Armstrong Robbed

[theblether]

Yes, but is he a psychopath?

http://bigthink.com/...ican-psychopath

And if so, can he use that as a defense in court?

Frankly, for most people I would worry about suicide risk after such a rapid public disgracing. Lance, I think he'll be just fine.

No, it's not a defence, it's a mitigation.

[LaoPo]

LATEST NEWS as told on a popular show in The Netherlands:

Lance Armstrong brakes into tears and is crying during the interview with Oprah...

[carmine]

LATEST NEWS as told on a popular show in The Netherlands:

Lance Armstrong brakes into tears and is crying during the interview with Oprah...

I had a feeling that i'd need a puke bucket next to the sofa to watch Lance's interview tonight. Vile creature.

[Fookhaht]

At the same time, reality also catches up with Boeing and their fanboys on the forum.

I hope nobody dies because of Boeing's crappy Dreamliner.

How did we go from Lance Armstrong doping to The Boeing Company's Dreamliner?

Your gap in logic trumps the Grand Canyon.

Off-topic rant.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Fookhaht

[Fookhaht]

For no money in the world I would like to be in his shoes....it must be awful

It's hard to have sympathy for someone who made his bed so brazenly for so long, and is now forced to lie in it.

And in the process, he tried to destroy the lives and reputations so many other people, particularly his whistle-blowing teammates.

Some people really do deserve <<sohm nahm naa>>.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Fookhaht

[lomatopo]

I agree; but some pressure from DC could work since it wouldn't be nice for the Presidency to have LA jailed; face and all is also important in the US, isn't it?

I guess I am missing your somewhat obtuse comment. George W. Bush probably doesn't have any influence now?

http://latimesblogs....d-warriors.html

As far as I am aware the statute of limitations has (eight years, just!) been exceeded - hence the timing, specifically to his most recent potential criminal proceedings (perjury), so I cannot see how he could be "jailed"?

He won't even need a future Presidential pardon.

[LaoPo]

SHORT version of LA's confession with Oprah:

Video is from a Dutch website but interview is in English of course (maybe they change the content of the video during the day, I don't know)

http://www.zie.nl/video/ingezonden/Amstrong-bekent-doping-gebruik/m1nz7kbfmfyj

Edited January 18, 2013 by LaoPo

[lomatopo]

The interview was on TLC (Ch. 153 - TrueVisions) here. I watched ~ 60 seconds before having to rush to the toilet to vomit.

I just hope all the people in his 'camp' who covered up for him, and went after anyone who said anything (true) about him also suffer the same ignominy.

Johan Bruyneel, good luck. At least he did a good job, at cheating.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/usada-bruyneel-a-key-player-in-armstrong-and-teams-doping

USADA: Bruyneel a key player in Armstrong and team's doping

By: Cycling NewsPublished: October 10, 2012, 23:42, Updated: October 10, 2012, 23:43Edition:First Edition Cycling News,

Team manager pressured riders, facilitated doping

The USADA Reasoned Decision document reveals huge details of the findings of the investigators, lifting the lid on what USADA calls "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen". The document includes a damning nine-page section titled: Johan Bruyneel's involvement in doping.

The Belgian team manager is mentioned multiple times elsewhere in documents but the section alleges how Bruyneel learned how to "introduce young men to performance enhancing drugs, becoming adept at leading them down the path from newly minted professional rides to veteran drug user." Bruyneel has always denied the accusations of doping and has as yet chosen to contest the charges made by USADA and take his case to arbitration in the USA.

Using key sections of many of the witnesses' affidavits and even carefully selected quotes from Bruyneel's own autobiography, the USADA report details Bruyneel's persuasive and often bullying techniques. It reveals how he closely monitored riders' blood values, taught them how to blood dope and pressured them instead of protecting their health.

[LaoPo]

The interview was on TLC (Ch. 153 - TrueVisions) here. I watched ~ 60 seconds before having to rush to the toilet to vomit.

I just hope all the people in his 'camp' who covered up for him, and went after anyone who said anything (true) about him also suffer the same ignominy.

Johan Bruyneel, good luck. At least he did a good job, at cheating.

http://www.cyclingne...nd-teams-doping

USADA: Bruyneel a key player in Armstrong and team's doping

These are just 2 names out of 1,000's of doping users in the world of cycling sports...

I dare to say that in Armstrong's years in the TdF more than 90% of the Tour de France riders "took" dope in one way or another; the problem is that EPO was already known in the '90's and '00's but there were no available 100% tests to test the riders on EPO.

Armstrong (without having seen the interview yet; just the 0:52sec one) was the most known rider who now admitted (also).

His huge mistake was that he denied and lied over the years, over and over again.

But, as Jingthing brought up the question (by others)..Is Armstrong a psychopat, yes or no?

Well, after seen some interviews with "fellow" riders of Armstrong, they ALL speak out that's he's a 100% psychopat, a weirdo, a scary person and a dominant @sshole and many other riders were scared to death of him, his attitude and powers.

That doesn't mean that the -former- admirers of LA, including myself, are hugely disappointed in him and I'm not alone in Europe; dozens of millions of people feel cheated and disappointed

The Armstrong era has gone by and we all hope that cycling will become more clean now and as one rider today mentioned:

The Biochemical Passport, EVERY RIDER has to have now, developed by the WADA in 2008/09 and the 2013 PROHIBITED LIST* is IMPOSSIBLE to cheat on.

NO Doctor or Teamleader would want to risk his postition/salary/income anymore to supply doping to a rider and a rider is simpy not educated enough to know all about these strange components in the list, below.

Apart from that, let's not forget the enormous use of doping in other sports.

They should install the doping passport there as well....IN EVERY SPORT!

* http://www.wada-ama....ist-2013-EN.pdf

[Jingthing]

Now he's deemed the biggest liar EVER by the Washington Post fact checker service.

Fox News talking heads say he seems worse AFTER the Oprah-view than before.

http://www.washingto...3fecd_blog.html

Edited January 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[pieandmash]

I think we should let Lance Armstrong keep all his awards. The last time I rode a bicycle on drugs I ended up in a hedge.

[lomatopo]

But, as Jingthing brought up the question (by others)..Is Armstrong a psychopat, yes or no?

Well, after seen some interviews with "fellow" riders of Armstrong, they ALL speak out that's he's a 100% psychopat, a weirdo, a scary person and a dominant @sshole and many other riders were scared to death of him, his attitude and powers.

Obviously I am not a trained or accredited psychologist or M.D.; maybe these "fellow" riders are, but "psychopath" would seem to be an inaccurate diagnosis based on the available information. Maybe the condition you are rolling around in your brain is "sociopath"?

[carmine]

Now he's deemed the biggest liar EVER by the Washington Post fact checker service.

Fox News talking heads say he seems worse AFTER the Oprah-view than before.

http://www.washingto...3fecd_blog.html

He seems worse to me. Little or no remorse except for the little matter of getting caught. Don't even get me started on the arrogance which seemingly no's no bounds.

So whats going to happen to the 120m personal fortune he's amassed out of cheating and conning everyone i wonder.

And the big question for me regards Livestrong. theres no doubt the help it has given to cancer sufferers but i' m really not sure that that was Armstrong's total motivation. What i'm bsaically saying is that a charity like that makes him a very tough nut to have a pop at.

For me, as i said before the worst part of the whole saga is not the cheating but the bullying and intimidation of anyone who stood in his way.

[Fookhaht]

And the big question for me regards Livestrong. theres no doubt the help it has given to cancer sufferers but i' m really not sure that that was Armstrong's total motivation.

His motivation? Simple: taxes.and public relations

When you amass a certain amount of fortune in the American tax system, it becomes more advantageous to give a certain amount of it away rather than to the government. This, due to the generous USA tax breaks that most donors receive over a broad range of non-profit recipients (religious, charitable, etc.)

You still lose the money either way, but giving it away gives you PR points with the public; undoubtedly at the prodding of his accountants and PR people.

Cancer donations notwithstanding, his motivation remains self-serving then and now. A leopard doesn't change it's spots just because it pisses in a different bush.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Fookhaht

[Fookhaht]

I strongly protest against the word "Robbed" in the thread title.

What was taken from him wasn't rightfully his in the first place, as his confessions reveal.

A better thread title might have been, "Armstrong Gets His Just Due, " or for the benefit of our Thai hosts, "Armstrong: Sohm-nam-naa!"

[Jingthing]

I strongly protest against the word "Robbed" in the thread title.

What was taken from him wasn't rightfully his in the first place, as his confessions reveal.

A better thread title might have been, "Armstrong Gets His Just Due, " or for the benefit of our Thai hosts, "Armstrong: Sohm-nam-naa!"

This thread started quite a while back before all these cards fell. A huge number of people were loyal to him back then. Not me, I am happy to say! Always seemed totally arrogant and something creepy about him. I thought he could keep hold of his demographic of support back then. Now he's lost all support. Edited January 19, 2013 by Jingthing

[Fookhaht]

I strongly protest against the word "Robbed" in the thread title.

What was taken from him wasn't rightfully his in the first place, as his confessions reveal.

A better thread title might have been, "Armstrong Gets His Just Due, " or for the benefit of our Thai hosts, "Armstrong: Sohm-nam-naa!"

This thread started quite a while back before all these cards fell. A huge number of people were loyal to him back then. Not me, I am happy to say! Always seemed totally arrogant and something creepy about him. I thought he could keep hold of his demographic of support back then. Now he's lost all support.

Age of thread--yes, my oversight. I innocently admired his accomplishments, but I never liked him as a person, either; and considered his followers sheep--not unlike the followers of other megalomaniacs of time past.

We smiled along with Muhammad Ali who made outrageous and arrogant boasts, but it was all in the fun and genre of the sport. In contrast, Armstrong's attitude was real, vindictive and deep-seated; evidence of a deep-rooted problem--a person we wouldn't want raising our kids.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Fookhaht

[utalkin2me]

Well, this has been an interesting story. Lance Armstrong, whether you like to admit it or not, was no doubt the best in the world at something for a certain amount of time. That is quite an accomplishment, and it is also really easy to try and tear down a man of that stature. The reason it is so easy is because you will probably never be anywhere near that good at anything. And when I say anywhere near, I really mean it. If you have never been very competitive at any sport, you probably have no idea what I am talking about. He was great. Did he make mistakes? yes, but so have we all.

[Fookhaht]

Lance Armstrong, whether you like to admit it or not, was no doubt the best in the world at something for a certain amount of time.

How can you say "best" when he created an uneven playing field by his unethical and illegal behavior?

[Jingthing]

Well, this has been an interesting story. Lance Armstrong, whether you like to admit it or not, was no doubt the best in the world at something for a certain amount of time. That is quite an accomplishment, and it is also really easy to try and tear down a man of that stature. The reason it is so easy is because you will probably never be anywhere near that good at anything. And when I say anywhere near, I really mean it. If you have never been very competitive at any sport, you probably have no idea what I am talking about. He was great. Did he make mistakes? yes, but so have we all.

So how much criminal bullying would he have had to do for you to think he wasn't so great?

[StreetCowboy]

Well, this has been an interesting story. Lance Armstrong, whether you like to admit it or not, was no doubt the best in the world at something for a certain amount of time. That is quite an accomplishment, and it is also really easy to try and tear down a man of that stature. The reason it is so easy is because you will probably never be anywhere near that good at anything. And when I say anywhere near, I really mean it. If you have never been very competitive at any sport, you probably have no idea what I am talking about. He was great. Did he make mistakes? yes, but so have we all.

So how much criminal bullying would he have had to do for you to think he wasn't so great?

He's got a fair point. I have never been at the top in the world at any sport, so I don't know what he is talking about. I don't even know in what sport utalkin2me was at the top in the world.

In my line of business, I get on quite well with all my competitors around the globe, and we do our best to work together for the benefit of the game, of the competition, as it were. More Adam Smith than Lance Armstrong.

SC

[cdnvic]

I stuck by Armstrong because I believe in innocent until proven guilty. I don't regret it, but it's time for him to go away now. He's had his time in the limelight.

[carmine]

Well, this has been an interesting story. Lance Armstrong, whether you like to admit it or not, was no doubt the best in the world at something for a certain amount of time. That is quite an accomplishment, and it is also really easy to try and tear down a man of that stature. The reason it is so easy is because you will probably never be anywhere near that good at anything. And when I say anywhere near, I really mean it. If you have never been very competitive at any sport, you probably have no idea what I am talking about. He was great. Did he make mistakes? yes, but so have we all.

Is it an interesting story or just a very sad one about a very sad dysfunctional bully who happened to be a world class cyclist.

Whats so wrong about your post begins with you saying he was the best in the world when really you have no idea how good he would have been without the huge help of illegal performance enhancing drugs and secondly the disservice you do to clean athletes.

How on earth do you know he was a better cyclists who were having to race against him at a constant disadvantage. There is NO evidence to suggest he was EVER the best. The only evidence you have is listening to this pathological liar that simply wasn't good enough to do it clean and emulate the likes of Indurain.

Armstrongs was a big enough liar and vindictive bully to ruin and discredit his countryman though that did 'prove he was the best winning it clean.' Armstrong was probably jealous because he was never up to much without his performance enhancers

Edited January 20, 2013 by carmine

[cornishcarlos]

In the end, just a cheating &@฿!...

Go Wiggo

[manarak]

At the end, cyclism shows that ultimate success in sport is not determined by training.

Success at the top is determined by how much the organism of an athlete is adapted to the activity, especially the composition of their blood for being able to sustain long time efforts.

Some people have genetical conditions which make them better cyclists, for example guys with a genetic anomaly that increases their haemoglobin concentration in their blood.

Normal blood has no chance against abnormal blood.

So now we come into the debate: should abnormal people (i.e. with higher haemonglobin concentration than normal) be banned from taking part in sport competitions?

Maybe you will now say that it is a natural advantage and they should be allowed to compete.

What a about a boxer with 4 arms?

[bigbamboo]

Sad to say it would seem that Lance is once again manipulating proceedings to get his own way. Just as he cheated for years he now realises he is finished in every respect, especially his triathlons, unless he comes clean.... no pun intended..... but all the years of lying and denying will be hard to wipe away.

Edited January 20, 2013 by bigbamboo

[7by7]

Some people have genetical conditions which make them better cyclists, for example guys with a genetic anomaly that increases their haemoglobin concentration in their blood.

Normal blood has no chance against abnormal blood.

So now we come into the debate: should abnormal people (i.e. with higher haemonglobin concentration than normal) be banned from taking part in sport competitions?

Maybe you will now say that it is a natural advantage and they should be allowed to compete.

What about a boxer with four arms?

Of course some people are better at some sports than others due to the make up of their bodies.

Look at the difference between a sprinter and a marathon runner; a long jumper and a high jumper.

Maybe you think anyone over a set maximum height should be banned from playing basket ball!

There is a big difference between using the body one was born with and training it to compete at the highest level in one's chosen sport and enhancing that training by using banned substances and methods.

One is fair competition and the other is cheating.

Do you, and others who still support Armstrong, believe that Ben Johnson should have kept his gold medal and world record?

[utalkin2me]

Well, this has been an interesting story. Lance Armstrong, whether you like to admit it or not, was no doubt the best in the world at something for a certain amount of time. That is quite an accomplishment, and it is also really easy to try and tear down a man of that stature. The reason it is so easy is because you will probably never be anywhere near that good at anything. And when I say anywhere near, I really mean it. If you have never been very competitive at any sport, you probably have no idea what I am talking about. He was great. Did he make mistakes? yes, but so have we all.

Is it an interesting story or just a very sad one about a very sad dysfunctional bully who happened to be a world class cyclist.

Whats so wrong about your post begins with you saying he was the best in the world when really you have no idea how good he would have been without the huge help of illegal performance enhancing drugs and secondly the disservice you do to clean athletes.

How on earth do you know he was a better cyclists who were having to race against him at a constant disadvantage. There is NO evidence to suggest he was EVER the best. The only evidence you have is listening to this pathological liar that simply wasn't good enough to do it clean and emulate the likes of Indurain.

Armstrongs was a big enough liar and vindictive bully to ruin and discredit his countryman though that did 'prove he was the best winning it clean.' Armstrong was probably jealous because he was never up to much without his performance enhancers

Your own words just magnify your lack of understanding. Think of it like the home run record... did Bonds juice? I'm sure. Is anybody in the world capable of hitting that many home runs, ON OR OFF steroids. No. You dont understand that point, and that it fine. You have never been in the middle of dozens of the best cyclists in the world and came out on top (neither have i to be honest), under all the intimidation and motivation to bring you down. Bottom line, people just have no idea what they are talking about. They dont. People like you are also blind to the fact that most of the people you admire probably cheated in many ways... from businessman, to who knows, a cy young winner who put some spit on a baseball. Show me the guy at the top of wall street and i swear id give 5 to 1 he is a total scumbag cheat.

Really, my only point is that I still think he's a great athlete. People can think what they want of him, of course, but it is just way off in my estimation to just think "oh, he's nothing, he won nothing and never did a thing". That is a 100% crock, but that is what people think.... so it is what it is that's all... not the first time everybody was wrong about something.

Edited January 25, 2013 by utalkin2me

[utalkin2me]

Well, this has been an interesting story. Lance Armstrong, whether you like to admit it or not, was no doubt the best in the world at something for a certain amount of time. That is quite an accomplishment, and it is also really easy to try and tear down a man of that stature. The reason it is so easy is because you will probably never be anywhere near that good at anything. And when I say anywhere near, I really mean it. If you have never been very competitive at any sport, you probably have no idea what I am talking about. He was great. Did he make mistakes? yes, but so have we all.

So how much criminal bullying would he have had to do for you to think he wasn't so great?

He's got a fair point. I have never been at the top in the world at any sport, so I don't know what he is talking about. I don't even know in what sport utalkin2me was at the top in the world.

In my line of business, I get on quite well with all my competitors around the globe, and we do our best to work together for the benefit of the game, of the competition, as it were. More Adam Smith than Lance Armstrong.

SC

Where in the world did i say i was the best in the world. I have been, like many people, competitive at a professional level in a sport however. Others obviously have not, and dont understand the nature of competition at all, especially this one where i'm sure most all athletes juiced.

Edited January 25, 2013 by utalkin2me

[manarak]

Some people have genetical conditions which make them better cyclists, for example guys with a genetic anomaly that increases their haemoglobin concentration in their blood.

Normal blood has no chance against abnormal blood.

So now we come into the debate: should abnormal people (i.e. with higher haemonglobin concentration than normal) be banned from taking part in sport competitions?

Maybe you will now say that it is a natural advantage and they should be allowed to compete.

What about a boxer with four arms?

Of course some people are better at some sports than others due to the make up of their bodies.

Look at the difference between a sprinter and a marathon runner; a long jumper and a high jumper.

Maybe you think anyone over a set maximum height should be banned from playing basket ball!

There is a big difference between using the body one was born with and training it to compete at the highest level in one's chosen sport and enhancing that training by using banned substances and methods.

One is fair competition and the other is cheating.

Do you, and others who still support Armstrong, believe that Ben Johnson should have kept his gold medal and world record?

It's not the first time you see things in posts which aren't there.

I don't support Armstrong. I despise him.

My earlier post should have made that clear:

http://www.thaivisa....75#entry6029075

I was only asking the readers what their take is on the fact that the top athletes are people with genetic anomalies giving them an unattainable advantage over the other athletes.

Those interested by the topic may want to read this:

http://houseofbodybu...opic=680.0;wap2

While I don't agree with the author's opening, which was probably deliberately provocative, he illustrates my point about top athletes winning not because better training, more effort or better technique, but because of genetics.

This fact has a lot of philosophical ramifications, which in essence can be summarized as "welcome to reality, life is unfair and people are not created equal"

Edited January 25, 2013 by manarak