Lance Armstrong is a dope

[Joe Public]

In 1990, the last year I feel confident was clean, the avg speed of the TDF was 38.2 km/per hour. During the LA years the avg was anywhere between 38.9 and 41.6 km and last year, which many felt was a clean race, the avg was 39.8 km.

Wow. That's fast. I get up to those speeds on downhill sections sometimes.

[fusnik]

lol @ Shaka.

He's had a rough couple months of backing the wrong horse.

It's also hilarious that creek, in 2012 after over 7 years of testimony and eye witness accounts, wasn't completely convinced that Armstrong was a doper.

lol @ creek.

[Jacob]

I don't feel sorry for those who didn't dope, they wouldn't have won anyway. I'm convinced that those who reach the top will do anything to get there, be it legal or illegal, and those that won would have still been the winners if everybody was clean, they just did it a little bit faster.

SU is right. That statement is absurd and if you had any dignity you would admit it, or at least say you mis spoke and correct your statement.

[creekster]

SU is right. That statement is absurd and if you had any dignity you would admit it, or at least say you mis spoke and correct your statement.

You are quite the acolyte. Both your opinion and rhetoric match SU.

[creekster]

lol @ Shaka.

He's had a rough couple months of backing the wrong horse.

It's also hilarious that creek, in 2012 after over 7 years of testimony and eye witness accounts, wasn't completely convinced that Armstrong was a doper.

lol @ creek.

I find it a little hard to understand the excitement you and triplet find in having "called it." Calling it without evidence is an expression of opinion. It's like the stopped clock being right twice a day. But, if it excites you, then, yes, you did say so, way back when. As did triplet. And you were both correct, so you two have that going for you. And I am glad I could provide you a good laugh today. We all need that now and then.

btw, please link me to any post of mine from 2012 where I said LA was not doping.

[creekster]

I watched highlights on ESPN of LA's interview with Oprah, and it is pretty interesting. In general, it appears he is taking the "everyone did it and so i was just putting things on a level playing field" position. As i suggested long ago in this thread, that just isn't true given that the regimes and sophistication of those regimes vary widely. And, as Pelagius added, people react very differently to such regimes.

Moreover, he has no answer to the obvious problem of the people he harassed and hounded. Fillipo SImeoni, Emma O'Reilly, Frankie Andreu and others. that is the stuff that is really despicable.

One thing I am very interested in is finding out how the 2009 and 2010 test results can be explained. LA claims he was clean in those two 'comeback' years, but those are the years where his results were 'consistent with' blood doping according to USADA.

I recall when I read his first book how I found him to be such a distasteful character as a person. There has never been much to like about him outside of a bike race. Watching his confession to Oprah where he uses the right words but where his body language suggests no remorse or regret makes me think that he is a near sociopath. Its too bad. It was a great story.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I find it a little hard to understand the excitement you and triplet find in having "called it." Calling it without evidence is an expression of opinion. It's like the stopped clock being right twice a day. But, if it excites you, then, yes, you did say so, way back when. As did triplet. And you were both correct, so you two have that going for you. And I am glad I could provide you a good laugh today. We all need that now and then.

btw, please link me to any post of mine from 2012 where I said LA was not doping.

Did you really just compare believing Lance was doping to a clock being right twice a day?

[creekster]

Did you really just compare believing Lance was doping to a clock being right twice a day?

Yes. In that context and with that level of understanding and at that time and as the basis for some sort of vindication. Yes. I really did.

[Moliere]

I'm just a weekend cyclist and don't watch much of the TdF, but I watched the highlights of the interview and I found LA disgusting afterwards. He is near sociopathic. I don't wish ill will on him, but I'm glad he was stripped of his titles and barred from the sport....and I hope he does repay all the prize money he got from cycling while he was doping.

The guy would have been legend if he had only won one TdF (cleanly) after beating cancer.

[Uncle Ted]

Just go away, Lance.

I think after y'all (as in you lawyers) get done with him he may just do that...

An amazing detail from the ongoing Lance Armstrong story...

According to Selena Roberts at her new sports site Roopstigo, Lance Armstrong is trying to settle with one of his former sponsors before they launch what would otherwise likely be a full-on legal attack on his assets.
Until recently, Armstrong and his attorneys have remained steadfast about his doping denials and refusal to revisit old cases. But the overwhelming evidence released by the US Anti-Doping Agency will likely embolden former sponsors to try to recoup the money they paid Armstrong for winning Tours.

At least one of Armstrong's former teammates, Floyd Landis, has also sued him.

Armstrong is worth an estimated $125 million, so there's plenty of cash to go after.
[...]

http://www.businessinsider.com/lance...ponsor-2012-11

I also heard that Lance has taken out a credit line on his $3M Austin home. I am guessing he figures he needs to either lawyer up or head to the border.

[Surfah]

I think after y'all (as in you lawyers) get done with him he may just do that...



http://www.businessinsider.com/lance...ponsor-2012-11

I also heard that Lance has taken out a credit line on his $3M Austin home. I am guessing he figures he needs to either lawyer up or head to the border.

I were a judge I'd grant them the difference of the money they paid Lance and the money they made off of him, if there is any.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Yes. In that context and with that level of understanding and at that time and as the basis for some sort of vindication. Yes. I really did.

Wow. That's nuts.

[creekster]

Wow. That's nuts.

Feel free to explain why. I can take it. But if all you do is say that I'm nuts without explanation you may or may not be correct. Of course, if it turns out at some point in the future to be right you can always come back and point out how you called it early on. I am sure this will give you great satisfaction.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Feel free to explain why. I can take it. But if all you do is say that I'm nuts without explanation you may or may not be correct. Of course, if it turns out at some point in the future to be right you can always come back and point out how you called it early on. I am sure this will give you great satisfaction.

Come on. There has been smoke around that fire for years. Massive amounts of smoke.

[fusnik]

Within my experience most committed cycling fans have long since decided how to deal with this. I have long concluded it was possible and even likely that he doped. Reached this conclusion without even the smallest bit of help from Triplet. The more recent evidence makes it look pretty certain. There are some who still question, but by far most think he did it.

7 months ago you wrote this.

btw, please link me to any post of mine from 2012 where I said LA was not doping.

Your welcome.

I said you weren't completely convinced, you said it was possible, leaving open the idea that he may have been clean. That's what is funny to me.