Lance Amstrong

[John K]

On a side note, in looking at those two photos of Bonds, it's difficult to believe that they are the same person. In looking at the photo of "new and improved Barry", its's hard to fathom that earlier in his career, he once stole more than 50 bases in a season. It's equally hard to fathom that the guy on the left one day would hit 73 home runs in a season. I mean 30-35 maybe, but not 73.

[ilovethecats]

I imagine that he has no interest in being held up in a court and having to pay huge amounts of money in legal fees.

Even if he is not at fault and wins, I think the earnings from said lawsuit would barely cover the cost of lost/wasted time and effort.

ha. armstrong personally as well as his foundation seems to be in a lawsuit every year. he has already sued a former trainer for a breach of contract. his foundation also sued some guy that was making collars because it looked to much like his live strong bracelets. and we're to believe that he willing to just sit back and let person after person blatantly lie about him because he doesn't want to hassle with a lawsuit? again, i guess it's feasible....but based on the evidence it doesn't appear he's afraid of time-consuming lawsuits.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 46823.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.upi.com/Sports_News/2007/09/ ... 189796837/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BelgradeBobcat]

I think Armstrong was the best in a dirty era. I think pretty much everybody was doing it on one level or another.

I think the sport is much cleaner now and you can tell in the way the riders perform. You just don't see the awesome sustained attacks on the climbs that were so fun and amazing to watch in the Armstrong era. Unfortunately the sport is just not as fun to watch-just like baseball without the home runs I suppose.

But for Bozeman cycling fans we're at the beginning of an exciting era. TeeJay VanGarderen, who grew up learning how to ride a bike on our local roads is starting to make a big impression in the pro peloton. He just won the best young rider category in the Tour of California. I think we're going to see great things from him...and I think he's 100% clean!

[TIrwin24]

If these guys are lying, then why hasn't Armstrong sued them for libel and slander? That way he could get them in court, under oath, and clear his name once and for all. It would be a slam dunk case. He could even take all of his proceeds from the verdict and donate them to some charity to look like an even bigger hero.

Why wouldn't he sue? They are destroying his brand and costing him millions of dollars in endorsements and potential career opportunities. It would be insane for him NOT to sue, wouldn't it?

I imagine that he has no interest in being held up in a court and having to pay huge amounts of money in legal fees.

Even if he is not at fault and wins, I think the earnings from said lawsuit would barely cover the cost of lost/wasted time and effort.

So you think it is more rational for him to instead have his entire future earning potential destroyed by the lies of others without taking any legal steps at all to stop it?

If it was financially feasible for Mike Kramer to advance a lawsuit of that kind, it would seem to be roughly 100 times more feasible for someone of a national stature like Armstrong to file that kind of lawsuit.

Not only would it have a huge financial impact for Armstrong (between the judgment and all of the career/endorsement opportunities that would open back up with full redemption in a court of law), it would also provide justice and clear his name for his legacy.

I doubt that Armstrong is either as apathetic or as financially illiterate as your theory would paint him as being.

And that sir, is the problem with Americans today. "Ohh, Brad told a lie and it hurt my feelings. I'm gonna sue his ass off!" Give me a break.

The fact of the matter is that he's built a hugely successful foundation in Livestrong, and people see that. I applaud him for maintaining his cool while these dipsh!ts waltz around, making themselves look like cheating idiots.

[MashTun]

I think Armstrong was the best in a dirty era. I think pretty much everybody was doing it on one level or another.

I think the sport is much cleaner now and you can tell in the way the riders perform. You just see the awesome sustained attacks on the climbs that were so fun and amazing to watch in the Armstrong era. Unfortunately the sport is just not as fun to watch-just like baseball without the home runs I suppose.

But for Bozeman cycling fans were at the beginning of an exciting era. TeeJay VanGarderen, who grew up learning how to ride a bike on our local roads is starting to make a big impression in the pro peloton. He just won the best young rider category in the Tour of California. I think we're going to see great things from him...and I think he's 100% clean!

I've been keeping an eye out for Teejay as well. A customer of mine rode quite a bit with Teejay when he was younger. My customer loves riding, and still rides competitively in his age class. He told me Teejay would ride with the older guys when he was younger. As a 15 year old, the older guys would burn him off the back of the group, but at 16 it was Teejay that was setting the pace. Futures bright.

I understand he is a strong candidate to make the team for the Tour......Best of luck Teejay!

[SonomaCat]

And that sir, is the problem with Americans today. "Ohh, Brad told a lie and it hurt my feelings. I'm gonna sue his ass off!" Give me a break.

Well ... considering that he actually HAS sued people for far less in the past, it doesn't appear that he's philosophically opposed to such a thing. Although it's a nice touch to frame it in the cliche "problem with ... today" format. Yeah, people suing other people who tell lies that will ruin a person's career, reputation, and future earnings are what is wrong with this country today ... riiiiiggght.

The fact of the matter is that he's built a hugely successful foundation in Livestrong, and people see that. I applaud him for maintaining his cool while these dipsh!ts waltz around, making themselves look like cheating idiots.

The fact of the matter is that if these lies aren't rebutted, anyone wearing a livestrong bracelet is going to be about as fashionable as sporting a Roger Clemens jersey, and his foundation will be destroyed. THAT is why it makes no sense at all for him not to sue for libel and slander. Except, of course, for the fact that he probably is guilty of doping, and that he will never sue because then he would be setting himself up for a perjury conviction.

I was an Armstrong fan just like everyone else ... but it takes a large dose of faith and hope in light of the recent and past allegations to put forth an argument that he was clean.

[MashTun]

What I find amazing in this whole discussion is the lack of comment on how Lance somehow avoided detection throughout his career despite being arguably the most tested cyclist on the planet. I find it INCREDIBLE that he didn't get caught in all this time. He has never even been accused of anything past the the time of Tyler Hamilton's accusations. Are we to believe he "doped for awhile" then quit? Seems like if he was doping then quit, his performance would have suffered. He is a physical freak built for cycling as I have seen in more than one article.

Are we to believe that Lance's doctors, trainers, and support are so much better, so as to provide better doping advice that all of his competition?

I also strikes me as interesting as to why the motivations of his accusers have barely been discussed. Those having books to sell and convicted dopers are hardly the best people on which to hang your faith. Why haven't the come forth before, if their accusations are to be so relied on?

The best comment I have seen is in regard to why is he not suing his accusers. Yes, it could be guilt. It also could be he doesn't wish to give credence to the accusers. I really don't know ,and neither does anyone else without direct involvement. It's now so far past the dates of the supposed infraction that are we really going to be able to get to the truth NOW? I have my doubts on that.

What is to be gained by pursuing this now? It's over and yes cycling has suffered through a dirty era, not unlike other professional sports. The culture of the sport seems to have changed at lot to my observations. Lance helps a lot of people through his foundation. The accusations really only benefit the accusers whether it's selling a book or furthering a career.

[SonomaCat]

The best comment I have seen is in regard to why is he not suing his accusers. Yes, it could be guilt. It also could be he doesn't wish to give credence to the accusers. I really don't know ,and neither does anyone else without direct involvement. It's now so far past the dates of the supposed infraction that are we really going to be able to get to the truth NOW? I have my doubts on that.

It's possible that he doesn't want to give credence to his accusers. But if that's truly his thinking, it is a HUGE miscalculation, IMO, because most everybody else is already giving credence to his accusers, and it's already impacting his legacy and reputation ... and destroying his endorsement value and the ability of him to leverage his cycling career into future ventures. He was talking about running for major offices and things of that nature. If these charges aren't refuted, all of that is over.

There is apparently a chance that federal legal action might be coming against Armstrong, so it's possible that these future financial considerations are taking a backseat to him trying to avoid a criminal conviction. He just hired a couple attorneys who have had success defending baseball players accused of steroid use.

It sounds like he actually did test positive in the past, but wasn't made public ... very similar to the situation with Bonds, etc.

[ilovethecats]

and again....bonds never tested positive either. are you guys of the belief that he didn't use ped's either? mcguire never tested positive for anything either....

all i'm saying is it would be remarkable if the guy who ruled the sport was the only guy NOT using ped's after nearly everyone else tested positive. and for a guy who has sued regularly over the years.....to not sue these guys for slander now is just crazy if he is in fact innocent. the livestrong foundation is amazing, and benefits millions of people. but it is going to take a serious hit and if he really wants to do the "right" thing he needs to sue and clear his name.....or admit to doing what it looks like he clearly did.....

oj was found innocent too? thoughts on that?

[MashTun]

and again....bonds never tested positive either. are you guys of the belief that he didn't use ped's either? mcguire never tested positive for anything either....

all i'm saying is it would be remarkable if the guy who ruled the sport was the only guy NOT using ped's after nearly everyone else tested positive. and for a guy who has sued regularly over the years.....to not sue these guys for slander now is just crazy if he is in fact innocent. the livestrong foundation is amazing, and benefits millions of people. but it is going to take a serious hit and if he really wants to do the "right" thing he needs to sue and clear his name.....or admit to doing what it looks like he clearly did.....

oj was found innocent too? thoughts on that?

Are you comparing the level of testing in MLB and Pro Cycling? That's probably a whole other discussion in itself. Though I feel safe to say that pro cycling has had in the past, and will continue in the future to have significantly stronger testing.

I guess a person believes what they believe. Explain to me how he magically avoided detection while being tested randomly and consistently while in competition? Why is it more believable that he's guilty based on doper allegations than lack of positive testing results?

[MashTun]

The best comment I have seen is in regard to why is he not suing his accusers. Yes, it could be guilt. It also could be he doesn't wish to give credence to the accusers. I really don't know ,and neither does anyone else without direct involvement. It's now so far past the dates of the supposed infraction that are we really going to be able to get to the truth NOW? I have my doubts on that.

It's possible that he doesn't want to give credence to his accusers. But if that's truly his thinking, it is a HUGE miscalculation, IMO, because most everybody else is already giving credence to his accusers, and it's already impacting his legacy and reputation ... and destroying his endorsement value and the ability of him to leverage his cycling career into future ventures. He was talking about running for major offices and things of that nature. If these charges aren't refuted, all of that is over.

There is apparently a chance that federal legal action might be coming against Armstrong, so it's possible that these future financial considerations are taking a backseat to him trying to avoid a criminal conviction. He just hired a couple attorneys who have had success defending baseball players accused of steroid use.

It sounds like he actually did test positive in the past, but wasn't made public ... very similar to the situation with Bonds, etc.

What are you referring to. The Tour of Switzerland issue? The Tyler Hamilton allegations? Something new?

Those are the only charges I am aware of. Even Tyler's allegations date back to 2001. I haven't heard of any issues after that point. I'd find the testimony of George Hincapie interesting given that he rode with Lance in all of his tour wins. I'd find him far more credible Tyler.

[ilovethecats]

Are you comparing the level of testing in MLB and Pro Cycling? That's probably a whole other discussion in itself. Though I feel safe to say that pro cycling has had in the past, and will continue in the future to have significantly stronger testing.

I guess a person believes what they believe. Explain to me how he magically avoided detection while being tested randomly and consistently while in competition? Why is it more believable that he's guilty based on doper allegations than lack of positive testing results?

well as a guy who has never been in the mlb or a professional cyclist, i don't have any first-hand knowledge of the testing process. so i couldn't argue that one way or another. i do know that both of them practice random drug testing though. and i can think of many former and current big leaders that never tested positive, and have since admitted to using ped's. and i don't think they did it magically either. i think that people with a lot of money and a desire to get any edge they can, can mask agents they are putting in their bodies.

i simply said that guys like bonds and mcguire never tested positive either.....but it is widely thought that they both used ped's and in mcguire's case he admitted as much.

you are correct though, people are going to believe whatever they want. i actually like armstrong so i'd love it if he was truly clean all those years. i just can't bring myself to believe that fully....just like i can't convince myself that bonds wasn't juicing all those years.....

[MashTun]

Are you comparing the level of testing in MLB and Pro Cycling? That's probably a whole other discussion in itself. Though I feel safe to say that pro cycling has had in the past, and will continue in the future to have significantly stronger testing.

I guess a person believes what they believe. Explain to me how he magically avoided detection while being tested randomly and consistently while in competition? Why is it more believable that he's guilty based on doper allegations than lack of positive testing results?

well as a guy who has never been in the mlb or a professional cyclist, i don't have any first-hand knowledge of the testing process. so i couldn't argue that one way or another. i do know that both of them practice random drug testing though. and i can think of many former and current big leaders that never tested positive, and have since admitted to using ped's. and i don't think they did it magically either. i think that people with a lot of money and a desire to get any edge they can, can mask agents they are putting in their bodies.

i simply said that guys like bonds and mcguire never tested positive either.....but it is widely thought that they both used ped's and in mcguire's case he admitted as much.

you are correct though, people are going to believe whatever they want. i actually like armstrong so i'd love it if he was truly clean all those years. i just can't bring myself to believe that fully....just like i can't convince myself that bonds wasn't juicing all those years.....

Not that I have first hand knowledge, but pro-cyclists are systematically tested in addition to random. Armstrong wore yellow for a ton of days during his tours with the exception of one of his wins(4th I think, where he clinched it fairly late). The yellow jersey rider is tested every day. Hell, the year I attended the Tour(2004), there was one rider chosen for supposedly random testing from 180 riders at the prologue. Funny how it was Lance.

I'd be pretty bummed if he turns out to be a liar. I don't see what good comes from court cases and accusations at this point. Only those selling a book(money and publicity) or those in government possibly bring charges(career moves) are getting positive outcomes.

[GrizinWashington]

I just assumed for years that Armstrong was cheating. Why? Because EVERYone in cycling cheated during that era, and Lance was no different (other than he was very good at avoiding detection). I lived (and traveled extensively) in Europe (where cycling is a HUGE sport) during Lance's reign. It was simply a given there that Armstrong was artificially enhanced, but not necessarily in a negative light because Europeans realized that so was everyone else in the sport. I think most Americans don't want to believe it because he's an American.


(edit: none of this should take anything away from Lance and what he accomplished. I just will never believe he accomplished any of it "cleanly").

[TIrwin24]

So going off of your logic, we should also assume that other athletes that were leagues in front of their competition were also cheating?

Athletes like:
Michael Jordan
Babe Ruth
Usain Bolt
Michael Johnson
Michael Phelps
Hicham El Guerrouj (World Record holder in the Mile)

Lance Armstrong is no different than these guys, and to simply assume that because he was winning year after year, that he must have been cheating is pretty narrow-sighted.

[John K]

So going off of your logic, we should also assume that other athletes that were leagues in front of their competition were also cheating?

Athletes like:
Michael Jordan
Babe Ruth
Usain Bolt
Michael Johnson
Michael Phelps
Hicham El Guerrouj (World Record holder in the Mile)

Lance Armstrong is no different than these guys, and to simply assume that because he was winning year after year, that he must have been cheating is pretty narrow-sighted.

The difference between Armstrong and the above list, is that as GIW pointed out, virtually everyone cheated in cycling. That was not the case for the athletes that you listed, and their respective sports. A better analogy for Armstrong and cycling, would be major league baseball and Barry Bonds. Bonds was the best in his sport for 4-5 years, and although he never tested positive for PED, he was obviously cheating, along with most of the other big home run hitters of that era.

[SonomaCat]

Armstrong's legal team is turning up the heat, but haven't threatened to sue anybody quite yet:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... .DTL&tsp=1

[SonomaCat]

So going off of your logic, we should also assume that other athletes that were leagues in front of their competition were also cheating?

Athletes like:
Michael Jordan
Babe Ruth
Usain Bolt
Michael Johnson
Michael Phelps
Hicham El Guerrouj (World Record holder in the Mile)

Lance Armstrong is no different than these guys, and to simply assume that because he was winning year after year, that he must have been cheating is pretty narrow-sighted.

You appear to have missed the entire point of the logic he was applying.

[TIrwin24]

My mistake. I mis-worded my initial sentence in that argument. It was meant to apply to the prior arguments that went along with the mindset of: since he is a superior athlete, he must be doping.

[MashTun]

So going off of your logic, we should also assume that other athletes that were leagues in front of their competition were also cheating?

Athletes like:
Michael Jordan
Babe Ruth
Usain Bolt
Michael Johnson
Michael Phelps
Hicham El Guerrouj (World Record holder in the Mile)

Lance Armstrong is no different than these guys, and to simply assume that because he was winning year after year, that he must have been cheating is pretty narrow-sighted.

The difference between Armstrong and the above list, is that as GIW pointed out, virtually everyone cheated in cycling. That was not the case for the athletes that you listed, and their respective sports. A better analogy for Armstrong and cycling, would be major league baseball and Barry Bonds. Bonds was the best in his sport for 4-5 years, and although he never tested positive for PED, he was obviously cheating, along with most of the other big home run hitters of that era.

A fair comparison of PED testing in cycling and baseball would be something like the following.

Was Bonds tested every time he jacked one out of the park? I bet he would have been caught if they did. Armstrong was tested every day he led the tour, which was a lot. This is an addition to random testing in and out of competition. Pretty amazing run of luck to not get caught.

How often were players in MLB tested for PED's in the era you're talking about? I only remember random testing.