The Lance Armstrong Story - Stop at Nothing on iPlayer

[M-Power]

Re:

Let's not forget Lance did all this with one good testicle ! So we can't say he had balls... Texan or otherwise. That in itself is amazing IMO, let alone surviving advanced C, Chemo etc. I remember reading back in 91 when he won the World Champs, he had one of the highest ever VO2 Max readings ever recorded at Texas Uni iirc, similar to Indurain. The man was physically special. If he'd had both bollox maybe he'd never have needed performance enhancing substances. Just saying. Yes I know the remaining bollock enlarges and compensates to some degree but in a sport that gruelling, natural T levels play an important part in an athletes physiology.

Scientist hat off

With regard to his ruthless pursuit of naysayers, those critical of him, accusers etc...he probably felt he must 'never' let those who believed in him down, he transcended sport in many people's eyes. My aunt RIP, was fighting breast cancer at the time and I gave her my copy of his book. She found it inspiring Once you start lying of course the stakes and lies get proportionally greater as their 'star' rises.

There are numerous rumours about Tiger and HGH, cover ups, dodgy busted Drs etc. If you ever see Daley Thompson's interview talking about Linford Christie's performances, then you will know that its likely many if not most of our heros were 'at it'. They had to, as they surely knew on the grape vine most of the competition were too.

Also saw a prog where an IOC anti doping specialist mentioned that they retested old samples in storage from famous champions bitd, using up to date analysis and the majority were 'at it' in some form or another. So much so they decided to just draw a line under it and keep quiet.

They are gunning for Lance and won't be happy till he's riddled with cancer and dies in agony....then they can eulogise again about what a great guy he really was and his support for cancer victims. It's all just sick media hyperbole to sell advertising at the end of the day :facepalm:

 

[Neil]

Re: Re:

Let's not forget Lance did all this with one good testicle ! So we can't say he had balls... Texan or otherwise. That in itself is amazing IMO, let alone surviving advanced C, Chemo etc. I remember reading back in 91 when he won the World Champs, he had one of the highest ever VO2 Max readings ever recorded at Texas Uni iirc, similar to Indurain. The man was physically special. If he'd had both bollox maybe he'd never have needed performance enhancing substances. Just saying. Yes I know the remaining bollock enlarges and compensates to some degree but in a sport that gruelling, natural T levels play an important part in an athletes physiology.

Scientist hat off

With regard to his ruthless pursuit of naysayers, those critical of him, accusers etc...he probably felt he must 'never' let those who believed in him down, he transcended sport in many people's eyes. My aunt RIP, was fighting breast cancer at the time and I gave her my copy of his book. She found it inspiring Once you start lying of course the stakes and lies get proportionally greater as their 'star' rises.

There are numerous rumours about Tiger and HGH, cover ups, dodgy busted Drs etc. If you ever see Daley Thompson's interview talking about Linford Christie's performances, then you will know that its likely many if not most of our heros were 'at it'. They had to, as they surely knew on the grape vine most of the competition were too.

I'd tend to agree about the cynicism some people have for many athletes.

But as for Lance and the one ball thing... well hasn't it been established / brought into the public domain that he was assisted before the big C?

All the same, it does say something- this guy beat metastasised cancer, and fought his way back into an already drug adled sport.

 

[pigman]

Re:

You're right, a remarkable athlete and a man so driven that he could really move mountains. All good and much kudos to him. Like i said earlier, the self-drugging is not the thing that the witch hunt has been about. For Linford and others it was about improving oneself and administering to oneself. If you look at the US postal no. 2's, one by one they fell from grace - heras, hamilton, landis, hincapie. Lance used them all as cannon fodder and scapegoats. And he took it so much further by ringleading, threatening, conspiring etc.

Like all dictators throughout history, what starts off as a fairytale and breath of fresh air gets replaced by distain, hate and witch hunts as the meglamania and crazy actions overtake the original ethos.

 

[M-Power]

Re:

Fair points Neil, Pigman but I think he was genuinely motivated by the greater good, unlike most dictators. Sure, he was single minded, ruthless and driven. If he hadn't been, its more than likely he would have been pushing up daisies years ago. C survivors talk about the 'fight' in people to survive. Many don't have it and it consumes them even faster.

Peer pressure can be a terrible thing, think about yoof sucked into hard drugs to look 'cool' amongst their friends. I honestly believe he had the natural abilities to win without 'help' if everybody else at the time was clean too. But only a fool would believe the others were. I was a big LeMond fan bitd, saw him in 94 climbing Ditchling beacon. He had 70+ toxic lead shot in him. Accepting tissue encapsulation, the facts are lead is a really nasty toxin which affects so many organs, nervous system etc. Bearing in mind he was taking part in the toughest Pro race at the time, do people honestly believe he didn't have 'help' too ?

I think Lance knew of the rank hypocrisy in lucrative professional sport and played along with it 'better' thank most of the rest and here's my point, predominantly for the common good. He made enemies along the way and the French hated the idea of an American dominating their national sport. He's an amazing intelligent articulate man. I hope he finds another positive outlet for his talents and just hope he's mentally and physically strong enough to get through all this. He's still a hero IMO.

 

[Neil]

Re: Re:

Fair points Neil, Pigman but I think he was genuinely motivated by the greater good, unlike most dictators. Sure, he was single minded, ruthless and driven. If he hadn't been, its more than likely he would have been pushing up daisies years ago. C survivors talk about the 'fight' in people to survive. Many don't have it and it consumes them even faster.

Peer pressure can be a terrible thing, think about yoof sucked into hard drugs to look 'cool' amongst their friends. I honestly believe he had the natural abilities to win without 'help' if everybody else at the time was clean too. But only a fool would believe the others were. I was a big LeMond fan bitd, saw him in 94 climbing Ditchling beacon. He had 70+ toxic lead shot in him. Accepting tissue encapsulation, the facts are lead is a really nasty toxin which affects so many organs, nervous system etc. Bearing in mind he was taking part in the toughest Pro race at the time, do people honestly believe he didn't have 'help' too ?

I think Lance knew of the rank hypocrisy in lucrative professional sport and played along with it 'better' thank most of the rest and here's my point, predominantly for the common good. He made enemies along the way and the French hated the idea of an American dominating their national sport. He's an amazing intelligent articulate man. I hope he finds another positive outlet for his talents and just hope he's mentally and physically strong enough to get through all this. He's still a hero IMO.

I don't see him as the pariah that many do.

And I recognise and try to understand what it must have taken to get through cancer as severe as he had it (it wasn't just a tumour in one area, it started off as testicular, but metastisised to his brain - both required surgery, as well as chemo), to be able to then get back to competitive cycling. And let's not just say that was the drugs talking - it's not like his peers were clean.

There's things I admire about him.

There's also things that have come to light that are far from admirable - I'm talking about how he treated those around him. Now sure - I suspect there's likely similar stories in other famous peoples' lives that haven't been broadcast and outed in the same way. All the same, his attitude and treatment of people and the press, is likely to be a factor in polarising those determined to nail him. Now he may well have had that coming. My issue being, he's presented as poster-boy for the presented "bad years" of cycling - but drug use was prevalent before and after him. He wasn't the cause, he played the game.

If the gig is that the sport is cleaned up, then that's one thing - let's see 'em do it. If it's to simply nail Armstrong - fair enough, I suppose, he brought that on himself - but I suspect nobody is going to be truly happy if ever full disclosure of all those times was exposed - people should be careful of what they wish for.

His issue, in terms of public opinion - he polarised people. And for a lot of people, him getting outed in this way was just what they were looking for - because it's suited many to demonise him. And as I said - he did kind of bring a lot of that on him.

But if the issue is drug usage - then let's really address the problem - let's really put the same scrutiny and exposure that was laser-beamed at him, to plenty of others, that are being claimed as clean - because like the previous rationale with Armstrong - were never caught.

On the other hand, if the issue is that for many he was an obnoxious, arrogant S-O-B - then fair enough, I suppose - a lot of people have got their wishes. All the same - that being true, let's not really be that hypocritical about the drug thing - because it's far from starting or ending with him.

 

[Totoro]

Re:

I watched this last night.

I wouldn't put all those drugs into my body and go through all that for all the money he got, never mind having to race too.

 

[M-Power]

Re:

Who's next to fall from Grace ?

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-ce ... 14-visits/



Like I said, if we all really knew the dirty secrets of our heros would we worship them so much ?