Armstrong vs Simeoni - Round 2!!

[Roy E. Munson]

I'll bite my tongue and reserve comment for now, but this article brings up some very intersting events and points - Rebel with a Cause? (http://www.thedailypeloton.com/)

[dirtdigger88]

Hey Roy

any luck on that NA IPA?

jason

[Roy E. Munson]

Let's figure out a way for me to get it in your hands and you're in business. I'll honor my side of the bet.

[PhatMatt]

For what it's worth I am letting Lance's lame-*** actions color my reactions to this year's Tour. To a person the "folks on the street" that I have spoken to about it (or more accurately my friends who are trying to connect with me through a well-known interest of mine) think that Lance did the right thing because that guy (Simeoni) had called Lance a liar. Many people also believe that since Lance said his actions were supported by the entire peloton that what he did was not only "cool" but sanctioned. While not only being a great example of how easily news can get confused and wrongly heard, transmitted, etc. it also illustrates what I think is a distressing "America rules at all costs" attitude, ie: If Lance did it then it's OK with me.

I hate that dumb-*** cowboy ****. Being a bully is not cool. And now a guy who I admired for a lot of reasons has jumped in with both feet and I feel cheated somehow. Lance obviously owes me nothing and I am equally certain my opinion means little if anything to him but damn, when your heroes let you down it sucks.

Sorry to beat a dead horse but I needed to finally weigh in on this topic.

[shaq-d]

in a competitive professional sport, i don't think it's "wrong" to be a bully in terms of flexing your muscle. should roger federer ease up on his obviously weaker opponents? of course not. and if federer chooses to toy with his opponent, it would be a sight to behold, as armstrong's was.

this is sport, not a grade 6 playground. too many crybabies in what is and should be cut-throat.

sd

[PhatMatt]

I agree Shaq, there is nothing wrong with kicking-*** on the field/court/road/pool/what-have-you but this was not a case of toying with an inferior opponent. This was Lance taking something personal and making it public. It was completely self-serving and then he masked it by saying he was doing it to protect the sport and the riders.

Even Simeoni said something to the effect of if Lance wanted to show he was the stronger rider he should have stayed in the break with me and raced.

It was petty. It was sophmoric. I think Lance might as well have said, "I'm doping and he wants to out me and everyone else so I tried to shut him up." So finally it was just plain stupid.

[Johny]

this is sport, not a grade 6 playground. too many crybabies in what is and should be cut-throat.

sd

Unfortunately, this is not just sport...hopefully truth will be told.

[shaq-d]

This was Lance taking something personal and making it public. It was completely self-serving and then he masked it by saying he was doing it to protect the sport and the riders.


i call that toying, you call it self-serving/etc., okay. same thing to me. what he said after it doesnt' even matter to me. if federer toyed with an opponent and said "i wasn't toying with him, i was doing what it takes to win", he would be lying, but surely you're not getting pissed because he's lying? if federer has a personal problem with the opponent and denied it was personal, so what? who cares what he says at the end? so he's lying, big deal. what some call class others call lying. etc.

don't know how to respond to johny's "it's not just a sport". i said it's a sport, not "just" a sport. no idea what "just a sport" would mean anyway.

sd

[gt6267a]

Even Simeoni said something to the effect of if Lance wanted to show he was the stronger rider he should have stayed in the break with me and raced.

one thought i have here: according to the press info, lance was asked to leave the breakaway by other riders. he stated that he would not leave without simeoni. they kicked simeoni out and so lance left. never did i hear that lance left because he was unwilling to ride in the breakaway.

further, lance commented that they tried to get hincapie in a number of breaks but they were chased down. why? why were these breaks chased down? because someone was high up in the GC in the break?, or was it because the peloton did not want to let a postal rider, hincapie, in the break?

from the reports of the tour, it takes 2 or 4 or even 10 breakaway attempts before the peloton lets a group go. why don't they let the first break go or the second or the third? there is a reason each time. maybe it is because someone is high-up on GC, or someone is a sprinter ... but i bet there is a lot of personal crap coming out as well. simeoni is not the first rider to have his breakaway attempt killed because of personal problem.

true, it was the yellow jersey that chased him down. but, i think it is naive to think this incident is the only personal attack within the tour.

i do not write this to condone LA's action or support them. i write to point out that while this is the only incident getting press time, i believe Lance is not alone in this type of behavior. my guess is that it is as prevelant within cycling as it is in every other facet of our lives.

again, i am not writing to condone or support his actions, but i am pointing out that to look down upon lance for these actions requires a deeper look into the actions of the peloton and the outside world influencing race day activities.

[Needs Help]

true, it was the yellow jersey that chased him down.

...he mentions parenthetically. That's the whole difference, the crux, the main point, and one of the things that sets it apart from any other chase. And, the yellow jersey that did the chasing had an insurmountable lead. And, the yellow jersey broke away from his teammates who usually surround the yellow jersey to protect him from crashes. And, the seasoned announcers were so shocked by the move they commented on it having "sinister" overtones.

Not just another chase.

Some people say you can do things that are within the rules of the sport and therefore those actions are "right", but you can win with honor or you can win with shame. Some people can't make that distinction anymore or choose to ignore it. As climb would ponder, maybe that's a reflection of their own character.

[Johny]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=1848071

"Simeoni was quoted... while he rode with Armstrong, the Texan said, "... I have time and money and lots of lawyers. I can destroy you."

... Italian investigators could open proceedings against Armstrong for sporting fraud, violence, and intimidation of a witness."

[Tom]

I wouldn't have a problem with it, despite the fact that imho she does sing poorly and just retreads songs that stank the first time around so he'd just be telling the truth. (If Armstrong hooked up with somebody like Michelle Shocked, now then I'd have a lot more respect for him...)

Why he lost a lot of respect from this particular cancer survivor was because, according to the information I read, this was over doping testimony. The subject of the dispute exposed a very seedy facet of his thinking, and his justification that all the rest of the guys thought it was cool really smells.

Yeah, he's done a lot, and I actually have one of those stupid yellow bands. Damn good thing I didn't put it on because I didn't want to look like I was jumping on the bandwagon. Somebody might need to sit the driver down and give him a little talking to.

[flydhest]

Tom, you were a hero to me and now, I'm just plain disappointed. I really think Sheryl Crow and her music are great.

How will I get over this.

On the other topic, it was dippy, but if the logic is, "there's dope in the peloton and we might need to clean it up, but it's simply not good to have riders ratting people out" then Lance's actions make more sense (to me) and are consistent with support from the peloton. Doesn't mean that I necessarily support the action, but if Lance believes that the way Simeoni was going about things was damaging to the other riders . . . well.

[Roy E. Munson]

Simeoni never ratted anyone out - he said that Ferrari showed him the in's and out's of EPO use. And he did it under oath, so all he really did was not commit perjury. No riders names were mentioned.

.

[Andreu]

in a competitive professional sport, i don't think it's "wrong" to be a bully in terms of flexing your muscle. should roger federer ease up on his obviously weaker opponents? of course not. and if federer chooses to toy with his opponent, it would be a sight to behold, as armstrong's was.

this is sport, not a grade 6 playground. too many crybabies in what is and should be cut-throat.

sd
I am glad you don´t race over here because this sort of prima donnish attitude largely doesn´t exist ....thankfully there are still some unwritten rules of sportsmanship in cycling as a sport - well in the races I do and I believe they still exist in the pro ranks too.

Yes, if someone steps out of line (and I am not talking about drugs), wants to piss about or doesn´t want to work in a break etc..they deserve to be worked over...but if it is true what most people are saying than why doesn´t Lance just let the lawyers sort it all out? I can only think that there is more to this because I cannot believe LA would do such a thing ----
(1) Waste of energy
(2) contrary to popular belief he (LA) seems to be generally sporting
(3) why do something which may, ultimately, point the finger of blame at you about drugs?
As I say, I think something additional as gone on here which we have not been privy to. Unless LA has lost it completely in which case we should look forward to more bizarre behaviour.
A

[Tom]

Yeah, I hear you. It's the Joni Mitchell thing. One time I was running a 10K race when I thought I could run fast so I was working hard but not having a very good day. At about 5 miles they had these speakers set up and what I hear is that one about the coyote. "...lost on the white line on the freeeeeway, the freeeeway, the white line... the freeway... coyote... glasses... freeway... "

Oh, the horror. The horror.

[slowgoing]

I have been wondering for years whether Lance's post-cancer personality transformation was as extensive as it had been presented by his media machine. After all, when Lance talked to the press, we rarely saw the brash, cocky Lance of old, and we were usually presented with a kindler, gentler Lance who was philanthropic, didn't speak out harshly about his competitors and or their home countries and didn't take unnecessary competitive risks. For me, the most striking point about his breakaway with Simeoni was that yes, underneath it all, he is still the same big-headed jerk he was before.

Unlike others, I read anything more into his actions than that. I don't think it implicates him in doping.

[shaq-d]

'cause if i did i'd be panting off the back. nonetheless it's clear the "sportsmanship" in cycling is far different from other sports, such as baskeball, F1 racing, hockey, soccer, baseball, etc. in all of THOSE sports there is almost always a very yummy personal undertone. in my opinion that is a good/great thing. in these sports it isn't prima-donna-ish..it's par for the course. maybe cycling is just wussier than i thought.

the "something else giong on here" is exactly what i'm saying is happening too, i.e., something personal. or are you saying it's something other than something personal motivating lance?

the unwritten rules of racing include not taking off like simeoni did at the champs elysee. guess he's as bad as armstrong, eh? unwritetn rules (hell, even written) include supporting your teammate -- guess cunego shoulda relinquished his crown for simoni? i don't think so. unwritten rules have exceptions, and often are matters of convenience and co-operation, not matters of honour. honour in sport is from a bygone era, and even in the bygone era it was more condescension than it was honour.

sd



I am glad you don´t race over here because this sort of prima donnish attitude largely doesn´t exist ....thankfully there are still some unwritten rules of sportsmanship in cycling as a sport - well in the races I do and I believe they still exist in the pro ranks too.

Yes, if someone steps out of line (and I am not talking about drugs), wants to piss about or doesn´t want to work in a break etc..they deserve to be worked over...but if it is true what most people are saying than why doesn´t Lance just let the lawyers sort it all out? I can only think that there is more to this because I cannot believe LA would do such a thing ----
(1) Waste of energy
(2) contrary to popular belief he (LA) seems to be generally sporting
(3) why do something which may, ultimately, point the finger of blame at you about drugs?
A

[oracle]

cyclists need to brush up (or actually read) the classics, specifically classical greek literature and mythology, which offers us insights as to the nature of our demi-gods and our heros, who, like achilles and hector, are ridden with foibles to more fully humanize them. they each have certain strengths and weaknesses, which are evident at many times throughout the conflicts described in the iliad. prime examples of such characters are achilles and hector. these two characters have obvious differences in their approaches to fitting the heroic mold to which they both try to conform. however, despite their differences and the fact that they are fighting for opposing armies and meet each other with hatred in battle, they also have numerous similar traits that logically lend themselves to a comparison between the two men. they both display behavior that could be described as heroism. the first way in which achilles, who fights for the greeks, and hector, who fights for the trojans, act differently is how they approach war and the inevitable violence and death that accompany it. although achilles knows that he is fated to be killed in battle, when his faithful and devoted lover patroclus is mercilessly and dishonorably cut down in combat, he puts aside his pride and chooses to temporarily forget about his previous feuds with agamemnon that have, up until now, prevented him from participating in the war. He joins the fighting with a deadly and vengeful mindset that will likely play a major factor in the outcome of the war. today, this lust for revenge might be considered a glaring character flaw. however, this passion for retribution undoubtedly conforms to the heroic code of greek society. meanwhile, hector is full of indecision and reluctance about whether to take part in the war. he too believes that fate has dictated that he will be killed in battle. he spends much time with his pleading wife andromache, who begs him not to go to war, both for his sake and for his family’s. he does not want to die and thus widow andromache, leaving her at the loom of another man. indeed, when he bids farewell to his young son astyanax, clothed in his shining war gear with gleaming helmet complete with plume crest (the quintessential picture of a bold greek soldier going off to battle, which today is a symbol of courage, bravery, and true heroism), astyanax cries with fright, showing that bravery and heroism in war cannot coexist with the care and love that a father shows to his son. so, while hector is indeed heroic is his departure for the war, his human side is overshadowed by this. another situation in which hector and achilles use different approaches to behave as heroes is in book 22, the main section in which hector and achilles and their separate personalities and character traits interact. hector, now courageous as ever and boldly confronting his fate, decides to remain outside the ramparts of the fortified city, within which the rest of his supporters that might defend him are safely secure. priam, hector’s father, upon seeing the advancing achilles, implores hector to retreat behind the safety of the walls, but to no avail. pride and honor play a role in preventing hector from backing down. hector’s fearless confrontation of his destiny is an extremely heroic action. however, then hector flees from hchilles, behavior quite unlike that of a hero. one might infer that now hector’s human instinct of survival is playing a role. this illustrates a seemingly-common conflict among characters who might be considered heroes: the internal contest between the heroic code within the character and the human emotions and instincts that sometimes present contradictory impulses to the heroic code. each hero responds in a different manner to this conflict. hector, in this case, decides to react upon his human impulses and flees from achilles, who instantly gives chase. after a cunning trick by athena which causes hector to decide to stand his ground and fight, perhaps the most conspicuous contradiction between a warrior’s heroic code and the warrior’s human side is evident. achilles, vengeful and bloodthirsty, kills hector in a manner, which, by today’s standards, would be unnecessarily cruel and barbaric. he allows hector to die a slow and agonizing death, after which he shamelessly desecrates the body, without caring in the least about the feelings of hector’s family and supporters. these actions are undeniably consistent with the heroic warrior code of the greeks, which puts tremendous value on valiance in battle and merciless retribution. nevertheless, even the most valiant and stonehearted soldier must have a human side, which definitely must object to the savage and brutal killing that is ubiquitous in war. on the other hand, when achilles and his soldiers get some type of obscene pleasure and glee from repeatedly and grotesquely stabbing hector’s lifeless and bloody corpse, another kind of human emotion is being displayed. this is the pent-up anger and hostility that builds up during one’s quest for revenge or simply battle, being directed towards the most apparent figure or symbol that represents the source of this hatred. so, it might be concluded that the heroic code and the human emotions might not conflict with each other after all. when achilles decides to return hector’s body to his father, priam, so that it might be honorably buried, he is violating the unfeeling and uncompassionate heroic code to which he earlier tried so hard to conform. he has decided to act upon the nobler human quality of pity and sympathy and another’s loss, even when the loss is that of a hated enemy. truly, in this scenario, priam had to simply draw on the common bond through which all humans feel linked, for no amount of rational thought would have swayed achilles to make this compromise of principle. ultimately, this is an excellent way to end the narrative of the iliad, for it shows that achilles, the character with which the reader most often identifies, has exhibited his independence from the heroic code and that he is capable of making decisions that have no basis in precedence, and that he is able to choose his own destiny and live his own philosophy, and one who accomplishes this is truly a hero by anyone’s standards. A careful comparison of the actions and thoughts of the two characters provides the reader with a perhaps unexpected insight. it seems that while hector is indeed possessive of a human side, in that he is afraid of dying in war, he loves his wife and family, and does not at first want to accept his fate, achilles is, in fact, the more human one. he uses boht his human emotions and the warrior code that he learned since childhood appropriately and in proportion, so that there is the least friction between the two and so that the resulting actions are indeed admirable and praiseworthy. he is able to construct a perfect formula containing both the heroic code and the human mind that presents the most ideal result. achilles seems to have successfully navigated his way through the heroic progression in this manner. thus, both hector and achilles behave as heroes throughout the iliad. while they both try to win glory in war for their families, their country, and themselves, they both have certain strengths and weaknesses in their character that dictate their very different courses of action and their thoughts. they are both presented with conflicts and dilemmas throughout the story, the resolutions of which must be made using both their intuitive human side and their aggressive heroic side, and it appears as if achilles meets with the most success in this difficult task. therefore, the heroic warrior code and the human conscience present certain contradictions to which the characters must respond in order to survive and in order to achieve their goals.

p.s. for roy: armstrong kicked arse like an achaian war-god, while showing his humanity, his hubris.

[Climb01742]

cyclists need to brush up (or actually read) the classics, specifically classical greek literature and mythology, which offers us insights as to the nature of our demi-gods and our heros, who, like achilles and hector, are ridden with foibles to more fully humanize them.

in this sentence, i believe you may have meant "riven", not "ridden" with foibles? perhaps next to your classics is a dictionary? ;)

[oracle]

so true, climb. i think i actually meant to write riddled, but riven works fine as well.

[DWF]

snipped.... (If Armstrong hooked up with somebody like Michelle Shocked, now then I'd have a lot more respect for him...)

I'd be impressed too, especially seeing as how Michelle Shocked is a lesbian. :)

I really dug her in the 80's early 90's. No idea what she's doing now.

"where there's smoke, there's fire...."

[Roy E. Munson]

Could someone translate Oracles post into something interesting, please?

[M_A_Martin]

Ah, thank you oracle for confirming that there is nothing new to be written and we are toiling for naught.


What I wanna know is:
I understand that some pro racers have come forward/got caught, admitted doping, did some time or not, supposedly reformed, and are current pro racers.

I understand that other pro racers have been caught doping and have been removed or suspended from the sport or have removed themselves/retired in shame from the pro ranks.

What I'm unclear on is that Simoni admitted to doping and to following a doping schedule and is still riding as a pro racer.
Is this only because he didn't actually get caught doping? Or has the case against him not gone through the courts?

Why are some admitted former doping cyclists allowed to continue riding in the pro ranks and others are removed? Is there a logic to it?



On Lance's actions (as that's what the thread is about I guess): The whole breakaway thing is a "he-said, he-said, Mom he's looking at me!" kind of thing. Unless they had a tape recorder running we have no real idea what really went down between the break and the peleton.

On Ms. Crow: He could do better by way of a girlfriend if she's his girlfriend at all. I'm still waiting for that situation to fade away quietly now that the Lance chronicles and the tour are finished. I suspect she was paid well for the role.
And I enjoy her music, but please-oh-please don't call her a rock star again. "Alternative Pop" star yes, Rock? No. She floats about the feel-good slightly out there slightly bluesy pop music and neither gets "rock'n" nor digs into the blues deeply. Not on her own albums, or on many of the albums she's appeared on as a guitarist in the band.

[geezohwiz]

... we rarely saw the brash, cocky Lance of old, and we were usually presented with a kindler, gentler Lance who was philanthropic, didn't speak out harshly about his competitors and or their home countries and didn't take unnecessary competitive risks. For me, the most striking point about his breakaway with Simeoni was that yes, underneath it all, he is still the same big-headed jerk he was before.

So we take the past several years of evidence that Lance has changed and throw it out the window because of one impulsive action? Do any of us really know enough about him to state whether he is an absolutely genuine, kind-hearted person or the biggest jerk to come along in the last 10 years? My guess is that, like most people, he's a little bit of both.

Unlike others, I read anything more into his actions than that. I don't think it implicates him in doping.

Agreed.

[Roy E. Munson]

What I'm unclear on is that Simoni admitted to doping and to following a doping schedule and is still riding as a pro racer.

This is 100% not true

On Lance's actions (as that's what the thread is about I guess): The whole breakaway thing is a "he-said, he-said, Mom he's looking at me!" kind of thing. Unless they had a tape recorder running we have no real idea what really went down between the break and the peleton.

I think that when Lance and his director tell us it was personal, we can safely assume it was personal.

[geezohwiz]

...
What I wanna know is:
I understand that some pro racers have come forward/got caught, admitted doping, did some time or not, supposedly reformed, and are current pro racers.

I understand that other pro racers have been caught doping and have been removed or suspended from the sport or have removed themselves/retired in shame from the pro ranks.

What I'm unclear on is that Simoni admitted to doping and to following a doping schedule and is still riding as a pro racer.
Is this only because he didn't actually get caught doping? Or has the case against him not gone through the courts?

Why are some admitted former doping cyclists allowed to continue riding in the pro ranks and others are removed? Is there a logic to it?


Simeoni admitted in his testimony to doping in 1997-8 time frame, and served a short suspension (less than 1 year?), after which he was allowed to race again.

[DWF]

This is 100% not true

Uh, I think that is 100% true.

Good reading & reference:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/2002/feb02/feb13news.php
http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2003/interviews/?id=ferrari03
http://www.cyclingnews.com/riders/2003/interviews/?id=ferrari03b

[va rider]

DWF - It's not true in the Bizarro Universe.

[Roy E. Munson]

Wow, I heard about Simeoni testifying, but I had absolutely NO idea that Simoni did as well. That must be buried in those news articles somewhere, because I couldn't see anything about it, or did he call you and tell you about it personally?

[DWF]

Wow, I heard about Simeoni testifying, but I had absolutely NO idea that Simoni did as well. That must be buried in those news articles somewhere, because I couldn't see anything about it, or did he call you and tell you about it personally?
Any sentinent being following the thread knows MA was talking about Simeoni and besides she never said anything about Simoni "testifying" which is probably why you only heard it from the voices in your head.

[Roy E. Munson]

Simeoni's admission came as part of judicial/police questioning against Dr. Ferrari. And it's bad enough to identify the wrong name, but even worse when the person you mistakenly identify is involved very closely in the same sport and "environment". ie: Gilberto Simoni

[M_A_Martin]

Why thank you Roy for clearing that up.

[va rider]

I stand corrected, Roy was right. As it turns out, I am actually the one living in the land of Bizarro, not Roy. (I apologize for the barb, Roy).

[Needs Help]

Why are some admitted former doping cyclists allowed to continue riding in the pro ranks and others are removed? Is there a logic to it?

What cyclist has ever been removed for doping?

[Climb01742]

several in this year's tour for being under investigation for drug use.

[Roy E. Munson]

Sorry about being so much on the attack over that one, but misusing names is a pet peeve of mine. As a side, Simoni did have his tilt with drug controversy - cocaine and a visit to the dentist's office.

[M_A_Martin]

Fortunately REM, I'm not accusing anyone, and my words here on the forum will not be used against either Simoni or Simeoni in a court of law, and geezowhiz corrected the error in his post directly following mine. I apologize for not personally knowing all of the names of every rider in pro cycing today.

I suppose the correct phrasing would be riders "dis-invited" from the tour rather than "removed" from the tour? Did the riders in question actually start in the tour?

I'm just trying to get a handle on what happens and why. If they dope, get caught, serve their time, then ride as a pro again; what's to discourage them from doping again, only using better information to not get caught? Why are some riders back, and others not?
Why isn't the penalty: If you get caught doping, you never ride in any sanctioned race again?

[hybridbellbaske]

I don't want to get into the main issue on this thread- way out of my depth- but I absolutely cannot let Tom's wholly unwarranted attack on Joni Mitchell go unanswered.

Come on Tom, Coyote is a great song- and is not about about a coyote at all-its about a charlatan boyfriend. Joni Mitchell's albums, at least from the mid 70's are brilliant. Hejira contains some of Jaco Pastorius's finest playing.... and of course this is the link back to cycling, as Pastorius is one of Dario Pegoretti's favourite musicians!

[Needs Help]

I suppose the correct phrasing would be riders "dis-invited" from the tour rather than "removed" from the tour?

In your post, you made a distinction between two groups of cheaters: those that were suspended temporarily and returned to cycling and those that were "removed" permanently from competing, and you asked what determined the different penalties. I was not aware that any cyclist had been permanently banned from competing after getting caught doping, so I was wondering who you had in mind.

[Russell]

I have been wondering for years whether Lance's post-cancer personality transformation was as extensive as it had been presented by his media machine...

Isn't that true of most stars/celebs? Michael Jordon's image is very different from reality. He was the biggest trash talker on the court, as well as a gambler and cooz hound. Still I loved watching him play.