85 posts in this topic

Posted

Yeah peeps move on. So what he doped up. He did a lot of good.

Move on? Is that what you would say to Emma O'Riely his masseuse? Frankie Andreu, his former best friend and team mate, and his wife Betsy? His other former team mates? Mike Anderson, his former personal assistant? The list goes on and on....

Lance Amrstrong: "To be honest Oprah, we sued so many people, I'm sure we did (sue Emma O'Riely)."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i wondered the moment he said he didnt dope in 2009 and 2010.

if true, that either means he was really crappy during his 7 tour de france wins or that means he had no opponents in 2009 and 2010. both of course not true, so its clear that he used helpers the last 2 years as well.

but then: same justice to everyone please. i have no idea how its allowed for jan ullrich to keep his tour de france win, or for contador to keep his 2. both are guilty of doping too. ullrich is now sitting in switzerland escaping any legal action against him and contador will ride this years tour de france as if never anything happend to him!

why was not a single soccer player named in the fuentes-scandal?

seeing it from that perspective, and i do, there is indeed a witch-hunt going on against lance armstrong.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

In an era when pretty much every athlete did it, it should be a shocker that he did them to. Oh well, he's just another fallen star, we'll move on to some other scandal soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

seeing it from that perspective, and i do, there is indeed a witch-hunt going on against lance armstrong.

I don't know any of those you mentioned but i do know this:

Lance won so many times, it is bigger.

Other cheaters are most likely hated in their home countries, the most. Like Bjarne Riis. There were plenty of ****storms when it came out about him. Surely there were plenty of outrage for everyone else like Lance and Bjarne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

doping issues aside the reason he needs torched for all this in my opinion is the way he bullied threatened sued and flat out tried to ruin and destroy anyone and everyone who suggested this about him over the last 10 years

It's exactly this for me.

I think the fact he took drugs is a side issue by now. An athlete took drugs to win. It's not rare unfortunately.

However with Lance he ruined people's financial/professional/personal lives if they dared speak up. He made millions and millions committing perjury and bankrupting people in the process.

As he said to Oprah, if he didn't want to compete again he wouldn't even have done the interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Also, his foundation does not fund any sort of cancer research.
These audits seem to disagree with you. Maybe they are tainted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

These audits seem to disagree with you. Maybe they are tainted?

What do the audits say about cancer research? Nothing I can find. Have you even read a single pdf from that link? Non of their efforts are for the elimination or the fight against cancer, not a single dollar. I do not consider research for survivorship as scientific cancer research. Do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What do the audits say about cancer research? Nothing I can find. Have you even read a single pdf from that link? Non of their efforts are for the elimination or the fight against cancer, not a single dollar. I do not consider research for survivorship as scientific cancer research. Do you?

He helps people that have cancer. A lot of them. I don't see how one is better than the other. Sure eliminating cancer would be the best, but how likely is that? Help the people you can. There are plenty of other organizations putting money into research and not helping the people going through it, so I believe his organization did have a place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

He helps people that have cancer. A lot of them. I don't see how one is better than the other. Sure eliminating cancer would be the best, but how likely is that? Help the people you can. There are plenty of other organizations putting money into research and not helping the people going through it, so I believe his organization did have a place.

Right and I have said nothing on which is better. However there is a fundamental difference and those who are uninformed think that they help with scientific cancer research and spread misinformation to others.

You even think eliminating cancer is better. How likely is that? What do you mean? Because it is difficult to find a remedy or cure you don't try?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Neil should go an spend the rest of his life in some South American country. The witch hunt is off the hook now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Neil should go an spend the rest of his life in some South American country. The witch hunt is off the hook now.

You forget to take your pills today? Houston, we have a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

USADA needs to GTFO!!!! Armstrong is a hero to many people and they ruined him and ruined lots of other people's faith and emotions. ANYONE THAT DOES THAT NEEDS TO GTFO

and so what if he did dope.... it's just like overclocking your computer to be better at game competitions!!! people need to STFU about this crap it's getting out of hand.

post-59941-0-95424700-1359220240.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

a faster computer does make a difference. try going up against someone with an OCed top of the line i7 and nvidia GPU with your core 2 duo and intel GMA GPU....

are you gonna whine that nobody should be able to use a computer faster then yours?

Seeing as No game maxes out even an i5, using an i7 or an OC'ed i7 would make no difference. the graphics card however would make a difference, VISUALLY, however a good player on a lwoer graphics card would still beat the crap out of e mediocre player on the best gaming rig ever. you know, unless the mediocre player used aimbots and wallhacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm sure his goods outweigh his lies which hurt absolutely no one.

You can't be serious?! He hurt all the people who competed legitimately - the people who would have won the Tour de France but instead came away with nothing. Those people lost tens of thousands of euros in prize money and likely much more in lost sponsorship. He hurt the reputation of the sport and that will likely have serious repercussions for the future of the sport, financially and in terms of credibility. He also defrauded the US government, who sponsored him.

If he had admitted his guilt in its entirety and agreed to payback all the prize money he received, as well as compensation for those he hurt, then I'd be much more accepting. However, instead he opted for a high profile appearance that likely netted him hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions. They're not the actions of somebody who is truly repentful - they the actions of a shameless fraudster.

he's raised over $400 million to fight cancer.

Actually, that's not true. At one point nearly half the money raised was being spent on fundraising and it was basically a PR machine for his sports career. Very little was spent treating cancer or funding research. And he used the charity name to promote for-profit businesses (livestrong.org being the charity; livestrong.com using the same logo but being for-profit). Lance Armstrong is a charlatan.

When you see such denial it's easy to see how conspiracy theories get started. Before he admitted doping there were people suggesting the USADA was out to get him - and sadly there are still people in this topic suggesting that! - and that it was an elaborate conspiracy involved dozens of people and secret bribes, etc. There's nothing wrong with admitting you were wrong - in fact it's the mature thing to do and some people in this topic have already done that, so props to them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I see where your coming from cat. I'm on your side in your corner. I may not fully agree with you but I support your position. I totally respect people who need dope to function normally. I've know many. That reason I support legalization. I don't do it though.

But consider this:

Do you remember Rocky VI? Ivan Drago doped up to CRUSH other boxers. There was rumor in the media about it. The Russians denied it. Rocky had a pretty good feeling and did his Rocky thing to win. Heart is what won it. When one dopes up to increase performance one loses heart.

"Your the best around, nothings gonna ever keep you down" lol had to.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

USADA needs to GTFO!!!! Armstrong is a hero to many people and they ruined him and ruined lots of other people's faith and emotions. ANYONE THAT DOES THAT NEEDS TO GTFO

and so what if he did dope.... it's just like overclocking your computer to be better at game competitions!!! people need to STFU about this crap it's getting out of hand.

the USADA didn't ruin Lance Armstrong.

Lance Armstrong ruined Lance Armstrong.

real heros don't need steroids to get a job done.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I do not consider research for survivorship as scientific cancer research.
First: you need to cool down. Second: I'm going to be perfectly blunt to you --- you cannot "simply" eliminate *plasms. Too many factors to mention here, but to sum it up: cancer evolves and it's really good at it. Third: there is a need to enforce the prevention of carcinogenesis and reliable survivorship/palliative care methods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

First: you need to cool down. Second: I'm going to be perfectly blunt to you --- you cannot "simply" eliminate *plasms. Too many factors to mention here, but to sum it up: cancer evolves and it's really good at it. Third: there is a need to enforce the prevention of carcinogenesis and reliable survivorship/palliative care methods.

That is great. What is your point? I said his foundation does not support cancer research, you claimed otherwise, I rebutted. Do you still think so? If not, what are you talking about? If so, show me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

the USADA didn't ruin Lance Armstrong.

Lance Armstrong ruined Lance Armstrong.

real heros don't need steroids to get a job done.

He rides a bike. The fact you or anyone else call him a "Hero" is very disturbing.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You forget to take your pills today? Houston, we have a problem.

LOL I'm just waking up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

He rides a bike. The fact you or anyone else call him a "Hero" is very disturbing.

I don't think he's a hero at all.

I only said hero in reference to the quoted "Armstrong is a hero to many people" comment

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't think he's a hero at all.

I only said hero in reference to the quoted "Armstrong is a hero to many people" comment

Yea a hero is someone who does something heroic. Lance is not. Neil Armstrong is.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

He rides a bike. The fact you or anyone else call him a "Hero" is very disturbing.

In case you're unaware, the dictionary definition of he

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Of course he lied. That's all he has done for the past year years. He can't stop now.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

In case you're unaware, the dictionary definition of he

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.