unbelievable. It's just sad tbh
P.S For Indians part 1 will be on at 9 tonight on discovery
P.S For Indians part 1 will be on at 9 tonight on discovery
Doesn't work like that. The best track sprinters are generally great sprinter in the road racing. His body style and make up was nothing close to those such as McEwan and Cavendish as examples. Also the idea that there are those that busted a gut and amounted to little is not limited to those that don't dope. Guys like George Hincappie etc busted there arse for their entire careers to achieve little personally. That is cycling and alot of sports in general.
Interesting that he only admitted doping up until 2005 but strenuously denied doing it in 2009/10, despite avoiding earlier capture. He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who would suddenly have a crisis of confidence, he was still using Michel Ferrari and his blood passport testing concluded that the natural chance of his blood matching 2009 and 2010 samples were one in a million - everything points to him doping.
The US statute of limitations lasts 8 years, so anything from 2005 and before he can admit to with no legal ramifications but suddenly despite all the evidence pointing to guilt, he denies more recent doping. I wish Oprah had pushed this angle.
Also his comment about getting the federal case dropped was telling - "that would be VERY hard to influence" - sounds like you at least had a go, son!
The US statute of limitations lasts 8 years, so anything from 2005 and before he can admit to with no legal ramifications but suddenly despite all the evidence pointing to guilt, he denies more recent doping. I wish Oprah had pushed this angle.
Also his comment about getting the federal case dropped was telling - "that would be VERY hard to influence" - sounds like you at least had a go, son!
Very interesting point Rising Sun, and it hasn't been picked up yet by any of the blogs/sites till now. Admittedly, I'm only reading articles by English journalists.
Ah.... that's why he confessed.... as you were.
Have watched parts of it with one eye so far, here are some preliminary thoughts:
- I have no idea why he claims to have been clean during the latter stages of his career. (Edit: I might now thanks to TheRisingSun) His blood values from 2009 clearly tell a different story. This is a pathetic attempt to put a bit of distance between the cheat and present day Lance, as if there's been some sort of reformation. What it actually proves is that he's still a liar.
- He regrets making a come back as he wouldn't have been caught otherwise. He does not regret cheating. Says it all, really.
- He blows the number of cheating riders waaaaaay out of proportion in an attempt to normalize what he did and victimize himself. This is what annoys me the most. Lance didn't just do what the others did in order to level any playing field. Lance, Bruyneel, Ferrari et al. took doping to new levels, systematized it and invested much more time, money and effort in it than anyone else. Rumor has it Lance has convinced more than one reluctant rider to join the dark side. I used to think even he couldn't be that big an asshole, now I'm not sure.
- He definitely called Betsy Andreu fat.
- I have no idea why he claims to have been clean during the latter stages of his career. (Edit: I might now thanks to TheRisingSun) His blood values from 2009 clearly tell a different story. This is a pathetic attempt to put a bit of distance between the cheat and present day Lance, as if there's been some sort of reformation. What it actually proves is that he's still a liar.
- He regrets making a come back as he wouldn't have been caught otherwise. He does not regret cheating. Says it all, really.
- He blows the number of cheating riders waaaaaay out of proportion in an attempt to normalize what he did and victimize himself. This is what annoys me the most. Lance didn't just do what the others did in order to level any playing field. Lance, Bruyneel, Ferrari et al. took doping to new levels, systematized it and invested much more time, money and effort in it than anyone else. Rumor has it Lance has convinced more than one reluctant rider to join the dark side. I used to think even he couldn't be that big an asshole, now I'm not sure.
- He definitely called Betsy Andreu fat.
There's a transcript of the interview on ESPN, for those who are interested.
Cold and calculated, as ever. Oprah did a good job, but I can see why she twitted after the interview that Armstrong 'came READY!". He prepared/was prepared for every possible question. He answered what he wanted and wiggled out of what he didn't want to. I've no problem with him not naming names, there's a time and place for that. But the fact he has chosen this stage before telling all to USADA and WADA speaks volumes. Armstrong's main goal is rehabilitating his reputation as best he can. It's all about him, as always.
" Limitations periods begin when a cause of action is deemed to have arisen or when a plaintiff had reason to know of the harm, rather than at the time of the original event "
How would that change things? It's not 8 years from the offence, but 8 years from the point that the proof came to light if I've interpreted that correctly?
As I understand it, it's 8 years from when he gave the sworn testimony.
According to ABC News "Armstrong, 41, has outlasted the statute of limitations for criminal perjury charges in sworn testimony as far back as 2005."
It would certainly explain his baffling assertion that he didn't dope in 2009/2010, despite admitting systematically using PED's for over a decade previous, despite not being caught - in spite of million to one evidence based on discrepancies in his "blood passport" between 2009/2010.
Even the way he brought up his supposed cleanliness in 2009/2010 was sketchy and insincere, he said that those particular claims "hurt" him - out of the whole damning USADA report. More manipulation with the very few remaining chips that he has left imho and far from a full, frank and contrite admisison.
This is a graph from his blood passport from the Giro D'Italia and the TdF of 2009. The hematocrit levels of the blood are the percentage of oxygen carrying cells and are used to measure EPO use. Note the spikes in hematocrit levels at the end of the TDF compared with the natural decline in the Italian race - suggestive of EPO use. I conclude that he was lying through his teeth -again - even as he professed to be baring his soul.
You're wasting your time looking for contriteness.
I put beating cancer above Sport. Lance Armstrong no matter what way you look at it beat Cancer. He was given low odds by professional medics and survived. For me he is a winner, legion, role model and also a cheat at sport.
Once you realise that health is more important to sport in life - you soon realise that the true character of any human is built around facing death and fighting it. Armstrong beat cancer when it was knocking on his door and deserves to be credited for that. No one can take that away from him and no amount of sporting acculades can take that away from him
I was looking forward to knowing the specifics of how the doping was conducted but he completely danced around that question. Will be interesting to see the next part of the interview when talks about the effect on his family and charity organisation.
Nauseating self serving rubbish.
I'd understand where you were coming from if you were talking about his charity, which has helped a lot of people. But his own personal cancer? He got better, big deal.
"Now, how about that free car?"
A lot of people were inspired by his 'fight' against cancer & fair to play to him on that score, but a lot of that inspiration came form that fact that he not only beat cancer but came back to win the Tour on multiple occasions. On that count he is a disgraceful cheating cnut & deserves no sympathy for the shit storm coming his way.
Interesting to compare him with Maradona. Although the argie didn't force the entire team to take drugs or EPO's
He deserves no sympathy as regards what he did to the sport of cycling. But outside sport his work with Cancer charities has been excellent and honorable, his first autobiography brought strength and belief to many sufferers and in my own case was a source of much inspiration when someone very close suffered and passed away from Cancer.
you can take his TDF medals away from him, but you can never take away what he did to help cancer sufferers and those surrounded by the condition.
I'll leave it at that Colin. I'm sure Armstrong has his own demons to fights - let him do that
He recovered from a disease. He shouldn't be idolized for that, millions of people do everyday. What he should be admired for, if anything, is helping others recover from cancer, putting money into cancer research, and the like.
Millions of people die from it too - leaving behind families, a wife, husband, parents, children. If ever faced with the situation where you or someone have cancer, the gfrank reality of dying or living - I hope you pass over the condition as above adex
I find the notion that beating one of the worst diseases in this day and age is not an achievement, absurd. The fact that others do it does not lessen the achievement. I also highly doubt that millions of people every day recover from cancer.
I have a feeling he walked away with a few millions on his pockets
That.