So what do you think of Lance Armstrong?

[pincushion]

Drugs or not, it is still one of the most gruelling of sports events so admiration for all who take part. It's a shame that drugs seemed to have taken a stranglehold over the race when it could be done clean and with much the same results.

:huh:

 

[bigmck]

It's going to be interesting in about 30 years when the present day pro wrestlers near their 60's. You are going to see massive numbers die early due to the drugs they take.

 

[spencer1]

Wow, I just answered a thread on dating, now Lance Armstrong?
Great tech forum.

Haha Britton.. I'm posting behind you again .. this is in the ChillOut Room thread..
we need to chill out, let our hair down for a little, after all the techie stuff we have to deal with in everyday life.
I'm disappointed in him.. I had been an advocate of his earlier in this thread, however so much has come to light from years past.. it's now looking like there's overwhelming evidence to convict .
Makes me very sad, when our young kids had looked up to him , this will be hard for so many to try and move forward with holding fast to truth and doing the honorable thing in their future. We parents try our very best to instill in our children, truth, honesty, character, doing what is right, plus so much more, then this happens.

LADYPINKtomato1, I was like you, ready to give Lance the benefit of any doubt. However, when I actually started reading (a lot!) about the whole Armstrong affair, it was a different story -- just too much ugliness to disregard, time and time again. Not only has Lance been lying through his teeth for years, he's also a narcissistic bully. Sorry to say, Armstrong has a slick PR machine that gives him a veneer, but what's just below is not a pretty sight.

 

[linnemeyerhere]

Maybe the best next step for Lance will be politics ! lol

 

[Joan Archer]

Maybe the best next step for Lance will be politics ! lol

:roflmao:

 

[spencer1]

Actually, he was considering running for governor of Texas. God help us.

 

[boohbah]

looks like hes on steroids to me

 

[smarteyeball]

Maybe it's time we open it up and allow a new 'Drug aided' category

It'll save on disappointment down the track.

 

[JimJoe]

Sadly, we have no way of knowing if these expose's are truthful, or just someone being cruel.

 

[pincushion]

Sadly, we have no way of knowing if these expose's are truthful, or just someone being cruel.

Really? There are an awful lot of 'someones' in this case. Conspiracy theories are best left to kiddies. :shock:

 

[spencer1]

Australian TV did a well researched piece on the Armstrong doping controversy. It includes video of Lance and others testifying in the SCA Promotions case. Lance firmly states under oath that he has never used performance enhancing drugs. Hmmm.

The show is 46 minutes long, and covers a lot of detail. Worth a watch if you have some time:
The World According to Lance - Four Corners

 

[JimJoe]

Sadly, we have no way of knowing if these expose's are truthful, or just someone being cruel.

Really? There are an awful lot of 'someones' in this case. Conspiracy theories are best left to kiddies. :shock:

I don't listen to conspiracy theories. I'm saying when one person attacks spomeone famous, others jump on the bandwagon. They rarely have truth at hand, they just like to attack more like sharks in a feeding frenzy than 'concerned reporters'.

 

[Golden]

When faced with overwhelming evidence, the best defence is denial. Sorry Lance Strongarms, it seems clear-cut to me............

 

[pincushion]

Sadly, we have no way of knowing if these expose's are truthful, or just someone being cruel.

Really? There are an awful lot of 'someones' in this case. Conspiracy theories are best left to kiddies. :shock:

I don't listen to conspiracy theories. I'm saying when one person attacks spomeone famous, others jump on the bandwagon. They rarely have truth at hand, they just like to attack more like sharks in a feeding frenzy than 'concerned reporters'.

What like Jimmy Savile? There is no 'jumping on the bandwagon', only a number of people who appear to be corroborating each other as to what happened. Whether anyone is famous or not is besides the point. Fame, as in Savile's case gave him some protection from prosecution whilst he was alive.

:huh:

 

[Britton30]

To answer the title question, who cares?:sarc:

 

[whs]

I have been watching the tour since the 70's. It is unfortunate to say, but I think there has been doping going on at all times. It has only been relatively recent that the authorities started focussing on it.

The problem is that if they take the titles away from Armstron, they will default to the ones who came in second - and have been doping too. So what's the point.

 

[bigmck]

I have been watching the tour since the 70's. It is unfortunate to say, but I think there has been doping going on at all times. It has only been relatively recent that the authorities started focussing on it.

The problem is that if they take the titles away from Armstron, they will default to the ones who came in second - and have been doping too. So what's the point.

The first year that Armstrong did not race the Tour, didn't the guy that won get disqualified for doping? That should say a lot about the whole sport.

 

[whs]

I have been watching the tour since the 70's. It is unfortunate to say, but I think there has been doping going on at all times. It has only been relatively recent that the authorities started focussing on it.

The problem is that if they take the titles away from Armstron, they will default to the ones who came in second - and have been doping too. So what's the point.

The first year that Armstrong did not race the Tour, didn't the guy that won get disqualified for doping? That should say a lot about the whole sport.

That is correct if you mean Alberto Contador. He got a 2 year ban but his case was never fully proven either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_C._Velasco

 

[Dwarf]

He (Lance Armstrong) has been dropped by Nike over this issue. BBC Sport - Lance Armstrong dropped by Nike over doping evidence

As regards Jimmy Savile, he wrote the following in his autobiography:

“‘Ah,’ says I all serious, ‘if she comes in I’ll bring her back tomorrow but I’ll keep her all night first as my reward’.”

More on this sordid entry: Jimmy Savile's affections laid bare by...Jimmy Savile? | Times Opinion on Tumblr

The questions remain:

Why did these issues remain as they are for so long? In the latter case (Savile), surely alarm bells would (or should) have been ringing given such an autobiographical entry.

As regards Armstrong, he didn't cause anyone any direct harm through his cheating (although he has brought his sport into disrepute), he only deluded himself. Savile, on the other hand, based on the allegations currently circulating, certainly did directly harm those who were unfortunate to come into contact with him under the circumstances alleged in the reports.

 

[pincushion]

He (Lance Armstrong) has been dropped by Nike over this issue. BBC Sport - Lance Armstrong dropped by Nike over doping evidence

As regards Jimmy Savile, he wrote the following in his autobiography:

“‘Ah,’ says I all serious, ‘if she comes in I’ll bring her back tomorrow but I’ll keep her all night first as my reward’.”

More on this sordid entry: Jimmy Savile's affections laid bare by...Jimmy Savile? | Times Opinion on Tumblr

The questions remain:

Why did these issues remain as they are for so long? In the latter case (Savile), surely alarm bells would (or should) have been ringing given such an autobiographical entry.

As regards Armstrong, he didn't cause anyone any direct harm through his cheating (although he has brought his sport into disrepute), he only deluded himself. Savile, on the other hand, based on the allegations currently circulating, certainly did directly harm those who were unfortunate to come into contact with him under the circumstances alleged in the reports.

I think the Savile case is a bit like the Michael Jackson one where he was known to have an interest in children but his 'fame' allowed a lot of leeway. I think Michael Jackson's 'Bad' was perhaps his way of expressing himself as it seems did Savile in some of his comments. Times were different then and groupies to Rock groups were known to be rather young so probably many will have something that they would not like to be made public now.

:huh: