Phil Liggett says Lance Armstrong did not need to cheat to win

[Dead Man]

if he and everyone had been clean, quite possible he would have won without drugs. but everyone was dirty, so was he.

god this topic is absolutely beat to ****

[torelli]

Well we will never know considering he doped his entire career, quite literally. Please don't give me the mentality that everyone was doping as well. The only thing Armstrong excelled at was having a state of the art doping program.

I'm sorry but Phil Liggert should have been put out to pasture a long time ago. I thought when Paul Sherwen died he might retire. He routinely makes flubs and mixes up riders names.

[FlashUNC]

Phil Liggett is proof a village somewhere is missing its idiot.

[choke]

Originally Posted by pdmtong

Sometimes I think it's too easy to forget just how exciting those years were, drugs aside.

I've seen this expressed several times by several people and I just don't get it. I started following cycling when Greg LeMond was racing and I thought that the LA years were terrible. The outcome was preordained (barring an accident) and my jingoism was diminished by that point in my life so I didn't root for him just because he was from the US. I had been a fan of his earlier years and I still vividly remember watching his win at the Tour the year that Fabio Casartelli died.

Somewhere during those years of dominance I stopped watching the TdF and I haven't returned.

[Dead Man]

everyone was doping, everyone has admitted to doping, the personal lives of the players are irrelevant (poor world champion, 3-time tdf winner, and multi-millionaire lemond) because theyre literally just entertainers playing a game for our amusment... the -7 hatred is weird and irrational. he is just king douche among his contemporary douches, on an off the set level, like any star. on set, he was a hell of an entertainer

but then again, i guess your hatred... the vilification of character, is just a continuation of entertainment. yall love to hate him, and he probably actually loves your hate

[Elefantino]

Lance who?

[reuben]

Originally Posted by elefantino

lance who?

-7

[lzuk]

His team would still have to dope

[oldpotatoe]

I'm sure Bruyneel thinks LA is a great cyclist too...

[Tony T]

Originally Posted by pdmtong

Sometimes I think it's too easy to forget just how exciting those years were, drugs aside. Lance vs. Jan. the Alpe d H TT. Dodging Beloki and CX down that hill side. and it was all on TV nonstop for the first time. What Phil could do is also acknowledge how -7 eff'd everyone - this friends, his team, his sponsors, the sport and us the fans. So saying he could have won without drugs just doesn't go far enough ...

I like Bobbke and Chris. Enough Jens. Say no to CVV.

Originally Posted by choke

I've seen this expressed several times by several people and I just don't get it. I started following cycling when Greg LeMond was racing and I thought that the LA years were terrible. The outcome was preordained (barring an accident) and my jingoism was diminished by that point in my life so I didn't root for him just because he was from the US. I had been a fan of his earlier years and I still vividly remember watching his win at the Tour the year that Fabio Casartelli died.

Somewhere during those years of dominance I stopped watching the TdF and I haven't returned.

There was not full coverage of the TDF when Lemond raced (hell, there wasn't even highlights in the U.S. sports coverage). Only one year with GL was truly exciting (when he beat Fignon with the aero bars — and if Fignon had used them, he would have beat GL) The LA years brought the TDF to the U.S. general public, and those years were exciting racing.

[Matthew]

Two week ban for anyone that starts or comments on a Lance Armstrong / Greg LeMond thread. Me too now I guess.

[wc1934]

But he did, so end of story for me!

[benb]

Originally Posted by Dead Man

if he and everyone had been clean, quite possible he would have won without drugs. but everyone was dirty, so was he.

god this topic is absolutely beat to ****

This totally... I have always thought this.

His main competitors were mentally weak and disorganized and couldn't rally a team around them. He was not, he was a leader. The drugs don't make you disciplined or keep you from eating donuts or going out and doing coke and ecstasy in the offseason.

Yep, he used his leadership skills to cheat better than everyone else.. but if the mechanism of cheating wasn't there he still would have found a way to stay ahead IMO.

[fiamme red]

Originally Posted by benb

This totally... I have always thought this.

His main competitors were mentally weak and disorganized and couldn't rally a team around them. He was not, he was a leader. The drugs don't make you disciplined or keep you from eating donuts or going out and doing coke and ecstasy in the offseason.

Yep, he used his leadership skills to cheat better than everyone else.. but if the mechanism of cheating wasn't there he still would have found a way to stay ahead IMO.

I agree with you that he was far above his rivals in mental toughness. But I'm curious, weren't the USPS/Discovery budgets much larger compared to the other teams? Lance always seemed to have a stronger surrounding cast (some of whom were GC contenders themselves) than his rivals in the Tour. And he could afford a more sophisticated doping program.

[fiamme red]

Originally Posted by Matthew

Two week ban for anyone that starts or comments on a Lance Armstrong / Greg LeMond thread. Me too now I guess.

Why? No one is forced to read these threads.