Bye Lance

[Hedgebanger]

No he'll go for the sympathy vote.
''Look what we were doing was testing drugs for post cancer treatment. The team had to take them, so we could do valid comparisons.'' Poss LA defence statement ?
'Ah shucks, good ol Lance was only trying to help people.'

[John Henry]

He's stolen ten years of pro cycling from history and I can't feel sorry for him.

This. And it doesn't stop with that - he's ensured that there's a shadow over the sport which will mean that all successful riders for a long time will have doubt cast over their achievements.

It's what he's done, it's the way he's done it, it's the number of people he's hurt by his deception and bullying (including those well beyond the world of cycling). Fucker.

[henshaw11]

LA was way too arrogant and calculating to recover from this.  He was just plain nasty.  Threatening the wives of fellow cyclists is pretty low.

I think I found this indirectly from http://inrng.com/2012/09/book-review-secret-race/
http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/biking/road-biking/My-Life-With-Lance-Armstrong.html
- can't help thinking he's the sort of character that he never will just admit it...

of course, purely for balance, this is the LA response:
http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/athletes/lance-armstrong/Lance-Armstrong-Responds-to-Mike-Anderson.html

...but knowing what we know now, anything he says sounds like a big crock of shit...

[spesh]

If LA raced on a level playing field, it was because he made it so - everyone had to take drugs.

At Motorola, LA (and others) took the decision to dope when they realised that the reason they were regularly getting thrashed was because the other teams were juiced up the eyeballs. At that time, it could be just about argued that they were trying to level the playing field in order to get a chance.

However, at USPS/Discovery, Armstrong wasn't interested in a level playing field, he was determined to tilt it very much in his favour. Most riders were scared by the Festina Affair into being clean or only mildly juiced at the 1999 TdF, but the USPS inner circle went fully-loaded. As a result, the entire peloton was back on the juice in 2000, trying to keep up with USPS, only going by Tyler Hamilton's book, Armstrong was probably a good two years ahead in the doping arms race. It's probably why people say that Armstrong would still have been as successful if everyone was riding clean, not realising that in reality, he was the best in the TdF for 7 years on the bounce because he was the best at doping.

[IanDG]

All very sad. I remember the days I used to come on this very forum and be roundly criticised (along with others) for daring to speak up even against Landis and Hamilton even when they tested positive. Lance was untouchable in those days. I'm glad times have changed.

I read that ridiculous Liggett article. Lance was not good for the professional sport of cycling, and yes he was an inspiratoin to many people outside of pro cycling, I think there has been a lost generation of cyclists who have gone as far as they can until they reached the point of to dope or not to dope in their career. And took the choice to walk away.

I too remember many arguments where I was criticised for being a doubter that he won 7 tours 'clean'. Very pleased to see things finally fall apart in the wash (tho' it survived more washes than most)

[spesh]

Apropos of nothing in particular.

http://www.olympic.org/news/nike-to-become-ioc-supplier/179406

16/10/2012
The IOC has announced a new supply agreement that will see Nike supply uniforms and products to International Olympic Committee members and staff.

This, on the day that Nike terminates Armstrong's contract... coincidence? 

EDIT:

Armstrong is having a bad day:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13082/RadioShack-ends-personal-sponsorship-of-Armstrong-Oakley-reiterates-it-awaits-UCI-decision.aspx

Mind you, as I have mentioned, RadioShack are in the financial doo-doo... 

Now Oakley's behaviour could be the interesting one, because going by the 4 corners documentary, it's alleged that Oakley suborned Stephanie McIlvain to perjure herself at the SCA hearing. I've also seen the suggestion that Oakley forced their insurers to pay for Armstrong's cancer treatment, arguing that he was an employee, not merely someone whom they sponsored.

EDIT 2:

Trek distancing themselves from Armstrong would be significant, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for an apology from them to Greg LeMond for their role in destroying the LeMond bicycle brand.

[Hot Flatus]

It's worth remembering that Armstrong, at least initially, was as much of a victim as his alleged victims. Festina weren't the only team doping in '98, and USPS weren't likely to be the only dopers of '99.

Armstrong and Bruyneels logic was sound. If you want to succeed in a corrupt system, you have to be corrupt, and you might as well do it properly, especially because you don't know what everyone else is doing.

The depth of the darkness that ensued is, I think, attributable to the riches that Armstrong brought with him to the world of pro cycling. Once you are on that train, how can you get off?

Still, he sounds like an utterly nasty bastard, as opposed to just either thick and/or greedy like many of the other players.

I really want the UCI to go down in flames.

[Nuncio]

Still, he sounds like an utterly nasty bastard, as opposed to just either thick and/or greedy like many of the other players.

Indeed, he is a vindictive bully. See the stories of Livingston, Simeone, Lemond, The Andreus,  Mike Anderson and many more who had the potential to undermine the myth and have suffered in varying degrees.  I know it's all connected, but leave aside the charity on the one side and the drugs on the other, and you're still left with a controlling nasty piece of work.

[Jakob]

Most riders were scared by the Festina Affair into being clean or only mildly juiced at the 1999 TdF, but the USPS inner circle went fully-loaded. As a result, the entire peloton was back on the juice in 2000, trying to keep up with USPS, only going by Tyler Hamilton's book.

Actually, I've just read the part about the Festina affair and he claims that some people (Cofidis) still doped in '98, but '99 most of them had developed a courier system that took the drugs out of the teams hands. (Or at least, USPS had)

[IanDG]

It's worth remembering that Armstrong, at least initially, was as much of a victim as his alleged victims. Festina weren't the only team doping in '98, and USPS weren't likely to be the only dopers of '99.

Armstrong and Bruyneels logic was sound. If you want to succeed in a corrupt system, you have to be corrupt, and you might as well do it properly, especially because you don't know what everyone else is doing.

The depth of the darkness that ensued is, I think, attributable to the riches that Armstrong brought with him to the world of pro cycling. Once you are on that train, how can you get off?

Still, he sounds like an utterly nasty bastard, as opposed to just either thick and/or greedy like many of the other players.

I really want the UCI to go down in flames.

+1

Drugs were rife, so the only way to win was to have a drug culture in the team. I've always thought Armstrong was an utterly nasty bastard (but then champions need a nasty side to their character, don't they?), and yes I hope the UCI go down and cycle sport comes through all the better for this.

[IanDG]

Obree's continental career never started because he wouldn't sign up to FdJ's medical programme

[Hot Flatus]

What worries me about this, is that if it remains "all about Lance", then it has largely been a waste of time.

In the same way that some other people who were unlucky enough to be caught got sent out into the cold, so could Lance.

Like I said, I really want the UCI to go down.

[IanDG]

Again, completely agree the UCI has to be 'sorted' on the back of this otherwise it'a complete waste of time.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Yes. But who has a) the power to do that b) the authority to replace or renew them? WADA?

[spesh]

Aaaaaand another one's gone! http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/anheuser-busch-joins-nike-in-distancing-from-lance-armstrong

[hubner]

His sponsors can stop sponsoring but what about all the millions of photos of him riding a Trek, wearing Nike etc. Trek will be forever associated with Armstrong.

[Hedgebanger]

Again, completely agree the UCI has to be 'sorted' on the back of this otherwise it'a complete waste of time.

Also agree, but surely the only way that's going to happen is if LA and Bruyneel are taken to court with the UCI as witnesses then they might get shown up for the corrupt bunch they are. (Or in the case of testing just bloody inept.)

[Jaded]

His sponsors can stop sponsoring but what about all the millions of photos of him riding a Trek, wearing Nike etc. Trek will be forever associated with Armstrong.

and forever sullying their brand.

Cutting links is critical.

[Hot Flatus]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-asks-riders-and-staff-to-sign-anti-doping-declaration

.......damage limitation exercise, and making an arse-covering opportunity of the inevitable?


Bit of a strange declaration.  Given that Sky said they would not employ anyone connected with doping, essentially they are just asking liars to restate their lies. The end result is the same.

[spesh]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-asks-riders-and-staff-to-sign-anti-doping-declaration

.......damage limitation exercise, and making an arse-covering opportunity of the inevitable?

Given that in some quarters of the internet discussing cycling matters, there is an atmosphere that may be reminiscent of the McCarthy Red Scare, or the Cultural Revolution, I can't see that this exercise will be that effective in deflecting a lot of the ordure that is now flying Team Sky's way. 

Someone once said that whatever hits the fan will not be evenly distributed, and it seems they weren't wrong.

[spesh]

Giro jump ship: http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/17/lance-armstrong-bike-helmet-company-giro/

Also gets a very cursory mention within a Wall Street Journal report on the flight of Armstrong's sponsors:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444868204578062313532317222.html

And Trek! Trek Company Statement

Though like Nike, they're still supporting Livestrong... 

And there's more...

Honey Stinger, the Colorado-based nutrition company in which Armstrong has invested, announced that it was in the process of removing the Texan’s image from its products.

“Honey Stinger is a small Colorado company focused on providing healthy, honey-based energy foods,” the company said in a statement. “We are in the process of removing Lance Armstrong’s image and endorsement from our product packaging. While this presents short term challenges, we look forward to growing our brand and offering our customers the best products possible.”

How do you like them fucking apples, Lance? 

[Justin(e)]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444868204578062313532317222.html

WSJ estimate that he earnt between $15 & $18million last year.  Not bad.

I also enjoyed the article on the bike mechanic spilling the beans.

Have you noticed how every article still has in it somewhere, "And Lance denies any doping" to give "balance".  Sometimes I think that journalists try too hard.

[citoyen]

Verbruggen has apparently been quoted in De Telegraaf as saying there's no evidence against Lance.
(For those who can read Dutch: http://www.telegraaf.nl/telesport/wielersport/13089646/__Geen_bewijs_tegen_Armstrong__.html )

Un-fucking-believable.

d.

[hatler]

Does he define what constitutes 'evidence' in that article ?

[arvid]

Not in the free online article.
"Lance has never tested positive. Not even in USADA tests. So there is no trace of evidence."
"People who know the doping test procedure know there is nothing to arrange. The story of LeMonds wife is so nonsensical that it's not worth an official statement."
"There are a lot of stories and accusations. But people familiar with the procedures know there is nothing to arrange. I have been past the 'tired'-stadium for a while now."