We have had enough of Armstrong

[rnhood]

But he certainly had the attitude of a winner. I like it.

"I definitely have a '···· you' attitude," he says. "I fight in training, I fight to win races, I fight to motivate the guys in the team.
"That brazenness is a great thing for that but it's not a great place for personal relationships. I just didn't have the switch to turn that off. It helped me on the bike but it also got me where I am today."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/sport/lance-armstrong-doping-cycling/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

[oldguy00]

Does anyone know.....what has viewership of the TDF coverage been like year after year since LA's last couple of TDF wins, first retirement, through his comeback, and to now?

[Mr. Pink]

"But he certainly had the attitude of a winner. I like it."

Not all winners are assholes. Just sayin'.

I wonder how much this PR campaign is costing him?

[victoryfactory]

Not all winners are assholes. Just sayin'.


Yes they are.
Some are just better at hiding it!

(said with a wink...)

[AJosiahK]

ive had enough too, but

"That brazenness is a great thing for that but it's not a great place for personal relationships. I just didn't have the switch to turn that off. It helped me on the bike but it also got me where I am today."

thats nice he at least can acknowldge that....

[Elefantino]

Does anyone know.....what has viewership of the TDF coverage been like year after year since LA's last couple of TDF wins, first retirement, through his comeback, and to now?
No, but live viewership was up about 1 percent from 2013 and down 1 percent from 2012. The nightly Bobke fest was up 16 percent year-over, for some unknown reason.

[fuzzalow]

No. More self aggrandizing pap from a calculating, methodical manipulator.

Still flattering himself. There was not anything "brazen" in what he did. He knew he had the best & most dominant doping program in the peloton on an exclusive basis to himself and his team. In words as he admitted during his Oprah media opportunity, his victories could be "phoned in".

This guy is relentless but in credit to him, his media strategy is probably correct. Because the general public is none too bright and he knows that any fiction repeated enough over time solidifies into fact. And coating his excrement with a flavoring of human frailty, contrived admission or vague regret is enough for the public to willfully swallow.

[54ny77]

Maybe he'll order an Ira Ryan frame. Then he'll really know suffering.

;)

[Mr. Pink]

This guy is relentless but in credit to him, his media strategy is probably correct. Because the general public is none too bright and he knows that any fiction repeated enough over time solidifies into fact. And coating his excrement with a flavoring of human frailty, contrived admission or vague regret is enough for the public to willfully swallow.

The big question is, of course, whether or not it will work for him, as it seems to have worked for NFL and NBA players, re: Michael Vick and whatever Ron Artest is calling himself these days, to name just a few. Or how about that wife beater from the Ravens who got a standing O from the fans at practice a week or two ago?
My guess is that Lance will have a much more difficult time at this redemption using the media game, because Americans could give a pile about bicycle racers and bicycle racing in general. They don't need it to live vicariously through them and to compensate for whatever inadequacies they are saddled with, which seem to be many, if one spends some time at an NFL game, or even a local sports bar on Sunday. We'll see. Thing is, his cancer story has sorta been erased by the tour wins, know what I mean? He can't pull that victim of the Big C anymore. He already conquered it, in public. So maybe he needs a relapse, and play that sympathy card again?

[dogdriver]

As the old saying goes, publicity is publicity, whether positive or negative. I'll make the assumption that this current set of media is engineered by a publicist to maximize chances at future income.

I find myself kind of conflicted on LA: I HOPED back in the day that he was clean (or would at least be perceived as having competed clean), due the image he had among cancer survivors. Oh, well. That said, I accept the fact that people who do hard things well (athletes, fighter pilots, astrophysicists, grand-master chess players, etc) are going to have an edge to their personality that may not play well on Dr Phil, the Today Show, Entertainment Tonight, or many other media outlets that most of the population gets their news from. I'm fine with that-- these folks work harder at their craft than most spectators can imagine. The flip side that irks me is that athletes, actors, and musicians live a DAMN privileged life precisely because they are compensated (very well-- these folks are American royalty) to entertain the public. As such, they, IMHO, have an obligation to present a positive image to the public-- a "role model", if you will.

That said, and back to LA, I don't really care that he was a jerk, and I choose not to journey into his rationalizations regarding his using PED's. I can't, however, ignore that he threw so many under the bus, especially that it is now obvious that he knew at the time not only that he was lying, but that everyone around him also knew what he was doing and most kept quiet due LA's influence over them and their lives.

If I was the average media consumer, he would fade into obscurity (and Oprah would have never had a TV show or been the most "admired person" on the planet, but I digress...). Unfortunately, people love a good comeback from sin, and contrition makes fantastic tabloid TV, so I expect that we'll be seeing/hearing a LOT more from LA going forward...

JMOICBR, Chris

[redir]

Sounds like he's still making excuses to me.

[Mr. Pink]

If I was the average media consumer, he would fade into obscurity (and Oprah would have never had a TV show or been the most "admired person" on the planet, but I digress...)


Yeah, I know, and the Kardashians wouldn't even exist, so what do I know. I always appalled at the scum in the limelight these days. I try not to think about it too much.

[harlond]

In words as he admitted during his Oprah media opportunity, his victories could be "phoned in".I've only watched the Tour for 30 years, give or take a few, so maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think you can phone in victory in the Tour no matter how much dope you do.

[bcroslin]

I've only watched the Tour for 30 years, give or take a few, so maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think you can phone in victory in the Tour no matter how much dope you do.

Maybe not phoning it in but I'm not sure what you call this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdMdJAdzpYQ). It's not supposed to be easy but it sure doesn't look hard when you're doped to the gills.

[FastforaSlowGuy]

Interesting that he's talking about another book. That seems like a big risk with all the litigation hanging out there. It would be a fine way to thumb his nose at the UCI, though, to cash in on a tell-all. And if he really wanted to ride the redemption train (oh how Americans love a redemption story), he'd wrangle David Walsh or Paul Kimmage into writing it with him.

[velomonkey]

Lance forgot one thing: If God takes your testicul for doping: then you are not God.

[CunegoFan]

He knew he had the best & most dominant doping program in the peloton on an exclusive basis to himself and his team.

Armstrong's doping program was hardly the best. He was the most successful but Postal's program was rather conservative. All the top ten in GTs were using EPO, blood transfusions, and testosterone. Dr. Fuentes was using homologous transfusions for his riders, which would give a large advantage over Postal's autologous. He was also freezing blood, which would give a large advantage over refrigeration. Postal reserved high octane doping for a handful of riders who supported its Tour de France campaign. Teams like Liberty Seguros, Kelme, and T-Mobile were doping all their riders for races all season.

USADA is responsible for a media blitz, putting out the story out that Postal's program was the most sophisticated doping program ever seen in sports. But it is not true. The facts don't support it. In fact several of USADA's witnesses rode for teams with larger, more sophisticated programs, something that surely would have discovered in USADA's interviews. Curiously the affidavits are very light on what the witnesses were doing on other teams--well light to flat out unbelievable.

[pdmtong]

The I couldn't switch it off position is old news. Agreed he is banking in consistency of frailty to resurrect himself. Unlike the nfl or NBA players those guys weren't the leaders of their sports. If Tom Brady or lebron bullied people and bet on games and cheated its different than Ron artest jumping into the stands If i saw lance somewhere id just ignore him. I don't have it in me to walk up to him and get in his face. Not worth my time

[Mr. Pink]

Yes they are.
Some are just better at hiding it!

(said with a wink...)

Well, the list is short, but two I can think of who aren't are Derek Jeter and Phil Mickelson.

[oldpotatoe]

"But he certainly had the attitude of a winner. I like it."

Not all winners are assholes. Just sayin'.

I wonder how much this PR campaign is costing him?

Most real 'winners' are quiet about it, not overbearing ass-hats.

[velomonkey]

Armstrong's doping program was hardly the best. He was the most successful but Postal's program was rather conservative. All the top ten in GTs were using EPO, blood transfusions, and testosterone. .

Incorrect - almost everything you said here simply isn't true.

Postal's Dr. basically conceived of EPO and brought back blood doping. Lance paid him enough that he was, more or less, exclusive. They actually called the guy when Pantanni attacked in 2000 and he ran the numbers and said "don't worry - he can't hold it, just do your ride." This was during the race.

Everyone else had to use another doctor - someone not nearly as ingrained and who had to copy. It's like saying you can all go shopping for your food - everyone go to Walmart, this team gets to go to wholefoods.

[Dead Man]

I have no interest in Lance's honesty... I feel like any kind of "confession" from him is laced with more convenient lies. He strikes me as having no conscience at all, really... any truth or confession or honesty coming from that guy is going to be the self-serving kind only, and you have no guarantee of getting all of the truth, useful truth, or even true truth anyway.

Dude is Cluster B for sure.

[CunegoFan]

Incorrect - almost everything you said here simply isn't true.

Postal's Dr. basically conceived of EPO

Nope. You have your doctors mixed up. EPO use was rife in Europe before the Postal team even existed. By the time Armstrong joined Postal, EPO use was a standard doping product used by nearly everyone.

and brought back blood doping.

Nope. As soon as the UCI began using the EPO test in 2001, many non-Postal riders immediately went to blood transfusions. Cipollini was using transfusions in 2001.

Lance paid him enough that he was, more or less, exclusive.

So what? Luigi Cecchini, who has the same experience and same past with Dr. Conconi as Ferrari, was available. Then there was Max Testa, Ilario Casoni, Giovanni Grazzi, Carlos Santuccione, Gianni Mazzoni, Gert Lienders, Andreas Blum, Stefan Vogt, Stephan Prettin, Lothar Heinrich... It is not like there is a shortage of men who take money to advise riders about doping.

They actually called the guy when Pantanni attacked in 2000 and he ran the numbers and said "don't worry - he can't hold it, just do your ride." This was during the race.

So what? Taking someone's climbing speed, estimating power required, then comparing that to how long a rider has previously sustained that power is not exactly rocket science. This is little different than a DS using radio to tell his team whether a break will be caught.

Everyone else had to use another doctor - someone not nearly as ingrained and who had to copy. It's like saying you can all go shopping for your food - everyone go to Walmart, this team gets to go to wholefoods.

New doping products and techniques quickly diffuse through the peloton as riders switch teams and doctors. This is not a situation like BALCO with designer made secret steroids that no one else can obtain. It is all basic stuff. What Floyd Landis found is that all he needed was transfusions and a little anabolics for recovery. Doing everything himself he was able to top ten at the Tour. With Allen Lim as a courier he was able to win.

Postal's program was hardly the sophisticated operation that USADA would have people believe. While Armsttrong was storing his blood in his closet under the care of Floyd Landis, T-Mobile was storing theirs at Freiberg University under the care of PhDs.

[firerescuefin]

Cunego....Lance knew the game better than you or I.

As obsessive as he was about all things, what would make you think his doping program would have been on the conservative side. No one was getting popped (that knew what they were doing)....He wasn't leaving anything on the table IMO.

[Mr. Pink]

How do you guys know all this stuff?

[harlond]

Maybe not phoning it in but I'm not sure what you call this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdMdJAdzpYQ). It's not supposed to be easy but it sure doesn't look hard when you're doped to the gills.All the contenders were doped to the gills. The Tour is never given to anybody.

[CunegoFan]

Cunego....Lance knew the game better than you or I.

As obsessive as he was about all things, what would make you think his doping program would have been on the conservative side. No one was getting popped (that knew what they were doing)....He wasn't leaving anything on the table IMO.

If you want to see lack of conservatism then look at the huge array of products Jesus Manzano was using. Compared to that Armstrong was a weekend toker.

Most teams were run as traditional cycling teams. They were looking for results from all of their riders. They would chase results at any race. Postal was different. It was based around Armstrong winning the Tour. Any teammate who could not contribute to that end was not important enough for the time, money, and risk of doping. Hence Landis getting no dope until it was clear that he would be riding the Tour. In contrast, Kelme and Liberty Seguros were team dopefests. Everyone was on the junk. At Liberty Seguros Manolo Saiz continued the polices that earned Johan Bruyneel his nickname.

Armstrong could do a handful of pre July races to test his form, win the Tour, and retire for the season. That would be a successful year for the team, so Armstrong did not have to seek results throughout the year. It was all about one race. That was a huge advantage when it comes to risk control. T-Mobile on the other hand needed to support Ullrich plus hedge its bet by supporting Zabel; its ranks were also stuffed with other top riders to help Ullrich and get results at other races. Teams like that required full, teamwide programs. Postal did not.

One of the big reasons Armstrong never tested positive is that he was not one of those riders who was on the juice 24/7 365 days a year. He doped for specific goals. There was no reason to risk getting caught to win a small race that no one in America has ever heard of. He spent most of the year undoped. This is in line with the approach that Dr. Ferrari has always advocated: Use the stuff that works and don't bother with the stuff that makes little difference.

Armstrong's program was not a revolutionary program that no one had ever seen before. It was built on the basics: Train really hard, minimize weight, and blood vector dope for target races to get an extra boost. There was no secret. It was the same basic stuff that everyone else was using. Interestingly, Ferrari's training methods are very old school. He still sticks to using heart rate zones based on Conconi's LT test while everyone else has moved on to power based training

[Elefantino]

Whether or not his doping program was the best is irrelevant. What is relevant, and beyond contestation, is that he cheated, lied and destroyed lives. Only when caught did he confess and attempt (in a very few cases) to make amends, a fact he admitted publicly.

I cannot for the life of me see a way clear in any way to defend, justify or excuse that behavior or, more broadly, his career.

[oldguy00]

...

I cannot for the life of me see a way clear in any way to defend, justify or excuse that behavior or, more broadly, his career.

I don't think he does either, and has pretty much said as much in recent interviews. It doesn't matter what he says, or who he says it to, folks won't care.
I miss seeing him race, but that's strictly from the standpoint of a bike racing fan that enjoyed watching the PRO sport of biking.....just like others like watching pro football, soccer, etc. all full of drugs.
I've found the TDF rather boring since his and Jan's departure. Oh well.

[FastforaSlowGuy]

My best hope for all of this is that:
1. Lance engages in just enough self-reflection to realize that he should be a bit less of an asshole to people around him, even if the reasons for that are selfish
2. Lance makes a passing effort to work with the sport's governing bodies to share his experiences.
3. As a sporting community, we come to terms with the fact that Lance behaved like an asshat, and agree that not everyone who wins a race (Cat 4 or UCI WorldTour) is as much of a doping asshat as Lance.

I'm not sure how to expect more from him, the sport or us.

[Mark McM]

I don't think he does either, and has pretty much said as much in recent interviews. It doesn't matter what he says, or who he says it to, folks won't care.

And why should they? He lied to cycling fans. He lied to reporters. He lied to supporters, donors and sponsors. He lied under oath, under penalty of perjury. He even lied to Oprah. His idea of 'truth' appears to be whatever story serves his own personal interest. I don't know why we should believe anything he says.

[bobswire]

The question posed," We have had enough of Armstrong"?

Apparently not judging by the responses.

[Fivethumbs]

And why should they? He lied to cycling fans. He lied to reporters. He lied to supporters, donors and sponsors. He lied under oath, under penalty of perjury. He even lied to Oprah. His idea of 'truth' appears to be whatever story serves his own personal interest. I don't know why we should believe anything he says.

I bet his name is not really even "Lance Armstrong".

[PQJ]

Unless he legally changed it, it isn't; it's "Lance Gunderson." The real question is: does he really only have 1 gonad?

[CunegoFan]

Unless he legally changed it, it isn't; it's "Lance Gunderson." The real question is: does he really only have 1 gonad?

Evidently it is a very big one.

[MalcolmK]

Total winner at all costs, and an arsehole. Sociopathic approach made him win without the worry of consequences. He'd probably be a great criminal lawyer character in a John Grisham book.

[rnhood]

One has to wonder if he is much different than many other elite athletes that we sometimes gush over. Given the opportunity, they might do the same thing. But that is only speculation on my part. Armstrong had the right attitude to win, but is a person of zero character as has already been mentioned more than once in this thread.

With regards to doping in general in professional cycling, I think "CunegoFan" has provided some well reasoned comments within the thread.

[cfox]

If you want to see lack of conservatism then look at the huge array of products Jesus Manzano was using. Compared to that Armstrong was a weekend toker.

Most teams were run as traditional cycling teams. They were looking for results from all of their riders. They would chase results at any race. Postal was different. It was based around Armstrong winning the Tour. Any teammate who could not contribute to that end was not important enough for the time, money, and risk of doping. Hence Landis getting no dope until it was clear that he would be riding the Tour. In contrast, Kelme and Liberty Seguros were team dopefests. Everyone was on the junk. At Liberty Seguros Manolo Saiz continued the polices that earned Johan Bruyneel his nickname.

Armstrong could do a handful of pre July races to test his form, win the Tour, and retire for the season. That would be a successful year for the team, so Armstrong did not have to seek results throughout the year. It was all about one race. That was a huge advantage when it comes to risk control. T-Mobile on the other hand needed to support Ullrich plus hedge its bet by supporting Zabel; its ranks were also stuffed with other top riders to help Ullrich and get results at other races. Teams like that required full, teamwide programs. Postal did not.

One of the big reasons Armstrong never tested positive is that he was not one of those riders who was on the juice 24/7 365 days a year. He doped for specific goals. There was no reason to risk getting caught to win a small race that no one in America has ever heard of. He spent most of the year undoped. This is in line with the approach that Dr. Ferrari has always advocated: Use the stuff that works and don't bother with the stuff that makes little difference.

Armstrong's program was not a revolutionary program that no one had ever seen before. It was built on the basics: Train really hard, minimize weight, and blood vector dope for target races to get an extra boost. There was no secret. It was the same basic stuff that everyone else was using. Interestingly, Ferrari's training methods are very old school. He still sticks to using heart rate zones based on Conconi's LT test while everyone else has moved on to power based training

I agree with you that USADA's description of Postal's program was ridiculously over-the-top, but I think you minimize the program too much. Instead of conservative, I'd call it smart or judicious. They were not the doping free-for-all that some other teams were, but they had resources available to them that others did not. A transfusion in a private jet is a bit safer than a Fuentes special in a dirty hotel room. Armstrong paid Ferrari enough so that he wouldn't work with anyone else. If his advice was so basic, why would Armstrong feel the need for an exclusive relationship with him (and Ferrari has long been an advocate of power based training and came up with the now infamous 7.4 w/kg)? From many accounts, Armstrong was a dope fiend, willing to try anything for an edge. I think Ferrari dialed that in a bit. And LA spent plenty of time doped. Before he was sick he used to show up for pre-season camp jacked up on roids and looking like a tight end. Also, don't forget he got popped at the Tour de Suisse.