none of my heroes are perfect or all good. I couldnt relate to a hero that was. I make mistakes, my life isnt perfect, i have problems and stumble and fall and all that. Having heroes that reflect that only makes sense. A hero that had no problems didnt make mistakes, didnt mess up, what purpose would that serve me? I cant relate to that.
this is what is called self-rationalization ... it's like you want to bury your face in fried chicken wings despite having heart problems and cholesterol issues and you make up an excuse as to why you should eat them ...
we understand that lance was a hero to you in many ways ... he was a hero to many ... what we are trying to explain to you is that he is a fraud ... the aspects of lance that made him a hero to you were partly fabricated to build his brand and hid what his true nature was ... there are plenty of people worthy of hero status ... and i can guarantee you they are all flawed in one way or another ... we don't look for perfection in heros ... we should not look for perfection in humans period ... what we should look for is at the very least integrity and truth ... something that if we all aspired to - would make the world a heckuva lot better place ...
you don't need to self-rationalize your faith in him in the past nor continue to support a man that despite all that has happened continues to LIE and serve only his own interests ... it can be argued that he is more of a fraud today than he was prior to the interview ...
the truth would set lance free ... it's time you set yourself free ... it's okay to be wrong in this world ... it doesn't make us bad people ...
Why do feel like you have the power to tell me who I can and cant view as a hero? You really think im going to read your post and change my mind based on it? Will any fan of Lance's? To each their own, i personally think its sad that people would try and tell others they cant or shouldnt view someone as a hero. Who are you to tell anyone anything?
I think theres a certain amount of holier than thou pontification going on here, and its both laughable and disturbing.
America and the world doesnt work like you seem to think it does. Few people ever do anything bad enough, if they are a public figure, to cause the public to think of them as beyond repair.
A vast majority of those slamming Lance would have done just as he did.
Faced with that fork in the road, of cheating in a cheating ridden sport to become wealthy beyond your imagination at minimal risk......or being one of a number of cyclists battling to win against people doping, then have a think .....what would you have done? the moral compass is all well and good when its someone else.
However his actions against a great many people stinks. The man is a twat plain and simple but i dont say that because he doped.
Sadly, you're probably right. I would not cheat myself no matter what the payoff, but I'm sorry to find that most people in this world have little to no sense of right or wrong, or duty or personal morals when it comes to money or success, or even just their own convenience (I am experiencing this fact right now on a smaller level. I've been called to jury duty selection, and the number of people who have advised me to shirk my civic duty by lying or doing something to sabotage myself so that I don't get picked is shocking. It totally disgusts me). I find myself feeling quite disappointed in people in general most of the time. However, that is no reason not to hold people accountable when they're caught. It may be hypocritical for most people to shit all over Armstrong (not for me), but that doesn't mean that it's not just that he gets shit upon.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Why do feel like you have the power to tell me who I can and cant view as a hero? You really think im going to read your post and change my mind based on it? Will any fan of Lance's? To each their own, i personally think its sad that people would try and tell others they cant or shouldnt view someone as a hero. Who are you to tell anyone anything?
I think theres a certain amount of holier than thou pontification going on here, and its both laughable and disturbing.
America and the world doesnt work like you seem to think it does. Few people ever do anything bad enough, if they are a public figure, to cause the public to think of them as beyond repair.
oh dear ... it's not about me telling you who you should or shouldn't call a hero ... perhaps i am being naive in thinking that given all the facts - lance should not be a hero in anyone's eyes ... from his bullying of people, to his ruining of lives to his exploitation of a deadly disease for personal gain ... but hey - if you are gonna stick with this guy through it all ... all the power to you ... just know that you will continue to be disappointed by him as you've admitted ...
all i am trying to do is give you all the facts ... much of which over the course of this thread you've chosen to ignore ...
A vast majority of those slamming Lance would have done just as he did.
Faced with that fork in the road, of cheating in a cheating ridden sport to become wealthy beyond your imagination at minimal risk......or being one of a number of cyclists battling to win against people doping, then have a think .....what would you have done? the moral compass is all well and good when its someone else.
However his actions against a great many people stinks. The man is a twat plain and simple but i dont say that because he doped.
Sadly, you're probably right. I would not cheat myself no matter what the payoff, but I'm sorry to find that most people in this world have little to no sense of right or wrong, or duty or personal morals when it comes to money or success, or even just their own convenience (I am experiencing this fact right now on a smaller level. I've been called to jury duty selection, and the number of people who have advised me to shirk my civic duty by lying or doing something to sabotage myself so that I don't get picked is shocking. It totally disgusts me). I find myself feeling quite disappointed in people in general most of the time. However, that is no reason not to hold people accountable when they're caught. It may be hypocritical for most people to shit all over Armstrong (not for me), but that doesn't mean that it's not just that he gets shit upon.
for me its so self evident as to be not even worth mentioning. the sheer numbers of cyclists who doped during those years indicates doping was the rule not the exception. What Hamilton said makes complete sense, one day he noticed his opponents were just zipping past him, flying through the mountains, and guys who normally wouldnt have been that fast. To keep up, he said, you needed to dope. And that does make sense. Certainly, lying about it for 10 years like Lance and Hamilton did isnt moral or good, but at the time, during those races, I can completely understand why Lance and everyone else who doped didnt think it was cheating, or wrong. Everyone was doing it. 80 percent of the peloton was. These guys had a choice. Either remain pure and moral and ethical and not dope, and languish in obscurity and be guaranteed NOT to win or even place in a Tour. Or dope and have a shot at winning. The doping clearly was working and paying off and getting results. Not doping from that point of view didnt have any results.
Plus, its not like the officials and higher ups and management of cycling at the time was doing much of anything to discourage its use. Cycling had gone from this obscure sport no one cared about, to this MAJOR sporting event that kids, parents and grandparents all were invested in, spent time and money on. Biking became more popular than ever. Cyclists became household names. As I said, my dad called the cable company at the time, to get them to install the Outdoor channel in our house so we could watch the Tour.
And again, as I said before, I think lance was being honest when he said, at that time, you couldnt win 7 in a row without doping. I cant imagine riding 2,000 miles over a month. Climbing those insane mountains like they do. Its just so far removed and so much more athletic than basketball or baseball or something like that. Its a brutal race.
What people seem to fail to understand is Lance isnt unique in the lying or cheating department, not even in terms of doing it for so many years. Hamilton and other teammates werent going to just come out and say it, they had lied for just as long as lance had. Hamilton said he, meaning hamilton, first doped in 97, the year after the supposed hospital room confession. He was lying and cheating and pretending and putting on this facade just like Lance was.
The only reason any of those guys admitted it, was because they were subpeoned. Had they not been, I have no doubt they and Lance would still be denying it.
A vast majority of those slamming Lance would have done just as he did.
Faced with that fork in the road, of cheating in a cheating ridden sport to become wealthy beyond your imagination at minimal risk......or being one of a number of cyclists battling to win against people doping, then have a think .....what would you have done? the moral compass is all well and good when its someone else.
However his actions against a great many people stinks. The man is a twat plain and simple but i dont say that because he doped.
Sadly, you're probably right. I would not cheat myself no matter what the payoff, but I'm sorry to find that most people in this world have little to no sense of right or wrong, or duty or personal morals when it comes to money or success, or even just their own convenience (I am experiencing this fact right now on a smaller level. I've been called to jury duty selection, and the number of people who have advised me to shirk my civic duty by lying or doing something to sabotage myself so that I don't get picked is shocking. It totally disgusts me). I find myself feeling quite disappointed in people in general most of the time. However, that is no reason not to hold people accountable when they're caught. It may be hypocritical for most people to shit all over Armstrong (not for me), but that doesn't mean that it's not just that he gets shit upon.
for me its so self evident as to be not even worth mentioning. the sheer numbers of cyclists who doped during those years indicates doping was the rule not the exception. What Hamilton said makes complete sense, one day he noticed his opponents were just zipping past him, flying through the mountains, and guys who normally wouldnt have been that fast. To keep up, he said, you needed to dope. And that does make sense. Certainly, lying about it for 10 years like Lance and Hamilton did isnt moral or good, but at the time, during those races, I can completely understand why Lance and everyone else who doped didnt think it was cheating, or wrong. Everyone was doing it. 80 percent of the peloton was. These guys had a choice. Either remain pure and moral and ethical and not dope, and languish in obscurity and be guaranteed NOT to win or even place in a Tour. Or dope and have a shot at winning. The doping clearly was working and paying off and getting results. Not doping from that point of view didnt have any results.
Plus, its not like the officials and higher ups and management of cycling at the time was doing much of anything to discourage its use. Cycling had gone from this obscure sport no one cared about, to this MAJOR sporting event that kids, parents and grandparents all were invested in, spent time and money on. Biking became more popular than ever. Cyclists became household names. As I said, my dad called the cable company at the time, to get them to install the Outdoor channel in our house so we could watch the Tour.
And again, as I said before, I think lance was being honest when he said, at that time, you couldnt win 7 in a row without doping. I cant imagine riding 2,000 miles over a month. Climbing those insane mountains like they do. Its just so far removed and so much more athletic than basketball or baseball or something like that. Its a brutal race.
What people seem to fail to understand is Lance isnt unique in the lying or cheating department, not even in terms of doing it for so many years. Hamilton and other teammates werent going to just come out and say it, they had lied for just as long as lance had. Hamilton said he, meaning hamilton, first doped in 97, the year after the supposed hospital room confession. He was lying and cheating and pretending and putting on this facade just like Lance was.
The only reason any of those guys admitted it, was because they were subpeoned. Had they not been, I have no doubt they and Lance would still be denying it.
I don't really understand how any of what you just said matters. If those people had any fucking moral fortitude, none of them would have doped and the problem wouldn't exist. I think the "everyone was doing it" excuse is one of the worst excuses known to man.
In any case, Lance did go above and beyond in the lying asshole department in trying to cover up.
BTW, he also broke laws.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Why do feel like you have the power to tell me who I can and cant view as a hero? You really think im going to read your post and change my mind based on it? Will any fan of Lance's? To each their own, i personally think its sad that people would try and tell others they cant or shouldnt view someone as a hero. Who are you to tell anyone anything?
I think theres a certain amount of holier than thou pontification going on here, and its both laughable and disturbing.
America and the world doesnt work like you seem to think it does. Few people ever do anything bad enough, if they are a public figure, to cause the public to think of them as beyond repair.
oh dear ... it's not about me telling you who you should or shouldn't call a hero ... perhaps i am being naive in thinking that given all the facts - lance should not be a hero in anyone's eyes ... from his bullying of people, to his ruining of lives to his exploitation of a deadly disease for personal gain ... but hey - if you are gonna stick with this guy through it all ... all the power to you ... just know that you will continue to be disappointed by him as you've admitted ...
all i am trying to do is give you all the facts ... much of which over the course of this thread you've chosen to ignore ...
actually i just choose to view people as the complex and complicated and conflicted people they are. Im not able to view things in black and white, and dont want to. This is a grey issue for many people. I guarantee you not every lance supporter has turned their back on him. As I said, the letter oprah read to lance is my view of him currently. Its not as if we excuse or condone his behavior, its just viewing the world and his actions in a mature manner. Id have no heros at all if I left them by the side of the road anytime they disappointed me or did something viewed as immoral. A timely example I listed yesterday was MLK, who was deeply flawed as well. John lennon wasnt perfect either. Neither was Gandhi.
The facts are way more complicated than you make them out to be. At least they are to me.
Im not willing to throw him overboard just because people say we should. I view things my own way. We all view things through the personal lens and filter of our own experiences.
As Ledbetterman said, he used to be a lets stone the cheaters guy. But when it became personal, and his own hero and team were accused of cheating, he had a choice to make. Either renounce his own childhood and happiness, or let people hold onto whatever they want to hold onto.
musicismylife what you are missing out on is the fact the Lance did nothing even slightly comparable the the historical figures you've mentioned. All the baseball players you keep bringing up were also doing what everyone else was doing.
Lance did very little for cycling. The only reason we know he won 7 in a row is because it was on the news. No one with any interest is real sports actually watches that shit.
The only reason any of those guys admitted it, was because they were subpeoned. Had they not been, I have no doubt they and Lance would still be denying it.
what you fail to understand here is that yes - these guys were subpoenaed and gave testimony ... but this is what is key:
1. they could have all pleaded the 5th like mcgwire
2. all these guys stopped doping a looooooong time ago ... on their own ... not from being caught but because they made that choice
3. lance was still doping in 2009/2010 during his comeback when most riders were clean ... his audacity to bring up his wife and tell further lies is even more astonishing ... we already know that his wife used to run drugs for him ...
and again - you are free to judge him how you see fit ... my only point is that you judge him with all the appropriate facts ... it just seems like you are cherry picking to suit your purpose ... the main thing is that you keep referring to his doping as a necessity and the focus when we've already explained that people aren't disgusted by him not because he chose to dope in a time of rampant doping but because of how he acted as a human being ... again - bullying, ruining people's lives, bribing officials, threatening sponsors and journalists, exploiting cancer for personal gain despite being mega rich, and now continuing to lie to the world as he's done the better part of his adult life when he's being given an opportunity to come clean ... in the face of all that is in front of him - he continue to exhibit the behaviour of someone with entitlement issues, no remorse or a victim ...
he knew he had had it and only wants to compete again but i cant see that happening .
he was worth $125 m before and ill bet hes squirrelled aload away but hes still going to be worth $50+m so hes not to badly of .. :roll: :roll:
info.... http://www.financemanila.net/2013/01/ho ... on-doping/
Now I keep hearing this rumour about a very high profile tennis player and that it will blow up soon .. That would shatter my Illusions
a chick with very big biceps?? :?
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
The only reason any of those guys admitted it, was because they were subpeoned. Had they not been, I have no doubt they and Lance would still be denying it.
what you fail to understand here is that yes - these guys were subpoenaed and gave testimony ... but this is what is key:
1. they could have all pleaded the 5th like mcgwire
2. all these guys stopped doping a looooooong time ago ... on their own ... not from being caught but because they made that choice
3. lance was still doping in 2009/2010 during his comeback when most riders were clean ... his audacity to bring up his wife and tell further lies is even more astonishing ... we already know that his wife used to run drugs for him ...
and again - you are free to judge him how you see fit ... my only point is that you judge him with all the appropriate facts ... it just seems like you are cherry picking to suit your purpose ... the main thing is that you keep referring to his doping as a necessity and the focus when we've already explained that people aren't disgusted by him not because he chose to dope in a time of rampant doping but because of how he acted as a human being ... again - bullying, ruining people's lives, bribing officials, threatening sponsors and journalists, exploiting cancer for personal gain despite being mega rich, and now continuing to lie to the world as he's done the better part of his adult life when he's being given an opportunity to come clean ... in the face of all that is in front of him - he continue to exhibit the behaviour of someone with entitlement issues, no remorse or a victim ...
I disagree. I assume his teammates were put under extreme pressure to tell what they knew. Tyler hamilton only admitted he doped once subpeoned. He lied repeatedly and doped since 1997. He doped also was doing in 2009 as well. The only thing that changed about Hamiltons situation was the subpeona.
They couldnt have pleaded the 5th like mcgwire. The entire team was under investigation. In mcgwires case it was only himself under investigation. You dont think they told Hamilton-"we know about Landis, we have hincapie saying you all doped, we have Leipheimer and Barry, we will go easy on you if you tell what you know about Lance". I think thats exactly what happened. They already had evidence on those guys, so its not like they could deny it.
Hamilton denied it just as long as lance did. I see now reason why he would have suddenly reversed 14 15 years of denials and changed his mind without significant pressure on him.
Its hard to tell when all these guys stopped doping. Landis came back during the 2009-2010 seasons. Hincapie was vague about his use. Hamilton failed a test in 2009, so we know he was doping until the end there.
Its like copping to a lower plea in the justice system. If you admit your guilty, you get a lesser sentence. Most of those guys got 6th month bans.
also I dont buy the idea that hamilton, landis, leipheimer, or anyone else, whether its Basso, or Ulrich or Contador, they didnt just quit because they felt like it. All were exposed as dopers. All of them doped. You cant quit doping on your own out of the goodness of your heart, then get caught failing a test. That obviously means you didnt quit.
They may have quit it once they were caught, but it wasnt the idea that it was wrong. Thats the whole point of it all. Why would they quit prior to being caught? Every single person I listed viewed it exactly the way lance did, you needed to dope to keep up with the peloton and to put yourself in contention to win the Tour.
What makes it tricky is the cover up by the higher ups in cycling. Thats the discrepancy you point out. Everyone knew these guys were doping and failing drug tests. Everyone knew it was going on, but no one exposed it or called it out. Thats why you have someone like Vande Velde stripped of victories from 04-06, but it only coming to light as a result of the Reasoned Decision, and Vande Velde's reputation remained intact all those years. The idea that he doped didnt come out until all the subpeonas and testimony happened last year.
If the whole systems corrupt and everyones doping why report it during those years? Why tell anyone who could do anything about it? Thats the whole point. It was sanctioned and allowed to occur by the powers that be in cycling just as the powers that be in the MLB allowed steroid use to occur.
The fact that so many dopers were top riders only streghtens that idea. If the only dopers are guys who place 100th, or hit 5 home runs a year, it really doesnt matter. But if the dopers are future Hall of Fame candidates and are finishing near the top every year, and hit 60 homers a year, and are the face of the sport, then you have a problem. And instead of doing something about it, both the MLb and the cycling world acted criminally.
id like to see serious litigation against cycling officials and MLB officials who knowingly hid the doping of athletes all those years.
That should be the next course of action.
Its like the bankers or something. So far, all these athletes have gotten exposed. Thats fine, but behind them, and allowing it to happen, or winking and turning a blind eye to it all were millionaire CEO's and buisnessmen and commissioners and officials, who tacitly allowed all this to happen out of greed.
You want to talk psychologically and mentally sick and disturbed? that to me is. Selig should be thrown in jail for what he did, or rather did not do. Theres something going on in your brain if you know your sport is dirty, and that all your top athletes are cheating to win, and your response to it is to sit on your hands. Thats gross
You think about what you could have done, exposed the cheating in your sport, exposed these athletes prior to the mitchell report, you could have made the drug tests 100 times harder and more accurate. Instead you sat back and did nothing.
what explanation is there for lance getting 3rd and then 25th place in 2009 and 2010? How can you go from being the clear winner for 7 years, then seeming to fall so far behind? I know what the reasoned decision says about his blood results looking consistent with doping, but how do you explain him not winning? He clearly had the system figured out, and doping was working for him like gangbusters those 7 tours. Did those 3 or 4 years away from the Tour just hurt him or something?
Theres no doubt the guy does indeed train like a maniac, despite his doping. Riding 90-100 miles a day on off days and to relax, which is pretty insane actually.
I do think he is a athletic obsessive, and gym rat, always training and doing something active and physical.
what explanation is there for lance getting 3rd and then 25th place in 2009 and 2010? How can you go from being the clear winner for 7 years, then seeming to fall so far behind? I know what the reasoned decision says about his blood results looking consistent with doping, but how do you explain him not winning? He clearly had the system figured out, and doping was working for him like gangbusters those 7 tours. Did those 3 or 4 years away from the Tour just hurt him or something?
Theres no doubt the guy does indeed train like a maniac, despite his doping. Riding 90-100 miles a day on off days and to relax, which is pretty insane actually.
I do think he is a athletic obsessive, and gym rat, always training and doing something active and physical.
you can always plead the 5th ... you can tell these guys weren't doping when they said they weren't because of the things i pointed out ... their metrics ...
he finished 3rd in his comeback year because he doped ... he was already 38 at that time (4 years after his last tour) ... pretty old to win a grand tour and not being a full time cyclist ... so, he doped and finished 3rd ... he finished 25th the year after because he crashed ... and he was another year older ... he finished as high as he did because he doped ...
and going back to the other guys ... garmin sharp was not being investigated ... some key people on that team were subpoenaed based on testimony of floyd landis and hamilton because they rode with lance all those years ... there are a lot of guys who were also subpoenaed but did not respond ... if subpenaing someone is all that needs to happen - they would have just done that with lance ...
in any case - you do have the part about the corruption in the governing body correct ... it definitely needs to be exposed and the guy holding that magic key right now is lance ... it's why he will not testify under oath - he's still got a lot of lies and a lot of covering up ...
what explanation is there for lance getting 3rd and then 25th place in 2009 and 2010? How can you go from being the clear winner for 7 years, then seeming to fall so far behind? I know what the reasoned decision says about his blood results looking consistent with doping, but how do you explain him not winning? He clearly had the system figured out, and doping was working for him like gangbusters those 7 tours. Did those 3 or 4 years away from the Tour just hurt him or something?
Theres no doubt the guy does indeed train like a maniac, despite his doping. Riding 90-100 miles a day on off days and to relax, which is pretty insane actually.
I do think he is a athletic obsessive, and gym rat, always training and doing something active and physical.
you can always plead the 5th ... you can tell these guys weren't doping when they said they weren't because of the things i pointed out ... their metrics ...
he finished 3rd in his comeback year because he doped ... he was already 38 at that time (4 years after his last tour) ... pretty old to win a grand tour and not being a full time cyclist ... so, he doped and finished 3rd ... he finished 25th the year after because he crashed ... and he was another year older ... he finished as high as he did because he doped ...
and going back to the other guys ... garmin sharp was not being investigated ... some key people on that team were subpoenaed based on testimony of floyd landis and hamilton because they rode with lance all those years ... there are a lot of guys who were also subpoenaed but did not respond ... if subpenaing someone is all that needs to happen - they would have just done that with lance ...
in any case - you do have the part about the corruption in the governing body correct ... it definitely needs to be exposed and the guy holding that magic key right now is lance ... it's why he will not testify under oath - he's still got a lot of lies and a lot of covering up ...
the subpeona obviously had an impact on his teammates. Nearly every single one was given a 6 month ban, a clear indication that they were offered deals, or lesser sentences as a result of their coming forward. Secondly, few if any had ever come forward before. They indeed could have pleaded the 5th, but they obviously knew the investigation was massive and had gathered tons of information on the doping on the team.
we are just now getting word that sheryl crow was also a unnamed witness in the reasoned decision. So I think all these guys, his teammates knew what was up. Had the investigators gone in half ready, and not had the evidence I dont think they would have said a word. I dont consider Landis, Hamilton or anyone else named in the report honest or forthcoming. They lied repeatedly and for years.
I dont consider his teammates any less culpable or dishonest than Lance himself. Just because as Oprah put it to Lance, "the wolves are at the door" and you tell the truth, as Landis, Hamilton and others did, then you tell the truth. Seemed like thats what went on with nearly every single one of his teammates that also doped. Lets be clear I dont think they were speaking out for the good of cleaning up the sport and telling the truth. They were saving their own skin.
In fact it could be argued Hamilton came forward, less for telling the truth, and more for paying lance back for things like the Colorado restaurant incident and the years lance treated Hamilton like dirt. Hamiltons career was nonexistant at that point. It was ruined. And in fact he had at first flat out refused to talk to the prosecutor initially. It was only after being subpeoned that he spoke out.
You underestimate the power of a subpeona and being forced to testify. Its a powerful thing.
i get your reasoning but it's based on some assumptions that aren't necessarily true ...
1. despite your reservations of landis, hamilton et al. they have all testified under oath ... now, that is something that used to be pertinent until lance had the audacity to lie ... coincidentally, his statute of limitations on perjury on that matter ended recently ... yes, those guys lied for years ... and there credibility is open for debate but they have at least put themselves in the position that if they were found to lie - they would all face prison time ... something lance isn't prepared to do right now ...
2. the thing with a bunch of his ex-teammates is that they have been the most vocal opponents to doping ... if you read vandevelde's testimony or even someone like zabriskie ... it's gut wrenching ... ya - these guys doped and they admitted it but they all stopped not because they were caught but because they didn't want to and had a way out ... the sport was changing ... teams like garmin took a stance and there was a home and the culture started to change ... the only thing that didn't was the omerta ... so, despite cycling cleaning itself up - the cyclists kept quiet ...
3. again - if a subpoena is all one needs ... why hasn't lance had to testify under oath to any of the multiple investigations against him?
For the ones who had a notion, a notion deep inside
That it ain't no sin to be glad you're alive
ORGAN DONATION SAVES LIVES http://www.UNOS.org
Donate Organs and Save a Life
i get your reasoning but it's based on some assumptions that aren't necessarily true ...
1. despite your reservations of landis, hamilton et al. they have all testified under oath ... now, that is something that used to be pertinent until lance had the audacity to lie ... coincidentally, his statute of limitations on perjury on that matter ended recently ... yes, those guys lied for years ... and there credibility is open for debate but they have at least put themselves in the position that if they were found to lie - they would all face prison time ... something lance isn't prepared to do right now ...
2. the thing with a bunch of his ex-teammates is that they have been the most vocal opponents to doping ... if you read vandevelde's testimony or even someone like zabriskie ... it's gut wrenching ... ya - these guys doped and they admitted it but they all stopped not because they were caught but because they didn't want to and had a way out ... the sport was changing ... teams like garmin took a stance and there was a home and the culture started to change ... the only thing that didn't was the omerta ... so, despite cycling cleaning itself up - the cyclists kept quiet ...
3. again - if a subpoena is all one needs ... why hasn't lance had to testify under oath to any of the multiple investigations against him?
I dont think cycling is cleaned up. Maybe its better than it was in 2002, but cyclings reputation currently as the most dirtiest sport I think is well deserved. I see no major effort on the part of people who could actually do something to clean it up-the officials and head honchos of cycling to do things like-toughen drug tests, do a zero tolerance policy-if you get caught you get kicked out.
And certainly it wasnt cyclists that cleaned up the cycling world. Everyone had a role to play, the athletes role is to honestly compete without cheating, and the cycling bodies and governments job is to make sure cheaters arent rewarded, let go, given a pass, and that any cheater is exposed and weeded out inmediately. Both entities failed miserably. I see no effort on behalf of the governing bodies of cycling to want to deal with cheating in cycling on a wider scale than one rider and one team. In my opinion they should go after cyclists who cheat like they have with lance. Across the board. Contador should have been treated this way. Hamilton too.
Wiggins hasnt been accused of doping, but i dont think im unique in wavering between wanting to watch the tour and not wanting to watch for fear of putting trust in an athlete who has doped or cheated. And thats not just all on Lance, thats cycling as a whole, and everyone in charge of it, from the governing bodies to the UCI to whoever.
You are making assumptions when you talk about why people did things. Its just as true to say all his teammates went under oath and testified because they were cut deals and lesser sentences and punishments. The fact their admitting to doping after years of denials and lies, happened to coincide with the case against Lance, this isnt coincidence. I think his teammates felt cooperating with the authorities was wiser than continuing to deny, not neessarily to expose cheaters and clean the sport up, but more so to save their own skin and not have as harsh a penalty as they ordinarily would. Hamilton lied for 13 or 14 years. Why suddenly change your mind? I think he knew the evidence against him and Lance and everyone else was overwhelming.
Its as i said, its common for defendents to cop a plea so as to reduce their sentence. You cop to involuntary manslaughter instead of murder and the judge and jury may give you a lighter sentence. Same with Hamilton and Lance's other teammates. By going under oath and testifying and giving information, they were more than likely thinking they'd get better deals and sentences than if they rode it out to the end denying everything. Its not like Hamilton and the others are bastions of transparency and openness.
I also think the increased pressure by the public on cheating in cycling, exposing cheaters, and in sports in general, played a part in them cooperating with the investigation. They knew it wasnt going away, and they knew it was a serious investigation that had uncovered massive amounts of damning evidence linking them and the team to the doping scandal. The fact Lance was the leader only heightens this aspect, because the investigators can use that as leverage, "i'll go lighter on you, if you tell us all you know about Lance".
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
I dont think cycling is cleaned up. Maybe its better than it was in 2002, but cyclings reputation currently as the most dirtiest sport I think is well deserved. I see no major effort on the part of people who could actually do something to clean it up-the officials and head honchos of cycling to do things like-toughen drug tests, do a zero tolerance policy-if you get caught you get kicked out.
And certainly it wasnt cyclists that cleaned up the cycling world. Everyone had a role to play, the athletes role is to honestly compete without cheating, and the cycling bodies and governments job is to make sure cheaters arent rewarded, let go, given a pass, and that any cheater is exposed and weeded out inmediately. Both entities failed miserably. I see no effort on behalf of the governing bodies of cycling to want to deal with cheating in cycling on a wider scale than one rider and one team. In my opinion they should go after cyclists who cheat like they have with lance. Across the board. Contador should have been treated this way. Hamilton too.
Wiggins hasnt been accused of doping, but i dont think im unique in wavering between wanting to watch the tour and not wanting to watch for fear of putting trust in an athlete who has doped or cheated. And thats not just all on Lance, thats cycling as a whole, and everyone in charge of it, from the governing bodies to the UCI to whoever.
You are making assumptions when you talk about why people did things. Its just as true to say all his teammates went under oath and testified because they were cut deals and lesser sentences and punishments. The fact their admitting to doping after years of denials and lies, happened to coincide with the case against Lance, this isnt coincidence. I think his teammates felt cooperating with the authorities was wiser than continuing to deny, not neessarily to expose cheaters and clean the sport up, but more so to save their own skin and not have as harsh a penalty as they ordinarily would. Hamilton lied for 13 or 14 years. Why suddenly change your mind? I think he knew the evidence against him and Lance and everyone else was overwhelming.
Its as i said, its common for defendents to cop a plea so as to reduce their sentence. You cop to involuntary manslaughter instead of murder and the judge and jury may give you a lighter sentence. Same with Hamilton and Lance's other teammates. By going under oath and testifying and giving information, they were more than likely thinking they'd get better deals and sentences than if they rode it out to the end denying everything. Its not like Hamilton and the others are bastions of transparency and openness.
I also think the increased pressure by the public on cheating in cycling, exposing cheaters, and in sports in general, played a part in them cooperating with the investigation. They knew it wasnt going away, and they knew it was a serious investigation that had uncovered massive amounts of damning evidence linking them and the team to the doping scandal. The fact Lance was the leader only heightens this aspect, because the investigators can use that as leverage, "i'll go lighter on you, if you tell us all you know about Lance".
oh dear ... so, let me get this straight ... you stopped following cycling for a while now ... and yet you are basically going to assume all that you assume ... you disagree with me based on assumptions ... whereas i am telling you things as someone who has continued to follow cycling and reads up on the subject ... have you read the affidavits of these cyclists? ... i suppose i am making assumptions but at least it is based on reading what they have said not based on how i want to rationalize it in my head ...
yeah hamilton lied all these years and his credibility is shot ... but at least he voluntarily gave up his olympic medal which has to say something ... but i find it strange that you are hell bent on defending lance, the person who has exhibited the least amount of remorse ...
anyways - all i suggest to you is that you get all the facts ... as much as it may hurt you to do so ...
I dont think cycling is cleaned up. Maybe its better than it was in 2002, but cyclings reputation currently as the most dirtiest sport I think is well deserved. I see no major effort on the part of people who could actually do something to clean it up-the officials and head honchos of cycling to do things like-toughen drug tests, do a zero tolerance policy-if you get caught you get kicked out.
And certainly it wasnt cyclists that cleaned up the cycling world. Everyone had a role to play, the athletes role is to honestly compete without cheating, and the cycling bodies and governments job is to make sure cheaters arent rewarded, let go, given a pass, and that any cheater is exposed and weeded out inmediately. Both entities failed miserably. I see no effort on behalf of the governing bodies of cycling to want to deal with cheating in cycling on a wider scale than one rider and one team. In my opinion they should go after cyclists who cheat like they have with lance. Across the board. Contador should have been treated this way. Hamilton too.
Wiggins hasnt been accused of doping, but i dont think im unique in wavering between wanting to watch the tour and not wanting to watch for fear of putting trust in an athlete who has doped or cheated. And thats not just all on Lance, thats cycling as a whole, and everyone in charge of it, from the governing bodies to the UCI to whoever.
You are making assumptions when you talk about why people did things. Its just as true to say all his teammates went under oath and testified because they were cut deals and lesser sentences and punishments. The fact their admitting to doping after years of denials and lies, happened to coincide with the case against Lance, this isnt coincidence. I think his teammates felt cooperating with the authorities was wiser than continuing to deny, not neessarily to expose cheaters and clean the sport up, but more so to save their own skin and not have as harsh a penalty as they ordinarily would. Hamilton lied for 13 or 14 years. Why suddenly change your mind? I think he knew the evidence against him and Lance and everyone else was overwhelming.
Its as i said, its common for defendents to cop a plea so as to reduce their sentence. You cop to involuntary manslaughter instead of murder and the judge and jury may give you a lighter sentence. Same with Hamilton and Lance's other teammates. By going under oath and testifying and giving information, they were more than likely thinking they'd get better deals and sentences than if they rode it out to the end denying everything. Its not like Hamilton and the others are bastions of transparency and openness.
I also think the increased pressure by the public on cheating in cycling, exposing cheaters, and in sports in general, played a part in them cooperating with the investigation. They knew it wasnt going away, and they knew it was a serious investigation that had uncovered massive amounts of damning evidence linking them and the team to the doping scandal. The fact Lance was the leader only heightens this aspect, because the investigators can use that as leverage, "i'll go lighter on you, if you tell us all you know about Lance".
oh dear ... so, let me get this straight ... you stopped following cycling for a while now ... and yet you are basically going to assume all that you assume ... you disagree with me based on assumptions ... whereas i am telling you things as someone who has continued to follow cycling and reads up on the subject ... have you read the affidavits of these cyclists? ... i suppose i am making assumptions but at least it is based on reading what they have said not based on how i want to rationalize it in my head ...
yeah hamilton lied all these years and his credibility is shot ... but at least he voluntarily gave up his olympic medal which has to say something ... but i find it strange that you are hell bent on defending lance, the person who has exhibited the least amount of remorse ...
anyways - all i suggest to you is that you get all the facts ... as much as it may hurt you to do so ...
What have I said thats not fact? Just because someone disagrees with you doesnt mean they didnt read the reasoned decision. You made a huge assumption, in that you said lance was a complete jerk but seem willing to view the 11 teammates as somehow paragons of good. In reality, they lied for just as long as lance did, and only came forward once they were offered clear deals that would reduce their possible sentences. You make quite an assumption when you argue everyone of those 11 came forward not to save their own skin, which is exactly what happened, but to rid the sport of cheating, something that hadnt crossed their mind at all prior.
Its as I said the day he confessed. In some narrow minded folks eyes, you cant have a conflicted view of things. You can say you hate cheating and want the cycling officials who allowed this to go on to go to jail, and that any cheater should be exposed and banned, but when you say you feel conflicted about lance somehow Im defending cheating and lying and bullying. Its silly.
I could say the same thing about you. You seem willing to ignore facts and continually support and defend 11 of his teammates who are known liars and cheats. The facts are indeed in the reasoned decision.
Its like the bankers or something. So far, all these athletes have gotten exposed. Thats fine, but behind them, and allowing it to happen, or winking and turning a blind eye to it all were millionaire CEO's and buisnessmen and commissioners and officials, who tacitly allowed all this to happen out of greed.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
What have I said thats not fact? Just because someone disagrees with you doesnt mean they didnt read the reasoned decision. You made a huge assumption, in that you said lance was a complete jerk but seem willing to view the 11 teammates as somehow paragons of good. In reality, they lied for just as long as lance did, and only came forward once they were offered clear deals that would reduce their possible sentences. You make quite an assumption when you argue everyone of those 11 came forward not to save their own skin, which is exactly what happened, but to rid the sport of cheating, something that hadnt crossed their mind at all prior.
Its as I said the day he confessed. In some narrow minded folks eyes, you cant have a conflicted view of things. You can say you hate cheating and want the cycling officials who allowed this to go on to go to jail, and that any cheater should be exposed and banned, but when you say you feel conflicted about lance somehow Im defending cheating and lying and bullying. Its silly.
I could say the same thing about you. You seem willing to ignore facts and continually support and defend 11 of his teammates who are known liars and cheats. The facts are indeed in the reasoned decision.
They came forward to get better deals. Period.
for one they have not lied as long as lance has ... read up the definition of lying ... show me an instance when david zabriskie, jonathan vaughters or christian vandevelde lied about doping since 2005 ... and how can you say they didn't want to rid the sport of cheating when they decided to either form or be part of a team that is the most vocal against doping ... a team that started a movement in cycling that commits their team and riders to a level of doping standards that are stricter than wada's? ... those are facts
and again for the umpteenth time - it isn't about lance cheating ... how many times does one have to say that? ... you keep harping on everyone else cheated ... it's secondary as to why lance is an asshole ... he's an asshole because of how he treated people, how he exploited cancer for personal gain, for how he ruined people's lives and for continuing to lie to people despite the hurt he's caused ...
I don't watch Entertainment Tonight, but Sheryl Crow did an interview last night and I was reading about it today. It sounds kind of funny. Apparently she kept repeating all this crap about honesty being the best thing, and the truth will set you free, etc.... then refused to answer whether or not she knew about Lance's doping.
"See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
The joy of life comes from our encounters with new experiences, and hence there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon, for each day to have a new and different sun.
altho I don't think lance was completely forthcoming (and may have even lied some more), I like him more than I did before.
I'm a cancer survivor and wear a livestrong bracelet. I took it off for a while but it's back on. I never wore it as a tribute to lance...I wear it to remind people of the insidious disease it represents.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Comments
Why do feel like you have the power to tell me who I can and cant view as a hero? You really think im going to read your post and change my mind based on it? Will any fan of Lance's? To each their own, i personally think its sad that people would try and tell others they cant or shouldnt view someone as a hero. Who are you to tell anyone anything?
I think theres a certain amount of holier than thou pontification going on here, and its both laughable and disturbing.
America and the world doesnt work like you seem to think it does. Few people ever do anything bad enough, if they are a public figure, to cause the public to think of them as beyond repair.
oh dear ... it's not about me telling you who you should or shouldn't call a hero ... perhaps i am being naive in thinking that given all the facts - lance should not be a hero in anyone's eyes ... from his bullying of people, to his ruining of lives to his exploitation of a deadly disease for personal gain ... but hey - if you are gonna stick with this guy through it all ... all the power to you ... just know that you will continue to be disappointed by him as you've admitted ...
all i am trying to do is give you all the facts ... much of which over the course of this thread you've chosen to ignore ...
for me its so self evident as to be not even worth mentioning. the sheer numbers of cyclists who doped during those years indicates doping was the rule not the exception. What Hamilton said makes complete sense, one day he noticed his opponents were just zipping past him, flying through the mountains, and guys who normally wouldnt have been that fast. To keep up, he said, you needed to dope. And that does make sense. Certainly, lying about it for 10 years like Lance and Hamilton did isnt moral or good, but at the time, during those races, I can completely understand why Lance and everyone else who doped didnt think it was cheating, or wrong. Everyone was doing it. 80 percent of the peloton was. These guys had a choice. Either remain pure and moral and ethical and not dope, and languish in obscurity and be guaranteed NOT to win or even place in a Tour. Or dope and have a shot at winning. The doping clearly was working and paying off and getting results. Not doping from that point of view didnt have any results.
Plus, its not like the officials and higher ups and management of cycling at the time was doing much of anything to discourage its use. Cycling had gone from this obscure sport no one cared about, to this MAJOR sporting event that kids, parents and grandparents all were invested in, spent time and money on. Biking became more popular than ever. Cyclists became household names. As I said, my dad called the cable company at the time, to get them to install the Outdoor channel in our house so we could watch the Tour.
And again, as I said before, I think lance was being honest when he said, at that time, you couldnt win 7 in a row without doping. I cant imagine riding 2,000 miles over a month. Climbing those insane mountains like they do. Its just so far removed and so much more athletic than basketball or baseball or something like that. Its a brutal race.
What people seem to fail to understand is Lance isnt unique in the lying or cheating department, not even in terms of doing it for so many years. Hamilton and other teammates werent going to just come out and say it, they had lied for just as long as lance had. Hamilton said he, meaning hamilton, first doped in 97, the year after the supposed hospital room confession. He was lying and cheating and pretending and putting on this facade just like Lance was.
The only reason any of those guys admitted it, was because they were subpeoned. Had they not been, I have no doubt they and Lance would still be denying it.
In any case, Lance did go above and beyond in the lying asshole department in trying to cover up.
BTW, he also broke laws.
actually i just choose to view people as the complex and complicated and conflicted people they are. Im not able to view things in black and white, and dont want to. This is a grey issue for many people. I guarantee you not every lance supporter has turned their back on him. As I said, the letter oprah read to lance is my view of him currently. Its not as if we excuse or condone his behavior, its just viewing the world and his actions in a mature manner. Id have no heros at all if I left them by the side of the road anytime they disappointed me or did something viewed as immoral. A timely example I listed yesterday was MLK, who was deeply flawed as well. John lennon wasnt perfect either. Neither was Gandhi.
The facts are way more complicated than you make them out to be. At least they are to me.
Im not willing to throw him overboard just because people say we should. I view things my own way. We all view things through the personal lens and filter of our own experiences.
As Ledbetterman said, he used to be a lets stone the cheaters guy. But when it became personal, and his own hero and team were accused of cheating, he had a choice to make. Either renounce his own childhood and happiness, or let people hold onto whatever they want to hold onto.
Lance did very little for cycling. The only reason we know he won 7 in a row is because it was on the news. No one with any interest is real sports actually watches that shit.
what you fail to understand here is that yes - these guys were subpoenaed and gave testimony ... but this is what is key:
1. they could have all pleaded the 5th like mcgwire
2. all these guys stopped doping a looooooong time ago ... on their own ... not from being caught but because they made that choice
3. lance was still doping in 2009/2010 during his comeback when most riders were clean ... his audacity to bring up his wife and tell further lies is even more astonishing ... we already know that his wife used to run drugs for him ...
and again - you are free to judge him how you see fit ... my only point is that you judge him with all the appropriate facts ... it just seems like you are cherry picking to suit your purpose ... the main thing is that you keep referring to his doping as a necessity and the focus when we've already explained that people aren't disgusted by him not because he chose to dope in a time of rampant doping but because of how he acted as a human being ... again - bullying, ruining people's lives, bribing officials, threatening sponsors and journalists, exploiting cancer for personal gain despite being mega rich, and now continuing to lie to the world as he's done the better part of his adult life when he's being given an opportunity to come clean ... in the face of all that is in front of him - he continue to exhibit the behaviour of someone with entitlement issues, no remorse or a victim ...
he was worth $125 m before and ill bet hes squirrelled aload away but hes still going to be worth $50+m so hes not to badly of .. :roll: :roll:
info.... http://www.financemanila.net/2013/01/ho ... on-doping/
I was just saying I don't blame him and I still feel many would have done it
I'm no lance fan but he was an incredible athlete
Now I keep hearing this rumour about a very high profile tennis player and that it will blow up soon .. That would shatter my Illusions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21115720
a chick with very big biceps?? :?
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
I disagree. I assume his teammates were put under extreme pressure to tell what they knew. Tyler hamilton only admitted he doped once subpeoned. He lied repeatedly and doped since 1997. He doped also was doing in 2009 as well. The only thing that changed about Hamiltons situation was the subpeona.
They couldnt have pleaded the 5th like mcgwire. The entire team was under investigation. In mcgwires case it was only himself under investigation. You dont think they told Hamilton-"we know about Landis, we have hincapie saying you all doped, we have Leipheimer and Barry, we will go easy on you if you tell what you know about Lance". I think thats exactly what happened. They already had evidence on those guys, so its not like they could deny it.
Hamilton denied it just as long as lance did. I see now reason why he would have suddenly reversed 14 15 years of denials and changed his mind without significant pressure on him.
Its hard to tell when all these guys stopped doping. Landis came back during the 2009-2010 seasons. Hincapie was vague about his use. Hamilton failed a test in 2009, so we know he was doping until the end there.
Its like copping to a lower plea in the justice system. If you admit your guilty, you get a lesser sentence. Most of those guys got 6th month bans.
They may have quit it once they were caught, but it wasnt the idea that it was wrong. Thats the whole point of it all. Why would they quit prior to being caught? Every single person I listed viewed it exactly the way lance did, you needed to dope to keep up with the peloton and to put yourself in contention to win the Tour.
What makes it tricky is the cover up by the higher ups in cycling. Thats the discrepancy you point out. Everyone knew these guys were doping and failing drug tests. Everyone knew it was going on, but no one exposed it or called it out. Thats why you have someone like Vande Velde stripped of victories from 04-06, but it only coming to light as a result of the Reasoned Decision, and Vande Velde's reputation remained intact all those years. The idea that he doped didnt come out until all the subpeonas and testimony happened last year.
If the whole systems corrupt and everyones doping why report it during those years? Why tell anyone who could do anything about it? Thats the whole point. It was sanctioned and allowed to occur by the powers that be in cycling just as the powers that be in the MLB allowed steroid use to occur.
The fact that so many dopers were top riders only streghtens that idea. If the only dopers are guys who place 100th, or hit 5 home runs a year, it really doesnt matter. But if the dopers are future Hall of Fame candidates and are finishing near the top every year, and hit 60 homers a year, and are the face of the sport, then you have a problem. And instead of doing something about it, both the MLb and the cycling world acted criminally.
That should be the next course of action.
Its like the bankers or something. So far, all these athletes have gotten exposed. Thats fine, but behind them, and allowing it to happen, or winking and turning a blind eye to it all were millionaire CEO's and buisnessmen and commissioners and officials, who tacitly allowed all this to happen out of greed.
You want to talk psychologically and mentally sick and disturbed? that to me is. Selig should be thrown in jail for what he did, or rather did not do. Theres something going on in your brain if you know your sport is dirty, and that all your top athletes are cheating to win, and your response to it is to sit on your hands. Thats gross
You think about what you could have done, exposed the cheating in your sport, exposed these athletes prior to the mitchell report, you could have made the drug tests 100 times harder and more accurate. Instead you sat back and did nothing.
Same goes for all those cycling big wigs.
Shame on them.
Theres no doubt the guy does indeed train like a maniac, despite his doping. Riding 90-100 miles a day on off days and to relax, which is pretty insane actually.
I do think he is a athletic obsessive, and gym rat, always training and doing something active and physical.
you can always plead the 5th ... you can tell these guys weren't doping when they said they weren't because of the things i pointed out ... their metrics ...
he finished 3rd in his comeback year because he doped ... he was already 38 at that time (4 years after his last tour) ... pretty old to win a grand tour and not being a full time cyclist ... so, he doped and finished 3rd ... he finished 25th the year after because he crashed ... and he was another year older ... he finished as high as he did because he doped ...
and going back to the other guys ... garmin sharp was not being investigated ... some key people on that team were subpoenaed based on testimony of floyd landis and hamilton because they rode with lance all those years ... there are a lot of guys who were also subpoenaed but did not respond ... if subpenaing someone is all that needs to happen - they would have just done that with lance ...
in any case - you do have the part about the corruption in the governing body correct ... it definitely needs to be exposed and the guy holding that magic key right now is lance ... it's why he will not testify under oath - he's still got a lot of lies and a lot of covering up ...
the subpeona obviously had an impact on his teammates. Nearly every single one was given a 6 month ban, a clear indication that they were offered deals, or lesser sentences as a result of their coming forward. Secondly, few if any had ever come forward before. They indeed could have pleaded the 5th, but they obviously knew the investigation was massive and had gathered tons of information on the doping on the team.
we are just now getting word that sheryl crow was also a unnamed witness in the reasoned decision. So I think all these guys, his teammates knew what was up. Had the investigators gone in half ready, and not had the evidence I dont think they would have said a word. I dont consider Landis, Hamilton or anyone else named in the report honest or forthcoming. They lied repeatedly and for years.
I dont consider his teammates any less culpable or dishonest than Lance himself. Just because as Oprah put it to Lance, "the wolves are at the door" and you tell the truth, as Landis, Hamilton and others did, then you tell the truth. Seemed like thats what went on with nearly every single one of his teammates that also doped. Lets be clear I dont think they were speaking out for the good of cleaning up the sport and telling the truth. They were saving their own skin.
In fact it could be argued Hamilton came forward, less for telling the truth, and more for paying lance back for things like the Colorado restaurant incident and the years lance treated Hamilton like dirt. Hamiltons career was nonexistant at that point. It was ruined. And in fact he had at first flat out refused to talk to the prosecutor initially. It was only after being subpeoned that he spoke out.
You underestimate the power of a subpeona and being forced to testify. Its a powerful thing.
1. despite your reservations of landis, hamilton et al. they have all testified under oath ... now, that is something that used to be pertinent until lance had the audacity to lie ... coincidentally, his statute of limitations on perjury on that matter ended recently ... yes, those guys lied for years ... and there credibility is open for debate but they have at least put themselves in the position that if they were found to lie - they would all face prison time ... something lance isn't prepared to do right now ...
2. the thing with a bunch of his ex-teammates is that they have been the most vocal opponents to doping ... if you read vandevelde's testimony or even someone like zabriskie ... it's gut wrenching ... ya - these guys doped and they admitted it but they all stopped not because they were caught but because they didn't want to and had a way out ... the sport was changing ... teams like garmin took a stance and there was a home and the culture started to change ... the only thing that didn't was the omerta ... so, despite cycling cleaning itself up - the cyclists kept quiet ...
3. again - if a subpoena is all one needs ... why hasn't lance had to testify under oath to any of the multiple investigations against him?
this is especially true in Manhattan !
That it ain't no sin to be glad you're alive
ORGAN DONATION SAVES LIVES
http://www.UNOS.org
Donate Organs and Save a Life
I dont think cycling is cleaned up. Maybe its better than it was in 2002, but cyclings reputation currently as the most dirtiest sport I think is well deserved. I see no major effort on the part of people who could actually do something to clean it up-the officials and head honchos of cycling to do things like-toughen drug tests, do a zero tolerance policy-if you get caught you get kicked out.
And certainly it wasnt cyclists that cleaned up the cycling world. Everyone had a role to play, the athletes role is to honestly compete without cheating, and the cycling bodies and governments job is to make sure cheaters arent rewarded, let go, given a pass, and that any cheater is exposed and weeded out inmediately. Both entities failed miserably. I see no effort on behalf of the governing bodies of cycling to want to deal with cheating in cycling on a wider scale than one rider and one team. In my opinion they should go after cyclists who cheat like they have with lance. Across the board. Contador should have been treated this way. Hamilton too.
Wiggins hasnt been accused of doping, but i dont think im unique in wavering between wanting to watch the tour and not wanting to watch for fear of putting trust in an athlete who has doped or cheated. And thats not just all on Lance, thats cycling as a whole, and everyone in charge of it, from the governing bodies to the UCI to whoever.
You are making assumptions when you talk about why people did things. Its just as true to say all his teammates went under oath and testified because they were cut deals and lesser sentences and punishments. The fact their admitting to doping after years of denials and lies, happened to coincide with the case against Lance, this isnt coincidence. I think his teammates felt cooperating with the authorities was wiser than continuing to deny, not neessarily to expose cheaters and clean the sport up, but more so to save their own skin and not have as harsh a penalty as they ordinarily would. Hamilton lied for 13 or 14 years. Why suddenly change your mind? I think he knew the evidence against him and Lance and everyone else was overwhelming.
Its as i said, its common for defendents to cop a plea so as to reduce their sentence. You cop to involuntary manslaughter instead of murder and the judge and jury may give you a lighter sentence. Same with Hamilton and Lance's other teammates. By going under oath and testifying and giving information, they were more than likely thinking they'd get better deals and sentences than if they rode it out to the end denying everything. Its not like Hamilton and the others are bastions of transparency and openness.
I also think the increased pressure by the public on cheating in cycling, exposing cheaters, and in sports in general, played a part in them cooperating with the investigation. They knew it wasnt going away, and they knew it was a serious investigation that had uncovered massive amounts of damning evidence linking them and the team to the doping scandal. The fact Lance was the leader only heightens this aspect, because the investigators can use that as leverage, "i'll go lighter on you, if you tell us all you know about Lance".
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
oh dear ... so, let me get this straight ... you stopped following cycling for a while now ... and yet you are basically going to assume all that you assume ... you disagree with me based on assumptions ... whereas i am telling you things as someone who has continued to follow cycling and reads up on the subject ... have you read the affidavits of these cyclists? ... i suppose i am making assumptions but at least it is based on reading what they have said not based on how i want to rationalize it in my head ...
yeah hamilton lied all these years and his credibility is shot ... but at least he voluntarily gave up his olympic medal which has to say something ... but i find it strange that you are hell bent on defending lance, the person who has exhibited the least amount of remorse ...
anyways - all i suggest to you is that you get all the facts ... as much as it may hurt you to do so ...
What have I said thats not fact? Just because someone disagrees with you doesnt mean they didnt read the reasoned decision. You made a huge assumption, in that you said lance was a complete jerk but seem willing to view the 11 teammates as somehow paragons of good. In reality, they lied for just as long as lance did, and only came forward once they were offered clear deals that would reduce their possible sentences. You make quite an assumption when you argue everyone of those 11 came forward not to save their own skin, which is exactly what happened, but to rid the sport of cheating, something that hadnt crossed their mind at all prior.
Its as I said the day he confessed. In some narrow minded folks eyes, you cant have a conflicted view of things. You can say you hate cheating and want the cycling officials who allowed this to go on to go to jail, and that any cheater should be exposed and banned, but when you say you feel conflicted about lance somehow Im defending cheating and lying and bullying. Its silly.
I could say the same thing about you. You seem willing to ignore facts and continually support and defend 11 of his teammates who are known liars and cheats. The facts are indeed in the reasoned decision.
They came forward to get better deals. Period.
agreed......shit always, always, always runs downhill :x
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
for one they have not lied as long as lance has ... read up the definition of lying ... show me an instance when david zabriskie, jonathan vaughters or christian vandevelde lied about doping since 2005 ... and how can you say they didn't want to rid the sport of cheating when they decided to either form or be part of a team that is the most vocal against doping ... a team that started a movement in cycling that commits their team and riders to a level of doping standards that are stricter than wada's? ... those are facts
and again for the umpteenth time - it isn't about lance cheating ... how many times does one have to say that? ... you keep harping on everyone else cheated ... it's secondary as to why lance is an asshole ... he's an asshole because of how he treated people, how he exploited cancer for personal gain, for how he ruined people's lives and for continuing to lie to people despite the hurt he's caused ...
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/ba ... 14537.html
- Christopher McCandless
altho I don't think lance was completely forthcoming (and may have even lied some more), I like him more than I did before.
I'm a cancer survivor and wear a livestrong bracelet. I took it off for a while but it's back on. I never wore it as a tribute to lance...I wear it to remind people of the insidious disease it represents.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14