or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Off-Season Sports & The Lighter Side › Cycling › No easy retirement for Lance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

No easy retirement for Lance - Page 15

post #421 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by WILDCAT View Post

More than one, without a doubt. Remember, he was stripped of his TdF wins and has confessed to his transgressions.


Not disagreeing.  I'm saying, it's probably worse than what's in that movie and only Lance knows!  :)

post #422 of 436
Thread Starter 
Yeah, I don't trust a big screen production to get the story right. Doping in the TdF goes back to the beginning. Lance stands out, do to his dedication to doping and lying, which he is the master.
post #423 of 436

Have you guys seen that Swedish movie "Stop at Nothing"?   It seemed to get the high points pretty well.   Betsy Andreu was absolutely excellent in it. 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3511812/

 

It's on Netflix right now.    Netflix also has the Pantani bio:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2966760/?ref_=nv_sr_1

 

With that and the Bartali movie AND Slaying the Badger  AND Clean Spirit with Marcel Kittel,  Netflix is pretty on for cycling right now.    

 

 

(I can't wait for the Jacques Anquetil story :D )

post #424 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post
 

Have you guys seen that Swedish movie "Stop at Nothing"?

 

Saw it a few weeks ago. Great movie.

 

LA was in my area mountain biking Palo Duro Canyon recently.  The newspaper treated it like it was a good thing.  Crazy world we live in.

post #425 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post
 

Have you guys seen that Swedish movie "Stop at Nothing"?   It seemed to get the high points pretty well.   Betsy Andreu was absolutely excellent in it. 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3511812/

 

It's on Netflix right now.   

 

Watched it a couple nights ago thx to your post. Agree, really amazing documentary!

post #426 of 436

I'll just add my thoughts to this very important discussion.

 

Whatever his methods, 7 consecutive tdf wins borders on the miraculous. To have avoided crashes, missing breakaways, a flu bug, mechanicals, any of the many obstacles that have prevented any other rider from accomplishing what Lance did IMO takes a once in several lifetimes perfect alignment of the planets, galaxies, etc. This kind of thing just doesn't happen!

 

I was too busy riding my bike to watch Lance's first 4 tdf victories, but I remember after the 2nd or 3rd, while riding my bike home from work, having some 10 year olds yell "GO LANCE!" from the sidewalk.

 

I caught the cycling bug just before Greg Lemond's first tour win, and as amazing a feat as I thought that was, I don't think Greg ever became the household figure, especially among 10 year olds, that Lance did.

 

I thoroughly enjoyed watching Lance's final 3 tdf wins, and I'm sorry, but learning of his tactics after the fact doesn't diminish that enjoyment, nor the impression left by those 10 year olds yelling his name. Up until Lance, I wonder how many 10 year olds in the US even knew about the tdf, or could name a single pro US rider?

 

Anyway, impressions; funny things. It's like finding out there's no Santa Claus, but still having a bunch of good memories attached to what boils down to having been lied to by your parents. I don't have to like the guy, or approve of his methods to enjoy those impressions.

post #427 of 436

Oh, but there is a Santa Claus...

 

 

...it's just he's not who you thought he was.

post #428 of 436

Agree with MT Skull, it's truly Miraculous that Lance could manage to have access to the best medical doping doctors and drugs, and exert influence over the authorities for a full 7 years in a row.

post #429 of 436

He devastated the lives of many, many people by lying, accusing, manipulating, controlling and being just plain mean.  For years. A great cyclist? Sure.  Whoopee.  He rode a stinkin bicycle well. Like that really matters.

post #430 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

Agree with MT Skull, it's truly Miraculous that Lance could manage to have access to the best medical doping doctors and drugs, and exert influence over the authorities for a full 7 years in a row.

 

I could argue that it took more than just good doping, and influence over the authorities, but both surely contributed. I'm definitely not trying to defend what he did; I'm simply saying I enjoyed the illusion while it lasted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowfan View Post
 

He devastated the lives of many, many people by lying, accusing, manipulating, controlling and being just plain mean.  For years. A great cyclist? Sure.  Whoopee.  He rode a stinkin bicycle well. Like that really matters.

He wouldn't be the first athlete who was basically a shitty person, but got a pass simply because he was at the top of his profession. None of it really matters; no more than any other spectator sport; but am I supposed to feel bad for having enjoyed the spectacle in the moment?

 

I'm not saying it was right, but I think one of the main reasons Lance was able to get away with what he did for as long as he did, was that watching people ride bikes matters a whole lot to a whole bunch of people, and I honestly believe that the authorities looked the other way because they believed his success and notoriety was good for the sport/business.

 

I think what's happened over the past couple of years with Lance being exposed for all his crap, and being stripped of his victories is a bit of an appropriate and well-deserved karmic smack-down, but regardless of what I think of it, it doesn't change my memories; that's my only point. I guess my memories are tainted now, but I'll probably get over it.

 

I also remember well Landis' amazing comeback ride in the 2006 TDF. It was fun to watch, but I don't think anyone was too surprised when Landis tested positive, and was stripped of the victory. What I remember most about that tour was Óscar Pereiro's comments after being awarded the victory. He basically said that it was an empty victory; that no one could give back the experience of riding into Paris and onto the Champs-Élysées in the Yellow Jersey, and to cross the finish line the victor. I guess Lance robbed 7 riders that same pleasure, and I think that sucks.

 

Anyway, I guess it would be nice if all sports figures and celebrities were held to a higher standard, and if people assigned less importance to their athletic feats, and more to their moral character, but I don't see things changing anytime soon, and I'm not going to say I didn't enjoy the show, regardless of what I might think of the man afterwards.

post #431 of 436

I'm not gonna read 15 pages of posts here to get a total view of this conversation.  Lance took the risk of losing it all by cheating and now is reaping the consequences.  I think some here are glad it is tough for him because they think he was an a$$hole and is getting his comeuppance.  Yeah, he most likely was.  He wasn't the first elite athlete that acted in that manner.  Eddie Merckx  was very much like that as were quite a few other elite cyclists.  The PEDs helped Lance perform at a higher level, but that was the level his competitors were at as well.  He just happened to be better than them, IMO.

 

Lance's teammates could have just quit if they didn't want to be involved with the drugs.  They had a choice.  However, they also were aware that probably all the other teams and many, many other riders were cheating as well and that they would be at a big disadvantage to ride clean.  Anyone remember the Festina affair?  That happened just the year before Lance won his first TdF.  Pantani, Jan Ullrich, Basso, Contador, Julich, Zulle, Vinokourov, etc have been caught and/or admitted to taking PEDs during the TdF.  Merckx was known to have been drugging during his career.  Drugs were rampant in professional cycling because the cyclists knew they could get a boost needed to perform at the level expected and the odds of getting caught weren't that high due to poor quality of testing.  You can't reasonably say Lance took the trophies away from so and so who deserved it because no one knows who was actually clean among the top placers in the races he won.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/08/24/sports/top-finishers-of-the-tour-de-france-tainted-by-doping.html?_r=0

 

Knock Lance all you want and root for his financial demise if you wish, he was still the best cyclist of his era by far and garnered a lot of interest in the sport by people who wouldn't have given it a thought if not for his story and his success.  Success that wouldn't have been achieved without him being the determined, ruthless fighter that he is.  

post #432 of 436

It's not how you play the game, it's whether you win or lose.

post #433 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by MT Skull View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

Agree with MT Skull, it's truly Miraculous that Lance could manage to have access to the best medical doping doctors and drugs, and exert influence over the authorities for a full 7 years in a row.

 

I could argue that it took more than just good doping, and influence over the authorities, but both surely contributed. I'm definitely not trying to defend what he did; I'm simply saying I enjoyed the illusion while it lasted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowfan View Post
 

He devastated the lives of many, many people by lying, accusing, manipulating, controlling and being just plain mean.  For years. A great cyclist? Sure.  Whoopee.  He rode a stinkin bicycle well. Like that really matters.

He wouldn't be the first athlete who was basically a shitty person, but got a pass simply because he was at the top of his profession. None of it really matters; no more than any other spectator sport; but am I supposed to feel bad for having enjoyed the spectacle in the moment?

 

I'm not saying it was right, but I think one of the main reasons Lance was able to get away with what he did for as long as he did, was that watching people ride bikes matters a whole lot to a whole bunch of people, and I honestly believe that the authorities looked the other way because they believed his success and notoriety was good for the sport/business.

 

I think what's happened over the past couple of years with Lance being exposed for all his crap, and being stripped of his victories is a bit of an appropriate and well-deserved karmic smack-down, but regardless of what I think of it, it doesn't change my memories; that's my only point. I guess my memories are tainted now, but I'll probably get over it.

 

I also remember well Landis' amazing comeback ride in the 2006 TDF. It was fun to watch, but I don't think anyone was too surprised when Landis tested positive, and was stripped of the victory. What I remember most about that tour was Óscar Pereiro's comments after being awarded the victory. He basically said that it was an empty victory; that no one could give back the experience of riding into Paris and onto the Champs-Élysées in the Yellow Jersey, and to cross the finish line the victor. I guess Lance robbed 7 riders that same pleasure, and I think that sucks.

 

Anyway, I guess it would be nice if all sports figures and celebrities were held to a higher standard, and if people assigned less importance to their athletic feats, and more to their moral character, but I don't see things changing anytime soon, and I'm not going to say I didn't enjoy the show, regardless of what I might think of the man afterwards.


Yes, I know what you mean.  Ben Johnson was the best Sprinter at one time, and I enjoyed watching him win.  It's not like he took a pill and didn't train rigorously.

post #434 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by MT Skull View Post
 
I could argue that it took more than just good doping, and influence over the authorities, but both surely contributed. I'm definitely not trying to defend what he did; I'm simply saying I enjoyed the illusion while it lasted.
 
He wouldn't be the first athlete who was basically a shitty person, but got a pass simply because he was at the top of his profession. None of it really matters; no more than any other spectator sport; but am I supposed to feel bad for having enjoyed the spectacle in the moment?
 
 

 

 

All spectacles are now suspect.  

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MT Skull View Post
 
I could argue that it took more than just good doping, and influence over the authorities, but both surely contributed. I'm definitely not trying to defend what he did; I'm simply saying I enjoyed the illusion while it lasted.
 
He wouldn't be the first athlete who was basically a shitty person, but got a pass simply because he was at the top of his profession. None of it really matters; no more than any other spectator sport; but am I supposed to feel bad for having enjoyed the spectacle in the moment?
 
 

 

I'm not saying it was right, but I think one of the main reasons Lance was able to get away with what he did for as long as he did, was that watching people ride bikes matters a whole lot to a whole bunch of people, and I honestly believe that the authorities looked the other way because they believed his success and notoriety was good for the sport/business.

 

I think what's happened over the past couple of years with Lance being exposed for all his crap, and being stripped of his victories is a bit of an appropriate and well-deserved karmic smack-down, but regardless of what I think of it, it doesn't change my memories; that's my only point. I guess my memories are tainted now, but I'll probably get over it.

 

 

 

 

Then why in the blazes did they not look the other way for Pantani?    

I think the actuality is more nuanced than that.     Watching the patron win again and again is frankly a bit boring, and we saw that this summer with Chris Froome.

I think Lance had a bit of a perfect storm of enablement, including, very critically, a team from a wealthy country that did not have a strong anti-doping atmosphere.   There is no way Lance could have succeeded like he did on a french or italian team, even with the recovery-from-cancer story.     Team managers fully versed in doping protocols and in making them work.  There is no way Lance could have succeeded like he did without Bruyneel.  Doctors  who had no better outlet for their creative, ah, juices, so that everyone else is bumbling about with off-the-shelf doping routines designed by the very people doing Lance's personal work. 

post #435 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc-ski View Post
 

It's not how you play the game, it's whether you win or lose.

That sounds like a line from Bill Belichick.

post #436 of 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post
 

 

 

 

Then why in the blazes did they not look the other way for Pantani?    

I think the actuality is more nuanced than that.     Watching the patron win again and again is frankly a bit boring, and we saw that this summer with Chris Froome.

I think Lance had a bit of a perfect storm of enablement, including, very critically, a team from a wealthy country that did not have a strong anti-doping atmosphere.   There is no way Lance could have succeeded like he did on a french or italian team, even with the recovery-from-cancer story.     Team managers fully versed in doping protocols and in making them work.  There is no way Lance could have succeeded like he did without Bruyneel.  Doctors  who had no better outlet for their creative, ah, juices, so that everyone else is bumbling about with off-the-shelf doping routines designed by the very people doing Lance's personal work. 

 

Pure conjecture on my part, but maybe simply because of potential to tap into the US market. Lemond's success helped to draw quite a bit of attention to the sport from the US, but I don't think ever came close to the interest Armstrong drew. I can only imagine that interest spelled increased revenues for all concerned, from a relatively untapped market. I don't think any non-'Murican rider will ever be able to draw the interest of the "average" US viewer the way an American rider can, and I wonder if even a phenomenal US rider will be able to draw the attention that Armstrong did after his scandalous demise?

 

I think Armstrong's success did a lot for the recognition and appreciation of the sport in the US, but in the long run, once his tactics were revealed, have the potential at least to do an equal if not greater amount of harm.

 

That's the long answer. The short answer is that if you asked those 10 year olds who yelled "Go Lance!" the same question, the answer invariably would have been "Pantani who?"

 

I don't know about boring, but I do remember being fairly disgusted watching the '03 or '04 tour while Armstrong was dating Sheryl Crow, and all the idiot attention paid to that side-show act. Ugh.:nono: Nothing against Sheryl Crow, but really? How may other pro rider's girlfriends have ever garnered that much attention, let alone air-time during a tdf? Pathetic really, and IMO pure pandering to the US viewer.

 

As far as the perfect storm of enablement; that perfect storm didn't help Armstrong in 2009, and much less in 2010. For me anyway, especially the 2010 tour showed how lucky, for lack of a better word Armstrong had been to win 7 consecutive tours. Any of the little things that plagued Armstrong in that tour, could just as easily have happened in any of his previous tours, but coincidentally didn't. For me, Andy Schleck's dropped chain on the Port de Bales served as further evidence of the tenuous nature of the margin between victory and elimination. That was the point I was trying to make in my first post.


Edited by MT Skull - 9/29/15 at 1:41am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Off-Season Sports & The Lighter Side › Cycling › No easy retirement for Lance