PDA

View Full Version : Sorry, another Armstrong thread, but this one says it all...


laupsi
11-02-2012, 02:52 PM
http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/11/analysis/opinion-armstrong-case-provides-a-window-into-our-collective-morality_263480

djg21
11-02-2012, 02:56 PM
http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/11/analysis/opinion-armstrong-case-provides-a-window-into-our-collective-morality_263480

Thank you for posting this. It is a very powerful opinion.

PQJ
11-02-2012, 03:08 PM
Thank you for posting this. It is a very powerful opinion.

+1. Reading the paragraph about Nike, I couldn't help but think of watching CNN last night and seeing images of the damage wrought by Sandy; the segment was followed immediately by a super-PAC sponsored ad on behalf of the coal industry. I'll say no more.

BumbleBeeDave
11-02-2012, 03:28 PM
+1000

"Simply put, the Armstrong case may be symbolic of a decline in our popular morality, which worships celebrity above fair play, hard work and decent behavior. It is also a window into how far the “win at all costs” mentality has contaminated our collective psyche."

It gets more apparent everyday. There seems to be less and less regard almost monthly for the common good, what used to be called common courtesy, and fair play--"doing the right thing." More and more blatant hypocrisy and less civility. Nothing matters except winning whatever contest--large or small--people picture themselves in and making the most profit possible--right now.

Nike and others could easily quietly make contributions to other cancer charities if they really gave a damn about the mission. But instead they hypocritically try to publicly distance themselves from Armstrong himself while maintaining connection to Livestrong--pretty obviously because it will still help them sell stuff and make that maximum profit right now.

BBD

Rueda Tropical
11-02-2012, 03:41 PM
This paragraph was pretty damning:


As a cancer survivor and as a physician, I wanted to believe in the Lance mythos more than anyone. I have used his example to help motivate my sickest patients for more than a decade. I am deeply disappointed at the way Armstrong provided false hope to desperate, vulnerable people, and then used them as his most ardent supporters. He sought veneration and financial gain in the hearts of people with catastrophic illness in the most craven way. This is the first reason you should care; Armstrong fed his own worst demons with our best angels

slidey
11-02-2012, 03:55 PM
Agreed! LA is a scumbag, and so are all of his sponsors who've supposedly dropped him...every last one of them is a penny-pincher and they'll do anything to keep that money minting going on. There's really no punishment for a colossal fraud as Dopestrong which is sufficient, well nothing that is legal anyways :fight:

bcm119
11-02-2012, 03:56 PM
This paragraph was pretty damning:
"false hope"? strange take on it.

jr59
11-02-2012, 04:03 PM
Nike and others could easily quietly make contributions to other cancer charities if they really gave a damn about the mission. But instead they hypocritically try to publicly distance themselves from Armstrong himself while maintaining connection to Livestrong--pretty obviously because it will still help them sell stuff and make that maximum profit right now.

BBD

Sorry but isn't that what a company is suppose to do? Make money!

I'm pretty sure that is why Nike or ANY other company exist! Much less a publicly held company.

This as many of the LA stories go is a simple deflection of the Lance love that was handed out. Nobody wants to say, or very few; Wow, how does he do this? How can LA climb better and time trail better than every one else?
All the while KNOWING something was up. Every other person who was a runner-up or close was caught cheating and still Lance rode on. And most thought it was training. That's the real story. Not that he cheated, ALL cheated, or most all. That has been going on in cycling for over 100 years. Yet we all believed Lance didn't? REALLY?

So whoever wants to pile on Lance now and say whatever they wish go on ahead. It's you that were not able to tell that Superman didn't ride a Trek that I laugh at.

Let Nike make their money. that's what they a going to anyway.

cnighbor1
11-02-2012, 04:07 PM
''He was the de facto ringleader of a breathtaking fraud.''
Somehow while he was training on his bicycle five to 7 hours a day he organized obtaining, disturbing and disposal of these legal drugs. The Team manager, Team sponsors, and all the rest were involved. Yes he may have asked for for drugs and offered advice on obtaining, disturbing and disposal of these legal drugs but he sure had a lot of willing help.
the whole sport is too blame with him the One who gets their feet stuck in the fire!!!!
So Far
Charles

e-RICHIE
11-02-2012, 04:12 PM
''He was the de facto ringleader of a breathtaking fraud.''
Somehow while he was training on his bicycle five to 7 hours a day he organized obtaining, disturbing and disposal of these legal drugs. The Team manager, Team sponsors, and all the rest were involved. Yes he may have asked for for drugs and offered advice on obtaining, disturbing and disposal of these legal drugs but he sure had a lot of willing help.
the whole sport is too blame with him the One who gets their feet stuck in the fire!!!!
So Far
Charles

Charles - He was an owner and these people you cite worked for him atmo. How hard is that to understand?

rugbysecondrow
11-02-2012, 04:29 PM
Yes Jr. That is the part of the saga which is hard to watch. The hypocracy, the love to hate, the self righteousness. He was not self made, he was created by fans, supporters, people who enjoy winning. And just to be clear, I feel the same about baseball. How many people cheered the McGuire/Sosa homerun race, only to demonize them for what the world already suspected, but cheerfully ignored. The same reporters who blacklist them from the HOF also glowingly wrote about them to sell papers, they propped them up.

There is enough fault to go around, Lance ought to bear the brunt of it, but he ought not bear the portion which should be born by fans...fans should wear their own yoke, don't throw it around Lances neck.

Sorry but isn't that what a company is suppose to do? Make money!

I'm pretty sure that is why Nike or ANY other company exist! Much less a publicly held company.

This as many of the LA stories go is a simple deflection of the Lance love that was handed out. Nobody wants to say, or very few; Wow, how does he do this? How can LA climb better and time trail better than every one else?
All the while KNOWING something was up. Every other person who was a runner-up or close was caught cheating and still Lance rode on. And most thought it was training. That's the real story. Not that he cheated, ALL cheated, or most all. That has been going on in cycling for over 100 years. Yet we all believed Lance didn't? REALLY?

So whoever wants to pile on Lance now and say whatever they wish go on ahead. It's you that were not able to tell that Superman didn't ride a Trek that I laugh at.

Let Nike make their money. that's what they a going to anyway.

David Kirk
11-02-2012, 04:39 PM
Good read. After reading the above article I stumbled on this one -

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/analysis/no-armstrong-never-tested-positive-but-how_261616

It outlines how they fooled the tests and testers. I always wondered and reading this makes it sound not all that hard.

Interesting if nothing else.

dave

jr59
11-02-2012, 04:55 PM
Good read. After reading the above article I stumbled on this one -

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/analysis/no-armstrong-never-tested-positive-but-how_261616

It outlines how they fooled the tests and testers. I always wondered and reading this makes it sound not all that hard.

Interesting if nothing else.

dave


That's the thing. It's not that hard. I give you BALCO, and Flo-jo! She never tested positive either, and she dealt with at least as hard of test. Many pro athletes have been found to be doing PEDs and not been caught. It is shocking to me now when I hear of one being caught. I think, was he to cheap or just plain foolish. The labs will always be ahead of the tests/testers.

I will say it again, Postal was the team that got caught, so now everyone can pile on so as to deflect on their own PED use.

A long time ago a winner of the TDF told reports that we aren't winning the tour on water!

Nothing has changed. Well, the type of drugs have changed, but that's about it!

Chance
11-02-2012, 05:53 PM
.....
I will say it again, Postal was the team that got caught, so now everyone can pile on so as to deflect on their own PED use.
......

+1

Would like to know how many teams are KNOWN to have been clean. Or significantly cleaner. If it's that easy to pass drug testing, what makes us think everyone else wasn't doing the same?

Get that others doing wrong doesn't make our wrong right, but to me it seems like a cop pulling one guy over for doing 80 MPH when everyone is doing exactly the same speed. May be right and legal, but not just.

esldude
11-02-2012, 05:59 PM
I think this guy's article is lame in the extreme.

While he makes good points he glosses over a basic tenet of all serious competition. Mark Donahue's biography perhaps said it best though about motor racing. This book was titled very honestly, The Unfair Advantage. He then details all the ways any good competitive racing team develops and exploits unfair advantages against the competition.

That is all Armstrong did. That is all any of these people did. It is at the core of all competition. I know in cycling perhaps more than even other sports competition is the hollowed furnace where truths are found. The ugly side result are these doping scandals.

If someone knew of a completely natural and legit way of training that was a huge advantage vs other methods they would use it and keep it to themselves as long as possible. Why? It gives them an advantage. An advantage so that with near equal work and near equal effort you have your fellow competitor beaten.

Same is true of the tech in bikes and other sports. Lighter, stronger, faster, more aero bikes and accessories, well until everyone has them just to keep up, you have an unfair advantage over the other guy. And yet no one thinks this wrong or unethical of people.

Once all the tech, training and other methods have been close to optimized more modern chemistry using blood doping and EPO gave guys one more area to exploit. It probably helped some more than others, but was exactly in the same vein as the hallowed unfair advantage all competitors try and get. And while less successful in the past this same idea using amphetamines etc has been in pro cycling for more than 50 years. And it is why you have various doping problems at the highest levels of all other major sports and likely always will. The promise we can even have "clean competition" is actually the big, big lie.

The rest of this article should be about knowing of this situation, one should watch and enjoy competition without being so childish as to elevate the competitors to heroes. But why do we do that? Everyone in their minds puts themselves in the storied competitors place in their mind. Imagining if they were there doing the racing how great it would be to accomplish these things. How great these guys must be. How heroic we humans all are. Does it indicate a loss of morality? You gotta be kidding me......it is simply exploiting a completely normal and human psychological trait.

When a society is well enough off we can devote resources and broadcast a sort of virtual reality of these events worldwide to adoring fans, there is money to be made. This money improves the sport as it makes even more fantastic competition possible. It makes the stakes much higher increasing the pressure cooker of competition among the competitors. We all love it of course. But it has nothing to do with morality.

I suppose it even applies to the sponsors. It is their money that fuels ever higher tech including the illicit tech of doping. They need never orchestrate it or fund it directly. It is a certain result of simply having that much money involved. That is why anyone seriously looking at all this finds there never is a single place to put their finger and say this is what is wrong. Because the entire situation assures the result. One can be moral and blame the competitor. But what about the sponsor exploiting our human psychological traits for profit through advertizing? And the organizers of racing, who have to know it, but rather look the other way? And on and on in a big circle. It is everyone's fault (including the fans) and no one's fault.

jr59
11-02-2012, 06:27 PM
Charles - He was an owner and these people you cite worked for him atmo. How hard is that to understand?

So LA was tailwind sports? Lance says he didn't, but who knows where the truth is really.

I do know that billionaires don't let millionaires be part of the club. They will let them in and play with them, but NEVER will they allow them to own part!

e-RICHIE
11-02-2012, 06:30 PM
So LA was tailwind sports? Lance says he didn't, but who knows where the truth is really.

I do know that billionaires don't let millionaires be part of the club. They will let them in and play with them, but NEVER will they allow them to own part!

Sorry - you have the wrong information atmo.

1centaur
11-02-2012, 06:30 PM
"the worst cheater in the history of sport"?

please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosie_Ruiz

Well worth a read all the way through, even if you know the punch line.

jr59
11-02-2012, 06:36 PM
Sorry - you have the wrong information atmo.

So ritchie,

Please do tell, what you KNOW about the ownership of tailwind.

Like I said, who knows where the truth really is!

Rueda Tropical
11-02-2012, 06:38 PM
He then details all the ways any good competitive racing team develops and exploits unfair advantages against the competition.

That is all Armstrong did. That is all any of these people did. It is at the core of all competition. I know in cycling perhaps more than even other sports competition is the hollowed furnace where truths are found. The ugly side result are these doping scandals.


Cycling is big business and like in any business there is a difference between developing an unfair advantage by excelling and developing an unfair advantage by fraud.

Businesses develop better services, products and technology within the law and regulations to gain an "unfair" advantage in a healthy sustainable economy all the time. Of course socio-pathic fraudsters and crooks attempt to claim that they are doing the same thing. But it's a self serving BS to excuse inexcusable behavior. Yes some level of cheating, crime and fraud always exists but when it dominates you have a system that is failed, sick and unsustainable. It should never be tolerated or excused away.

Rueda Tropical
11-02-2012, 06:39 PM
"the worst cheater in the history of sport"?

please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosie_Ruiz

Well worth a read all the way through, even if you know the punch line.

So you want to compare Ruiz's earnings from her fraud to Armstrongs?

e-RICHIE
11-02-2012, 06:46 PM
So ritchie,

Please do tell, what you KNOW about the ownership of tailwind.

Like I said, who knows where the truth really is!

Like I wrote above, and before elsewhere, the owners never anticipated Lance's return to escalate to the level that it did and, after maybe the first win (or certainly by the second...) his worth exceeded what they had allotted for salary and remuneration. Little by little, shares in the company went over to his side of the table. From what I know, by TDF 3.0 he was a card carrying member of the management team as opposed to be just another cat racing his bicycle for them atmo. Remember, when he came on board at the front end, it wasn't more that a mercy throw from some of his old pals. He wasn't expected to become what he became. Or maybe it's better stated that they didn't bank on what would eventually happen.

jr59
11-02-2012, 06:58 PM
Like I wrote above, and before elsewhere, the owners never anticipated Lance's return to escalate to the level that it did and, after maybe the first win (or certainly by the second...) his worth exceeded what they had allotted for salary and remuneration. Little by little, shares in the company went over to his side of the table. From what I know, by TDF 3.0 he was a card carrying member of the management team as opposed to be just another cat racing his bicycle for them atmo. Remember, when he came on board at the front end, it wasn't more that a mercy throw from some of his old pals. He wasn't expected to become what he became. Or maybe it's better stated that they didn't bank on what would eventually happen.


As I have said, It's hard to know where the truth lies!
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/491383/did-armstrong-own-a-stake-in-tailwind-sports-or-not.html

Jason E
11-02-2012, 06:59 PM
FOTRE

(*all *f t*e R*man *mpire)

I'll let you figure it out.

e-RICHIE
11-02-2012, 07:16 PM
As I have said, It's hard to know where the truth lies!
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/491383/did-armstrong-own-a-stake-in-tailwind-sports-or-not.html


No worries. I trust my colleagues and dinner companions as far as the truth here is concerned atmo.

esldude
11-02-2012, 07:23 PM
Cycling is big business and like in any business there is a difference between developing an unfair advantage by excelling and developing an unfair advantage by fraud.

Businesses develop better services, products and technology within the law and regulations to gain an "unfair" advantage in a healthy sustainable economy all the time. Of course socio-pathic fraudsters and crooks attempt to claim that they are doing the same thing. But it's a self serving BS to excuse inexcusable behavior. Yes some level of cheating, crime and fraud always exists but when it dominates you have a system that is failed, sick and unsustainable. It should never be tolerated or excused away.

You might notice I didn't excuse it. I described it however. And I think your idea separating advantages within the law vs outside is a divider without real meaning. With enough pressure and competition you are pretty sure to end up with some end run around the rules. Often this consists of gray areas or areas with no applicable rules ie:credit default swaps for instance. Or posit another question: how is high altitude training really different than a very minor amount of blood doping if the result were to be nearly the same physiologically? In both cases the competitor has to train equally hard. In one case at altitude in another case in more normal elevations.

You will find a fine sliding gray area to color one a socio-pathic fraudster or crook vs a honest but hard competitor if you look close enough. All the shades of gray will be so minute one next to another you won't get a clean dividing line. One can always arbitrarily choose the line, but to think there is really a difference in the quality of what the competitor is doing is to fool oneself. All are simply trying to get that little edge. With enough incentive someone will always emerge willing to push a little bit further than others.

Armstrong pushed maybe further, harder and in a more effective manner than others. He was more successful for it. I don't commend him as he doesn't appear to be worthy of that. I don't excuse him exactly. I am saying he or someone else much like him was nearly inevitable given the conditions. I don't see that changing as it is built in to high level sporting events.

bironi
11-02-2012, 07:24 PM
As I have said, It's hard to know where the truth lies!
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/491383/did-armstrong-own-a-stake-in-tailwind-sports-or-not.html

C'mon, that's his lying BS from 2+ yrs back.

Rueda Tropical
11-02-2012, 09:20 PM
You might notice I didn't excuse it. I described it however. And I think your idea separating advantages within the law vs outside is a divider without real meaning. With enough pressure and competition you are pretty sure to end up with some end run around the rules. Often this consists of gray areas or areas with no applicable rules ie:credit default swaps for instance. Or posit another question: how is high altitude training really different than a very minor amount of blood doping if the result were to be nearly the same physiologically? In both cases the competitor has to train equally hard. In one case at altitude in another case in more normal elevations.

You will find a fine sliding gray area to color one a socio-pathic fraudster or crook vs a honest but hard competitor if you look close enough. All the shades of gray will be so minute one next to another you won't get a clean dividing line. One can always arbitrarily choose the line, but to think there is really a difference in the quality of what the competitor is doing is to fool oneself. All are simply trying to get that little edge. With enough incentive someone will always emerge willing to push a little bit further than others.

Armstrong pushed maybe further, harder and in a more effective manner than others. He was more successful for it. I don't commend him as he doesn't appear to be worthy of that. I don't excuse him exactly. I am saying he or someone else much like him was nearly inevitable given the conditions. I don't see that changing as it is built in to high level sporting events.

There is unethical behavior as is rampant in our current financial system. Most of which would have been illegal before they bribed politicians to make it legal. But thats another discussion. Then there is illegal.

What Lance was doing wasn't a grey area. It was not just unethical, it broke all the rules. Using EPO and Testosterone, etc, etc, having a team wide program, coercing riders into the program, using a charity and vulnerable cancer victims as cover, driving clean riders out of the sport.

Where's the grey area? It's over the top out, of control fraud. Not pushing the envelope a bit or skirting the grey areas. Outright unrestrained greed and flagrant cheating.

Elefantino
11-02-2012, 09:54 PM
Everyone was doing it, so don't blame Lance. Blame everyone else first.
Excuse me while I hurl.

He, like all of the other pathetic dopers, had a choice. They chose money, fame, etc. And they got caught. And their legacies are toast.

Yay.

CunegoFan
11-02-2012, 10:11 PM
As I have said, It's hard to know where the truth lies!
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/491383/did-armstrong-own-a-stake-in-tailwind-sports-or-not.html

If you had read your own link then you would know that Armstrong himself said under oath, which apparently does not mean much to a liar like Armstrong, he owned about 10% of Tailwind.

jr59
11-02-2012, 10:18 PM
Charles - He was an owner and these people you cite worked for him atmo. How hard is that to understand?

If you had read your own link then you would know that Armstrong himself said under oath, which apparently does not mean much to a liar like Armstrong, he owned about 10% of Tailwind.

10% is far from owner. At least to me.

Like I said, kind of hard to tell where the truth lies!

Ritchie knows, heck he heard it over dinner. It's got to be true! :cool:

esldude
11-02-2012, 10:40 PM
There is unethical behavior as is rampant in our current financial system. Most of which would have been illegal before they bribed politicians to make it legal. But thats another discussion. Then there is illegal.

What Lance was doing wasn't a grey area. It was not just unethical, it broke all the rules. Using EPO and Testosterone, etc, etc, having a team wide program, coercing riders into the program, using a charity and vulnerable cancer victims as cover, driving clean riders out of the sport.

Where's the grey area? It's over the top out, of control fraud. Not pushing the envelope a bit or skirting the grey areas. Outright unrestrained greed and flagrant cheating.

I recall in the Tyler Hamilton book Tyler talking about Lance being such a powerful rider. And how he was amazed to then see Lance go to Europe and get passed like he was standing still. How Tyler couldn't believe those guys were that good as it seemed beyond human to be better than the Lance he had raced against. I have no idea whether Lance was doping or doping very lightly or what at that point in his career. I can imagine he may have done just like all the other young riders before him. He had talent and trained hard. Found he could stick with the established pro's for a day, but that was it. Remember Lance DNF'd more than one TDF before cancer. So he is faced with the same decision they all were. Give up the dream or 'level the playing field'.

From there the cancer he was cured off actually helped his public image. It also may have made him willing to play harder with fear it would come back or with an entitlement that he was fighting worse odds than the other guy and they were cheating. Something I guess only Lance would know in his heart.

Lance sounds like a pretty vindictive asshole. But he in some sense earned it as much as other top cyclists at the time who also were cheating. He was way over the top and not to be commended for that. But painting him as some anti-christ all powerful evil is simply ignoring reality. He didn't drive other clean riders out of the sport all by himself. The list of those who did it with him is at least several dozen if not many dozens long.

My point about the gray areas is where do you draw the line? In essential form he was doing what top competitors always do.....looking for an edge over everyone else. Know matter how identical in effort, ability or training, those at the very top of the heap will always have this attitude. It is what puts them up there that last couple percent to win instead of just finishing close. The problem in cycling was it became so all pervasive that you couldn't even compete in the show without the extremes of doping. Lance didn't do that all by his lonesome self.

esldude
11-02-2012, 10:45 PM
Another comment should someone paint me as a Lance booster or apologist. I am neither.

As long as this whole episode is considered a "Lance" problem, nothing useful or meaningful will come of it.

The problem is the situation that allowed someone to be as successful and due to that as influential as Lance became. The situation that put him into a position to ruin other people, to have the incredible financial resources he had. Without those as much of an asshole as he may have been he couldn't have harmed people very much.

The cycling/doping/cheating problem isn't a Lance problem. Doing something to Lance will not fix it at all. It goes beyond that.

gasman
11-02-2012, 10:53 PM
"false hope"? strange take on it.

I think he means some of his patients had false hope that they could beat metastatic cancer just like Lance did. Except Lance had testicular cancer which is very treatable even when it has spread.

cnighbor1
11-02-2012, 11:26 PM
Charles - He was an owner and these people you cite worked for him atmo. How hard is that to understand?

Owner of what I don't know what he was owner of

Rueda Tropical
11-03-2012, 12:19 AM
My point about the gray areas is where do you draw the line? In essential form he was doing what top competitors always do.....looking for an edge over everyone else. Know matter how identical in effort, ability or training, those at the very top of the heap will always have this attitude. It is what puts them up there that last couple percent to win instead of just finishing close. The problem in cycling was it became so all pervasive that you couldn't even compete in the show without the extremes of doping. Lance didn't do that all by his lonesome self.

No one has ever suggested, including the USADA, that Lance invented doping and personally made everyone in cycling take dope. The fact that he is not the only cheat and fraud make him no less of a cheat and a fraud. When you allow the cheaters to take over then only cheats will be at the top. That is not Lance's fault, that is the UCI's fault.

Yes Lance could not drive clean riders out without the collusion of the rest of the peloton but Lance took it on himself to be the guy who played the enforcer who delivered the message.

Lance earned everything he is getting in the way of sanctions and shame all on his own. Stealing 7 TdF wins made him the highest profile doper and the most successful doper -not the most successful athlete - the most successful cheat.

bcm119
11-03-2012, 12:51 AM
I think he means some of his patients had false hope that they could beat metastatic cancer just like Lance did. Except Lance had testicular cancer which is very treatable even when it has spread.

Ah, context. I did not know that... I thought once it had spread it did not matter where it started... good to know.