A Very Bad Morning For LanceRe: A Very Bad Morning For LanceNewsflash: Performance enhancing drugs have been a part of competitive cycling for the last 125 years.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
I bet cocaine worked dandy in the 1880s/90s!
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
This is selective. Over Cooke's career many female sports have increased in money due to more acceptance, awareness and more fans enjoying it more seriously as well as people reaslising there is a slowly growing market for female sports. When Cooke was reaching the top as a teenager there wasn't even girl's road racing tournaments in the Uk until she asked for one. Obviously that brings more attention and more money. Or does Lance take credit for better female attention and earnings all sports like Basketball, Netball, Athletics, football etc?
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
What sports are you talking about? I can't think of a single female sport that wasn't big time seventeen years ago, but is now.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
Actually, bambam could give you a better answer to this question than I can. I was too young to remember when Merkcx was riding. What about La Vie Claire team that Lemond and Hunault rode on in the mid-80's?
I agree with you about Vaughters. If you look at the circumstances, the timing, the candor and the thoroughness of his confession, he seems to be motivated more out of altruism than any of the other players in this saga. His New York Times op-ed, his Bicycling magazine interview and his posts on the cyclingnews.com message board under username JV1973 are must-read for anyone who wants to get a deeper, nuanced understanding of cycling's doping problem. Last edited by jazzcyclist on Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceJazz, I have more confidence in my impressions given your comments. I have not been on the Cyclingnews.com message board, so I have missed those comments.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
He starts posting on page five of this thread as JV1973. http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=18436
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceCoach Steve Magness comments on his interactions with Armstrong:
http://running.competitor.com/2013/01/n ... rong_64596
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
He's exactly who I thought he was as well....which isn't necessarily a good thing.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceBy stripping Armstrong of his 2000 Bronze medal, the IOC has undermined their statute-of-limitations rationale for why they can't strip the East Germans of their medals.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... 94459.html I hate it when people selectively enforce rules/laws, but I really hate it when people make up rules/laws to punish people after the fact.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
Yes.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceAnother very bad morning for Lance. The indignities never cease. Now it seems they're not going to invite him to the festivities in July celebrating the 100th Tour de France.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/to ... story.html I'm shocked, shocked!
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
They should not invite anyone whose ridden in the peleton for the last 20 years if they're going to be consistent.
What I find interesting is that Bjarne Riis didn't garner this same Inspector Renault reaction from the UCI and the Society of the Tour de France when he admitted to doping when he won the Tour. As a matter of fact, the only punishment he recieved is to have an asterik put by his Tour victory, and today he is the manager of one of the biggest teams in cycling. Why does Armstrong's Tour wins get expunged but Riis' only gets an asterik?
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
What happened in the GDR is totally different, and you'd be wrong (and stupid) to think it wasn't. I don't know why people are getting their knickers in a twist over Armstrong losing his Olympic medal. So the IOC has underminded it's rule. And what? Did you mind that Katrin Krabbe was target tested, the chain of anonymity around her samples broken and her negative results shared amongst federations prior to her positive test, before this kind of thing 'was allowed'. What about her ban being 'illegally' extended? I doubt it. Armstrong is a serial cheating so-and-so. If I had my way I'd rid him of everything, including his bike.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
So i'm stupid for expecting some consistency from the IOC? The bottom line is that East Germany had a systematic doping program and I'm disappointed that you find it necessary to be an apologist for them? Their doping program was much bigger and more sophisticated than anything the Armstrong, U.S. Postal or any other cycling team was involved in. EDIT: I also find it interesting that the IOC will not touch the medals of Vyacheslav Ekimov (U.S. Postal teammate and fellow doper) and Jan Ullrich (convicted doper), the gold and silver medalists from that race.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
You're not stupid for wanting consistency from the IOC at all, no. But it is stupid to compare what happened behind the iron curtain to Armstrong's team. Athletes being forced to take drugs, the vast majority unaware of what they were being given, from just past puberty, and having no say in the matter, is absoloutely nothing like what was happing here with Armstrong.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lancea spoiler alert for those who haven't thought about it and live outside of the Eastern Time Zone.... Oprah,I'm assuming will be shown "earlier" the farther east you are, so revelations about what was said will be appearing here, and perhaps on the front page as well, before it even airs on the west coast.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
It's not comparable from a moral point of view, but that should be irrelevant to the IOC. The bottom line is that the athletes who competed against them were competing on an uneven playing field and that's all that matters IMO. Furthermore, the IOC didn't use this excuse as its reason for not taking their medals away, instead they specifically use the 8-year statute of limitations as their as excuse. The article linked here explains the whole thing: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012 ... tive-board
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
That state-sponsored doping program is different from the cycling debacle in terms of the moral responsibility and culpability of the athletes, but is no different in terms of the dirtiness of the medals and records and how it hurts clean athletes. Whichever of the records still standing from the 1990s or 1980s were achieved with doping, they're unfairly harming today's athletes who can't get world record bonuses and publicity because of them.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceI'd love to see all of the East German's to be stripped of their medals as long the US is stripped of theirs too.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceArmstrong denies doping during his comeback - the biological passport positives in '09 being whole reason he got nailed to the wall.
Who's surprised...
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceSome remarkable admissions, though.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceAlso denying the damning "Godfather" stuff
Denies '99 Swiss positive coverup. Incredible
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceThis is pretty compelling viewing. Oprah isn't tossing softballs.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceTweet of the night
https://twitter.com/si_austinmurphy/sta ... 5705782272
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceJoking about his characterizations of Betsy Andreu? Really?
As I said earlier - psychopath
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceIt just hit me why he's denying the '09 biological passport - he's going to try to deal with USADA to have his 8 year ban retroactive to his last offense - which without the '09 positive is - wait for it - 2005.
What year is this again?
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
I agree with you. His admissions are much more damning than the stuff he denied and he was ten times more candid than Marion Jones. My only problem is that he seems to still be honoring the omerta which meant that he wouldn't talk candidly about other people. I guess I can respect the fact that he doesn't want to rat other people out, but it would have made for a much more compelling interview if he had ratted. And obviously I agree with him when he accused Travis Tygart of hyperbole when he accused U.S. Postal of running the most sophisticated doping program in the history of sports since I gave that title to the East Germans earlier in this thread.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
It's not comparable from a moral point of view, but that should be irrelevant to the IOC. The bottom line is that the athletes who competed against them were competing on an uneven playing field .....[/quote] Surely you're not suggesting that the DDR was the only nation doping in that era?! Or if you're saying they had a better doping system,you're also off the mark. What they had was the world's best talent-ID/coaching/nurturing system, combined with the same drugs that everybody else was taking. (Or, more likely, usually a year or three behind the latest developments that the cunning Westerners were coming up with.)
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lanceps--one other thing the DDR did have: an accredited IOC lab (Kreischa?), which allowed them to perform the best tests available on their own athletes, outside of official sampling, and know how to fine-tune to the right tolerances. There weren't many accredited labs in those days, as I recall.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
This ^^
and this ^^ By the 80's the GDR were definitely 'old school' in the drugs they were administering and never got onto giving their athletes HGH, unlike athletes the USA. And we know which western athletes were on that stuff in that decade. Unfortunately, too many blinkered western fans ignore all the above. Bit like when they were in denial over Armstrong. On Lance, I thought he revealed more than expected but still not enough. I guess it was appropriate for a TV interview and let us hope he co-operates more with WADA now. But I find him even more distasteful than before.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceHe may be a smug twat but certain track cheats could do with some of Lance Armstrong's belated, self serving honesty
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
Okay, besides the USSR, what other nations do you think could have possibly had a better state-run doping program? Did American athletes have access to a better doping regimen, complete with internal testing? Which nations are you talking about? Was Evelyn Ashford playing on a level playing field in the prime of her career?
Re: A Very Bad Morning For Lance
Since this sort of speculation is not permissible here, I'll just say that the evidence suggests that many while the doping was global and deep-seated (esp. in the 80s and 90s), the 'eastern bloc' nations seemed to have a more 'communistic' (systemic) approach, while the 'western bloc' had a more 'free market' (individual/small group) approach. Both are viable approaches and capable of great sophistication.
Re: A Very Bad Morning For LanceNot that I was sympathetic towards him before, but besides Armstrong, one person that I have no sympathy for in this whole saga is Floyd Landis, while Emma O'Reilly is the most sympathetic figure in this story.
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests |