30 for 30 Lance part 2. Any changes?

[ntb1001]

Originally Posted by GregL

Lance still comes across as a sociopath. A more contrite, controlled sociopath, but his moral/ethical compass still doesn't point north. The segment with his eldest son was telling. When the interviewer asked Lance what he would say to Luke if he (Luke) wanted to use PEDs, Lance qualified the answer with the condition that his advice may be different for college and pro sports. It was clear that to Lance, lying/cheating are situationally dependent. If you are still making those kind of rationalizations, you haven't learned your lesson.

Greg

My take on this is just a realization of what pro sports have become. Obviously it’s not just about beliefs or what’s right or wrong...PED’s are widespread in all sports.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bikinchris]

Originally Posted by jemdet

I don't know the guy personally, but it wouldn't be a stretch to say that he's self-centered and has a disregard for others. He just got good at riding bikes. If he worked at a Walgreens he probably would've gotten fired. You can be successful without being an asshole.

The charity aspect is true, both in terms of visibility and funding. It also raised his own profile and made him more valuable to sponsors. That doesn't mean that he didn't believe in it.

Anyway, seems like a lot of people feel like the guy did wrong by them. He doesn't particularly care or, worse, has fostered an active dislike of them. Humans first, sport second.

Most of the top sports players of ANY sport are arrogant, self centered pricks. Think Michael Jordan. I'm guessing y'all watched The Last Dance? Think also Tom Brady. DO you think he's a sweet guy? You are correct that SOME top players can be nice guys. Think Drew Brees. But those guys are the exception.

[jlwdm]

Originally Posted by pdmtong

...

If I could wave a wand I'd replace CVdV with Frankie on any cycling broadcast. I suppose since there are no races it doesn't matter anyways.

CVV is a horrible announcer, but Frankie is not any better. I would not listen to either one of them.

Jeff

[eBAUMANN]

I started paying attention to cycling right before Lance came back to ride with Astana. I was never personally invested in him as a story/hero/etc during the height of his career which I think it was keeps me from feeling overly passionate about him in one way or another.

Yes, he is an arrogant uber-competive asshole that stomped on a lot of people on his way to the top...so are many other pro athletes who achieve the fame he did.

But think about this - it all started when he was 15, his mentality/approach to life and other people. Once that snowball started rolling it was just one thing after another, lies in service of previous lies, compounded by the pressure/money/etc that comes with fame/success. Not trying to excuse his behavior but its quite easy to see how and why things unfolded the way they did.

Was he a victim? No. He just played the game of doping better than everyone else and as a result fell further when it all came tumbling down. There are many others who cheated just as much as he did and yet they are not cast in nearly the same light because he was successful AND an asshole.

I think the most important thing to keep in mind when judging the actions of any cyclist of this era is what would you have done in their shoes? You dedicate your entire life to a dream of racing professionally, and when the opportunity finally, FINALLY comes knocking, it has a contract in one hand and a blood bag in the other. Its easy to sit there in your chair and say you would have never done this and that and that cheating is wrong but if everyone is doing the same thing...and the playing field is leveled in that sense, is it still "cheating?" Thats a really tough decision for ANYONE to make...let alone some young kid.

[Alaska Mike]

Originally Posted by jlwdm

CVV is a horrible announcer, but Frankie is not any better. I would not listen to either one of them.

Honestly, I can't see announcing road cycling races for a US audience as being a lucrative gig. It's a niche sport, and the internet has completely eroded the already small broadcast market. Those of us who care look elsewhere for announcers with funny accents. I really don't care if NBC broadcasts the Tour or not. I can watch just about any sport I want to any time of the day in just about any language. Lance didn't make that happen. Al Gore did.

Most of us in the US grew up with Phil and Paul as the sound of televised cycling, with a few other notable voices thrown in there for color. It gave the sport an "authentic" color, even if they were wrong more than they were right. Guys like Bobke and Jens got by on preexisting likability rather than anything they added to the televised content. Racers with less personality, like CVV and Frankie (among many others) just don't have the vocal chops, charisma, or whatever to make a bike race interesting- even if they have good points to make.

That said, I'll take CVV and Frankie any day over John Tesh or the other non-racers NBC has thrown in the booth over the years.

[weisan]

The only guy who knows what the he!! he's talking about is Robbie McEwen.

[Peter P.]

Originally Posted by GregL

You do realize ... by his framed yellow jerseys today.

I believe he was ordered by the TdF organization to return his 7 trophies.

[Alaska Mike]

Originally Posted by eBAUMANN

I think the most important thing to keep in mind when judging the actions of any cyclist of this era is what would you have done in their shoes? You dedicate your entire life to a dream of racing professionally, and when the opportunity finally, FINALLY comes knocking, it has a contract in one hand and a blood bag in the other. Its easy to sit there in your chair and say you would have never done this and that and that cheating is wrong but if everyone is doing the same thing...and the playing field is leveled in that sense, is it still "cheating?" Thats a really tough decision for ANYONE to make...let alone some young kid.

The level playing field argument is thrown out a lot. It's garbage.

Gewiss (to use an example from the documentary) was a dominant team for a time. Their secret weapon? Michele Ferrari, who Lance sought out and eventually obtained an almost exclusive contract with (at least among GC contenders). His doping protocols were far ahead of anyone else at that time. Compare this with Floyd and Tyler's experiences with other doctors (e.g. Fuentes). No cyclist on Postal/Discovery was sanctioned for a positive control while they were on the team, but doping was very much part of their success story. Ferrari ran a very controlled and professional doping operation. Fuente's organization was a clown show in comparison.

There are countless other examples of eyebrow raising performances that were more a question of willingness to dope to the extreme than any sort of natural athletic prowess. Riis? Mapei 1-2-3? Books have been filled with the stories.

Post Festina and the eventual development of an EPO test, blood transfusions took on a huge role in GT performance. There is a large difference in complexity in obtaining, storing, distributing, and administering blood bags vs a vial of EPO. That comes at a large financial and logistical cost, and when you spread it across an entire team, transfusions become that much more complex. Not every team had that sort of will to win at any cost or the resources to pull it off.

Tyler detailed getting a bad blood bag in The Secret Race. Floyd got popped for testosterone, which he claimed he didn't use during the Tour. If he didn't, it likely came from the blood bag he had the night before. Ferrari was extremely careful in his doping regimes to avoid detection, yet managed to achieve better results through planning. Most other doctors were not that diligent, and a lot of riders got popped, sick, or both.

Then there's the simple fact that not everyone responds to doping protocols equally. Not everyone was able to get that 10% EPO performance bump Vaughters throws around and still remain undetected, depending on a variety of factors. The closest we ever came to drugs "leveling the playing field" was when the haematocrit limit was published and riders just doped up to that. Even then, you had Mr 60% putting his finger on the scale.

Not a level playing field at all. Clean or dirty, cycling has never been about fairness.

[Black Dog]

Originally Posted by Alaska Mike

The level playing field argument is thrown out a lot. It's garbage.

Gewiss (to use an example from the documentary) was a dominant team for a time. Their secret weapon? Michele Ferrari, who Lance sought out and eventually obtained an almost exclusive contract with (at least among GC contenders). His doping protocols were far ahead of anyone else at that time. Compare this with Floyd and Tyler's experiences with other doctors (e.g. Fuentes). No cyclist on Postal/Discovery was sanctioned for a positive control while they were on the team, but doping was very much part of their success story. Ferrari ran a very controlled and professional doping operation. Fuente's organization was a clown show in comparison.

There are countless other examples of eyebrow raising performances that were more a question of willingness to dope to the extreme than any sort of natural athletic prowess. Riis? Mapei 1-2-3? Books have been filled with the stories.

Post Festina and the eventual development of an EPO test, blood transfusions took on a huge role in GT performance. There is a large difference in complexity in obtaining, storing, distributing, and administering blood bags vs a vial of EPO. That comes at a large financial and logistical cost, and when you spread it across an entire team, transfusions become that much more complex. Not every team had that sort of will to win at any cost or the resources to pull it off.

Tyler detailed getting a bad blood bag in The Secret Race. Floyd got popped for testosterone, which he claimed he didn't use during the Tour. If he didn't, it likely came from the blood bag he had the night before. Ferrari was extremely careful in his doping regimes to avoid detection, yet managed to achieve better results through planning. Most other doctors were not that diligent, and a lot of riders got popped, sick, or both.

Then there's the simple fact that not everyone responds to doping protocols equally. Not everyone was able to get that 10% EPO performance bump Vaughters throws around and still remain undetected, depending on a variety of factors. The closest we ever came to drugs "leveling the playing field" was when the haematocrit limit was published and riders just doped up to that. Even then, you had Mr 60% putting his finger on the scale.

Not a level playing field at all. Clean or dirty, cycling has never been about fairness.

Very well said.

[goonster]

We have learned that he can't shave a block of cheese, with a ****ing safety peeler, without causing a minor medical incident.

And there are candid reactions from those closest to him that made me cringe. Involuntarily, physically cringe, and have to pause the stream until I could pull the hand off my face.

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by bikinchris

Most of the top sports players of ANY sport are arrogant, self centered pricks.

Sad but true. My brother is a sportscaster and behind closed doors will tell us stories about the narcissism (to put it lightly) displayed by a lot of the players in all pro sports.

But to keep things positive, he gushes on and on about how awesome Paul Pierce (Celtics) and Big Papi (Sox) were, even when they were in the midst of cold streaks and the pressure was on. And I'm not a fan of any Boston sports team

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by Alaska Mike

Not a level playing field at all. Clean or dirty, cycling has never been about fairness.

If one internalizes the doping as part of the game, it becomes level. I don't have strong feelings either way, but a lot of the lines drawn strike me as arbitrary. Even an outwardly vocal "clean" rider like Phil Gaimon describes getting using prescription sleep aids to help him recover during stage races. If you're Lance and you view EPO or blood transfusions as all part of the game, just like popping a sleeping pill, it doesn't make sense why year after year people keep expecting him to pretend it was all a mistake he regrets.

[goonster]

Originally Posted by prototoast

If you're Lance and you view EPO or blood transfusions as all part of the game, just like popping a sleeping pill

He doesn't, though. He used to be a vocal anti-doper. The pre and post-Ferrari line is crystal clear in his own narrative. He differentiates between cortisone and EPO. He was always aware of the level at which he was deceiving the public. He was just better at going all-in on the lies and living with the contradictions.

[bronk]

The best part about Part 2 was to see that his son gets it. So, it confirms egotistical jackass isn't hereditary.

[Waldo62]

Yeah, that show of "love" for Jan was hilarious and oh so genuine.

Originally Posted by BobbyJones

Sticking to just the things I learned in part 2 that I didn't know / suspect before:

1) Has no respect for any of his competition (besides that, um, "emotion" for Jan)

2) Hates Floyd

3) Hasn't changed much, he's gonna be who he is.