Lance Armstrong is a piece of garbage

[Dr. Benway]

Dope all you want, winner take all. Why is everyone so against it if it enhances performance?

Because the agencies which try to regulate drug use in sports are trying to protect idiots like Armstrong against their egos and greed.

No holds barred? Drug all you like? Great, bring on the exploding hearts the vicious race to the line for the sponsor's money.

[HueyNRolf]

I'd prefer a no limits contest. Dope all you want, winner take all. Why is everyone so against it if it enhances performance? Let the athletes dope, use steroids, whatever they want to do. It's just a sports contest. Who cares?

Who cares? Maybe the athletes who don't want to use drugs would care?

[HueyNRolf]

I think everything is natural.

Is a sea shell "natural"? It's created by an animal. Why aren't the things another animal, man, creates just as "natural".

A clam creates a shell, we create plastic. What could be more natural?

Yup and arsenic is natural too.

[cgbier]

German public TV just reported that Armstrong lost all seven TdF titles, with a life-long ban.

Funny thing is that most of now victors also have/had issues with doping...

[1]

Funny thing is that most of now victors also have/had issues with doping...

They take 'em away down the line from all who did drugs, and the final GOLD medal winner is 67 year old Mrs. Hutchinson who finished the TdF in a motorized scooter....

[cgbier]

RaboBank has left the cycling sport last week. They think the sport isn't fair anymore. A bit late....

They spent quite a lot on this business. No wonder I barely got any interest on my bank account back then.

[ctbehrens]

This isn't simply a case of an athlete being caught for using banned substances.

Armstrong and his allied corporations, teams, sponsors engaged in fraud, bribery, blackmail, intimidation, money laundering to keep his myth afloat and the money rolling in.

If you were to learn a bit more about this, you would see the depths of this case and the implications for such criminal activity.

Excuses like "They all were doping, it was a level playing field", "He would be rewarded in the corporate world for this behavior", "He did what it took to beat cancer, and did the same in racing"... Are all fine and dandy things to repeat to your friends to defend Lance, but they are ignorant, shallow and trite - all belying the complexity and depth this case presents.

Use your filmmaking abilities - assemble the facts - see the whole picture.

Many people allow their judgement to be clouded by Lance "beating" cancer (a phrase that we could discuss at length in another thread), and his Livestrong Foundation - they don't want to see the truth for fear that it will somehow diminish their support for those struggling with that horrible disease.

I too have dealt with loved ones and cancer - losing my oldest and youngest brothers to brain cancer. It sucks. We want to do anything we can in such a helpless situation - support someone who stands for us against cancer.

For me, I don't see Lance as that person, I see the opposite - someone who has taken advantage of those in my position - helping him to create a secure cocoon from scrutiny for so many years - well that cocoon has broken wide open - his failed tests swept under the rug with bribes, donations to regulating bodies, financial intimidation of past teammates and employees, etc., etc., are all coming to light.

Simplicity is nice, but it ain't reality.

Chris

[cgbier]

Chris, you are right. The structure behind that whole thing puts the mafia to shame.

[MalfunctioningHuman]

IMHO, Janke, that's the problem: he never was. I don't follow the sport and I'll admit I haven't paid much attention to this story, but AFAIK the "evidence" against him consists not of any failed blood or urine tests but rather statements from teammates, competitors, team doctors, etc. At least some of whom were facing their own troubles with the Anti-Doping Agency, and received leniency in exchange for their testimony.

A Federal grand jury spent nearly two years investigating allegations of doping and fraud against Armstrong and finally decided not to charge him. Only then did the USADA accuse him (and others). Armstrong sued for due process, in essence asking for a legal trial instead of answering the charges under USADA's "arbitration" process. He lost that suit, and declined the offer of arbitration, so now he's "guilty."

By all accounts, the guy has never had any trouble making enemies, with former teammates accusing him in television interviews, suing him in civil court, even wearing a wire to gather evidence against him. But I don't think he deserves to be labelled a cheater just because he's a jerk.

Very well said.

I'm not saying he's clean, but what's the point of having exhaustive tests if you are going to disregard negative results and convict somebody based on other (biased) people's testimony?

It's quite likely Lance Armstrong is not completely clean, but the fact that after stripping him of his Tour de France titles it was decided to not award them to the 2nd rider in each race because of the fact that most of them were also under suspicion of doping speaks volumes.

Cycling is a pretty brutal sport (physically probably the most demanding sport in existence), and the whole system of teams, sponsors, doctors, etc, has evolved into what it is today. If Armstrong ever doped, I wouldn't be the one casting the first stone. The guy has done a lot of great things through his foundation, etc. Probably not a saint, but I'll take his good deeds. To demonize and ostrasize him like this is just not right, and it has probably hurt a lot of people.