This is all he has wanted for the past 6 years and this is all his year is geared towards. Everyone know this and it is obvious. After dedicating the first half of his year to totally focusing on the tour and nothing else, he then spends time with his family after the tour.
Manny, I think if you look at almost all my posts, also in the D&D, it would be unfair to say I have "American envy". I believe this here is a specific issue that has nothing to do with the nationality of the main person that is being discussed in this thread. I would have the same opinion if the guy was Dutch, Russian, Australian or whatever (okay, perhaps I might be more biased in his favor if he was German, I don't know).
I don't think it's dishonest. The fact which you and others point out is so obvious (yes, of course it is related to Armstrong) that I am clearly not hiding it by saying "since you pointed it out".
Actually, the fact that people are pointing out is that you're trying to relate it to Armstrong - without any evidence of a connection - besides the fact that they were once teammates three years ago and both are Americans. And both are better than Jan Ullrich.
Yes, they were teammates for 6 years (this, as well as the fact that they train together and live together for a large part of the year was what I was getting at), no, it does not matter to me at all that they are both Americans, and no, only Lance Armstrong was more successful than Ullrich in the past.
It continues to blow my mind how anybody can dislike Lance Armstrong. This guy has got to be the sports story of the century. The man had a disease so horrible that it would be considered a death blow some 20 years prior. He was reduced to a ghost-like waif, sapping all energy and muscle from his body. Not only did he overcome it, but he busted his butt to get back into cycling shape and win what many consider the toughest test in sports: The Tour de France. And not only did he win it, he set the all-time record by winning 6 of them. And not only that, but he won all six back to back to back to back to back to back to become the most celebrated Tour de France winner of all time! On top of this, he has never tested positive for any kind of banned substance. On top of that, he has raised millions of dollars for cancer research worldwide. What's the issue here? Why are people trying to besmirch his good name? Is the issue: 1) The fact that he's American? 2) The fact that he whips the Euros in what is considered "their sport" (on their soil, also). 3) The fact that he's Texan on top of being American? 4) The fact that it took him a while to learn French and feel comfortable using it in interviews? 5) The fact that he comes across in interviews as being somewhat arrogant to some (not to me at all)? By the way, shyness and arrogance can easily be misconstrued as being one another. Also, an interview clip is a sorry way to form a judgment on another human being. I just don't get it.
How do you know? I mean, let me word it another way, HOW DO YOU KNOW? But really, HOW DO YOU KNOW? If you cannot come up with even a remotely respectable argument, why not leave it alone.
When I read that article, I thought the fact that Hamilton lived in the same building as Armstrong was just a coincidence. But the fact that Hamilton also talked to Armstrong too, just seals the deal for me. Armstrong is guilty as hell.
ยด No, definitely not. No...I am not very fanatic about cycling. Now, if you guys started beating us in soccer...but I'm not very worried about that . No, most definitely not! No. I actually have no idea how good his French is. My guess would be that it is much better than mine. Partly. I find him very arrogant, not only in interviews, but also his whole behavior (like when he chased down the Italian guy in this year's Tour de France). On the other hand, maybe this is what it takes for some to be a winner. I really dislike Michael Jordan and Kobe, too (or, to take a non-American example to make sure that this is not viewed as anti-American, which I would find absurd, Roberto Carlos (Soccer player from Brazil)), and they have similar behavorial patterns as Armstrong.
One somewhat funny thing I notice is that by addressing the issue of doping in cycling, I seem to have managed something which seemed impossible, if you have read the D&D forum for a while... ...left and right seem to unite in this case to defend someone who hasn't even been explicitly accused... Seriously, I am somewhat amazed by the ensuing hostility and defensiveness when this topic comes up .
So, does anyone have any comments on the case of Tyler Hamilton (not Lance Armstrong)? Do you guys think he (Tyler Hamilton) is guilty of doping?
I think it's very explainable. Lance Armstrong is a freaking badazz. Almost all of us on this bbs agree on that point, yourself being the most vocal exception. When you attack somebody who many people consider a hero and a role model (for very, very good reasons), then you will receive a response like this. by the way - on your point about Americans and soccer - let's not forget about the last world cup. I think you can agree that the US-Germany match was a pretty even competition, with some arguing that the better team that day lost the game. Not that I give a crap about soccer, but I thought I'd mention that.
I understand that. But it's not like I am the only one having doubts or expressing them. Among those who do the same is another American hero who recovered from tragic situations and who has a LOT of insight - Greg Lemond. Plus, I posted that another former American cycling great backed up Lemond. Now, the one rider from the peloton who for many years had the closest relationship to Armstrong - same team, lived in the same place, had been Armstrong's "lieutenant" for several years - seems to have been caught. I think it is legitimate to post this news in this context. I think we should be able to just agree to disagree, without the hostility I am obviously encountering here.
Let's see (and this is all circumstantial evidence only, and I am surely forgetting a few things, but a big piece of the puzzle has been added today): - Three-time AMERICAN Tour de France winner and respected athlete Greg Lemond, who should have a lot of insight and who would have a lot to lose if his statements are never proven true, accuses Armstrong of doping. - Lemond's wife testifies that Armstrong made threats against Lemond to ruin him. - Former Giro d'Italia winner Andrew Hampsten backs up Greg Lemond. - A book comes out with several claims of people who accuse Armstrong of doping. - Armstrong has been working for years with an Italian doctor who is widely known for his doping practices. - A former US Postal doctor who had to leave the team shortly before Armstrong came to that team says that he was forced to leave because he did not agree to participate in doping. - A former masseuse testifies that Armstrong made her throw away syringes and that she has first-hand knowledge of Armstrong doping and that he made threats to her that she better not say anything. - Armstrong chases down a fellow cyclist who admitted to doping and who confirmed that the doctor Armstrong works with all the time is a doping expert and says "I was just protecting the interests of the peloton". - Armstrong makes a surprising (to me, at least) decision not to participate in the Olympics when the one thing that is still missing in his collection of successes is the Olympic Gold - and when the IOC has announced that they will crack down extremely hard on doping, in contrast to former times, with new testing methods and more unannounced testing. - The one cyclist who was Armstrong's closest confidant for many years, who trained with him all the time and who lives in the same house with Armstrong for several months during the year apparently gets caught for blood doping when a new test comes out that was not available before. --------- Cohen, you can surely say that you find all of this irrelevant, or at least inconclusive, and I could not prove you wrong (at least yet). But to say this is "not even a respectable argument"...I cannot agree with that. To me, that is a whole lot of (circumstantial) evidence already. It is not proof (yet), but why in the world would Greg Lemond and Andrew Hampsten risk their reputation, why would people like that masseuse and that former US postal team doctor risk their reputation and make stuff up, why would Armstrong work with a doctor that is KNOWN for being a doping expert? And is it really THAT far-fetched, considering the very close relationship Hamilton and Armstrong had and have, to see a possible connection there? esse seems to be a very knowledgable fan, and irrespective of our differing views on the Armstrong doping issue, I think esse could confirm that they are and have been very close - they have been training together for years, and more than that.
Well, I just saw the press conference with Tyler Hamilton on TV, and I have to say, he looked innocent to me. I don't know what to think about this.
The common link to all that circumstantial evidence, they all suffered finacially because of Armstrong or were ex somethings. They all have motive to bring down armstrong or profit from the brining down of him. Miussing from that list, not one positive test. The most conclusive evidence and the only reliable non-biased evidence available.
In July 1999, during the Tour de France that he was easily leading, Armstrong had a positive finding for steroid use. "I already knew about the steroid because Lance had told me," she is quoted as having said. "He said he had used a steroid before or during the Route du Sud the month before, and he thought it would be OK for the Tour. He thought the drug would be completely eliminated from his body." To resolve the looming scandal, she continues, Armstrong and two officials of his team decided to attribute the steroid to a cream used to treat saddle sores. Since Armstrong had not listed such a cream or treatment on his obligatory medical form, the team's doctor, according to this account, filled out a predated prescription. At a news conference during the Tour, Armstrong explained the appearance of the steroid as a result of his treatment for a saddle sore. http://www.active.com/story.cfm?story_id=10776&sidebar=676&category=tdf2004_peloton http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Tour-de-France
What a crock. Just a bunch of weak circumstantial arguments and misrepresentations, and yes, not even respectable. Lemond claimed the the whole peloton blew his team away, not just Lance. But he fixates on Lance, as do you. If his unsubstantiated hypothesis is correct, the whole sport is doped. So why the Lance hate? If he's wrong, it's just an embarrassment for him, eh? As for Lance's reaction to Lemond (and Lemond's wife's comments), what you you do if you were innocent and slandered by someone? Someone who never saw you take drugs, had no evidence, but it just seemed logical to them that you must be? I'd be pretty pissed. As for Hampstein, you are WRONG WRONG WRONG. Read his letter. He supports Lemond for questioning what happened to the ENTIRE peloton, he SPECIFICALLY STAYS AWAY FROM THE LEMOND/ARMSTRONG ISSUE. E.g,: ..Without wishing to appear to side with either Greg Lemond or Lance Armstrong in their well-publicised fights, Andy Hampsten - the only ever US winner of the Giro d'Italia - has told BikeBiz.com he would like to invite Armstrong, Tyler Hamilton and Britain's David Millar to be part of the expert list for the putative organisation. Millar recented admitted to EPO use and expressed his desire to help other young pros say no to performance-enhancing drugs. Dr. Michele Ferrari is not on the invite list... http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-news/article.php?id=4431 Here's Andy's letter: http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/6660.0.html What if my physician is arrested for selling dope. Will people now think I take the stuff? Maybe he happens to be a competent sports dr, regardless of the dope. He lives in the same building with Hamilton and used to train with him...again, so what? I lived a few blocks away from a bodybuilder that I lifted with and he was always jacked-up on steroids. I never took any, but I guess you would think that I did? As for the Olympics, give me a break. Shall we now conclude that all of our NBA stars who decided not to partake are doping? Lance won a bronze 4 years ago, and stated he had not spent enough time with his kids this year. How you can read something into that to suit your needs is ridiculous. From all i've read, the tests used in Athens (that supposedly caught Hamilton) were the same ones from the Tour. WHAT'S YOUR LOGIC? SJC, you can believe what you want. But it appears that most folks here are sick of you're insinuations about Lance. Could Lance be doping? Sure, he could be. And it's just as likely if he is, that the entire peloton is. So WHY fixate on Lance ONLY?? I could at least understand a disgust with the entire sport if you felt Lemond's guess (which is all it is) was right, but focusing on Lance and utilizing a bunch of tenuous, circumstantial 'evidence' is just plain irritating. And FWIW, what Lance does with his wrist bands is a great gesture, but I personally don't really care for his personality that much. I.e., he's no hero of mine. I don't think that I would personally like him, but I intensely dislike people making unsubstintiated accusations at people who are so accomplished. What do you think this looks like to others?
From your enyclopedia link: Note that during his entire post-cancer career, Armstrong has been subject to blood testing after nearly every stage he has raced in the Tour, according to his autobiography, It's Not About the Bike. He once tested positive for minute traces of a banned substance, however it was explained that he had a medical prescription for saddle sore relief cream which had introduced those substances into his body chemistry, and he had cleared his use of the cream in advance with UCI and Tour organizers.
