Jump to content
Peter

ESPN Lance 30 for 30. He seems upset with someone

Recommended Posts

I swing between thinking he's just a sick sociopath & feeling sorry for him.

Alcoholics on both sides of the family; a mother who gave him no guidance; a supposedly semi-mad stepfather.. 

He's not & never will be a happy individual.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t bother watching it either. 
 

just more half truths. 
 

he is farked up That’s a certainty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Nick777 said:

I swing between thinking he's just a sick sociopath & feeling sorry for him.

Alcoholics on both sides of the family; a mother who gave him no guidance; a supposedly semi-mad stepfather.. 

He's not & never will be a happy individual.

I have moments where I think he knows the damage he has caused, and is willing to accept the backlash from it, and be self aware, but there is that thing in the back on my mind that cant shake the lies of 15 years, the careers he has ruined, and the personal vandettas he has had.

He could have been a beacon for all the fans of cycling, coming completely clean, and helping the sport wash the sins of past, but he doesnt, and all his mates around him must be equally toxic for the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can’t get to the top with out making some enemies. 
I get what people are saying, but I also like the way he’s moving forward & trying new things etc.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching it just reinforces my thoughts on Lance. I know a few people that have NFI  

FM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not worth discussing him He's not even yesterdays news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bored@work said:

You can’t get to the top with out making some enemies. 
I get what people are saying, but I also like the way he’s moving forward & trying new things etc.

 

 

I kind of agree, there is nothing he can really do to fix the past so he is focusing on the future, can't argue with that. But he has that cult leader kind of personality and you can see he is doing it all again. There are a lot of things about him that are admirable and many things i despise but at the end of the day very little of it impacts my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can put things into perspective very easily....And thats why I will always love Lance.

He can do no wrong on my eyes. Sure he has f%cked a lot of people over. But that was his defence mechanism - doesn't make it right though....but the best form of defence is attack..and thats what he did best....both on the bike and off it.

And....I am pretty sure doping in cycling and sport DID znot start with Lance. It's been a systematic machine in all sports (more specifically cycling) for a long time....way before Lance came along. He just got caught up in the machine and was the best of the best.
 

Apart from that, I don't think he gives a crap what we all think......and his regrets are few.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lance 

21 minutes ago, Naut said:

There are a lot of things about him that are admirable and many things i despise but at the end of the day very little of it impacts my life.

Reminds me of Trump, Mundine & my old sparing partner. 
 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, IronmanFoz said:

 

He can do no wrong on my eyes. Sure he has f%cked a lot of people over. But that was his defence mechanism - doesn't make it right though....but the best form of defence is attack..and thats what he did best....both on the bike and off it.

 

 

That makes zero sense. He f*cked over lots of people, but that was his defence, which wasn't right, but he can do wrong? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, IronmanFoz said:

 

He can do no wrong on my eyes. Sure he has f%cked a lot of people over. But that was his defence mechanism - doesn't make it right though....but the best form of defence is attack..and thats what he did best....both on the bike and off it.

 

He attacked on the bike, because he had better drugs.There's footage of him flying up  l'Alpe d'Huez in 2001(?) chatting as though he's on a coffee ride, whilst his competitors are struggling up the mountain, breathing out their ring. That was the day that when people started pointing fingers at him.

He did nothing in cycling until he got to 26 and by that stage he had been doping 5 years. You could argue that the playing field was level because they were all doping. They weren't all doping and many that were did not have access to the "medical expertise: offered by Ferrari. Additionally LA ensured he had the best team around him, doped up to the eyeballs too. Cycling is a team sport, how big a part does a team play in an individual's victory? I'm pretty sure Froome played a big part in Wiggin's first win and without Froome, he would not have won.

Edited by zed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, zed said:

Additionally LA ensured he had the best team around him, doped up to the eyeballs too. 

Like I said....he was the best of the best.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, IronmanFoz said:

Like I said....he was the best of the best.

 

What criteria are you using to say he was the best of the best?  He won a couple of road races in California back in the early 90s, that's it.

Edited by zed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, dazmuzza said:

He's a malignant narcissist

Unfortunately the way the world works, narcissists are often beloved and lauded, especially successful, charismatic narcissists. It does not matter how much they cheat, lie and screw people over, they can do no wrong. The irony is that if a LA fanboy had a brother, partner, mate like LA they would despise them.I think most people still declaring LA is the messiah, are not well or are trolling or both.

Edited by zed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He could have just kept quiet, and lived out his life quietly with his millions.

Edited by goughy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, goughy said:

He could have just kept quiet, and lived out his life quietly with his millions.

Crazy huh. He was in the clear, got away with it, 7 TDF titles, tons of sponsors and adoring fans, millions in the bank and he couldn't resist...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, goughy said:

He could have just kept quiet, and lived out his life quietly with his millions.

 

2 hours ago, zed said:

Crazy huh. He was in the clear, got away with it, 7 TDF titles, tons of sponsors and adoring fans, millions in the bank and he couldn't resist...

I’m sure if he had his time over again he would still take the drugs. Be the arsehole. 
 

just not make a comeback.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, goughy said:

He could have just kept quiet, and lived out his life quietly with his millions.

 

2 hours ago, zed said:

Crazy huh. He was in the clear, got away with it, 7 TDF titles, tons of sponsors and adoring fans, millions in the bank and he couldn't resist...

 

10 minutes ago, Peter said:

 

I’m sure if he had his time over again he would still take the drugs. Be the arsehole. 
 

just not make a comeback.  

But he cant stand not being in the spotlight and the centre of attention. That's what built him up and brought him down 

Its like his podcast, started out being informative and entertaining, (I hate Lance and even I enjoyed it) and he had the opportunity to redeem himself in many eyes and possibly even give something back to the sport in a way,  but then started just being all about Lance again and his opinion on everything.  I tuned out and have never tuned back in. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think his only regret was being found guilty.  Doubt he cared he was guilty, just that everyone else found out.  I reckon he wouldn't have done a single thing differently, except maybe the admitting it part.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Peter said:

 

I’m sure if he had his time over again he would still take the drugs. Be the arsehole. 
 

just not make a comeback.  

 

 

3 minutes ago, goughy said:

I think his only regret was being found guilty.  Doubt he cared he was guilty, just that everyone else found out.  I reckon he wouldn't have done a single thing differently, except maybe the admitting it part.  

I reckon if he could go back in time, he still would have made the come back. And the bizarre thing, him admitting his doping has hardly seemed to have affected his hero status. Maybe in some ways even elevated it. Most athletes that have doped have become pariahs, please stand up Ben Johnson. Marion Jones was widely despised in the USA and did jail time, Michelle Smith, Tyson Gay etc And Sun Yang hasn't even failed a drug test and we wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Yet Armstrong doped for 25 years and still charges $50k a go for motivational speaking.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

He can do no wrong on my eyes. Sure he has f%cked a lot of people over. 

I think we should all live by these guidelines

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nick777 said:

I think we should all live by these guidelines

lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zed said:

 

He did nothing in cycling until he got to 26

He won the World Championship at 22. Not supporting him but let's get our facts right

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot of self obsessed arseholes in America. Lance is their King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr Flower said:

He won the World Championship at 22. Not supporting him but let's get our facts right

Yup. Missed that one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Greyman said:

There are a lot of self obsessed arseholes in America. Lance is their King.

There's plenty on Slowtwits.

Seriously...that place is like another planet sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your anus???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lance deserves everything he is getting and has gotten, for the way he conducted himself. He could have done as every doper before him and sailed off into obscurity. For all that Lance made cycling main stream, many of us started watching the tour went out and bought bikes.

At the time those stages were awesome to watch, we were awe struck when he made the move on Ullrich and countless other attacks. The Festina affair of 98 lifted the veil that we had all sort of known and accepted, Richard Virenque cried and cried some more. For years many of us echoed the thoughts of Foz, and to an extent I still do, Cycling was glowing, 98 showed us that. Lance and his crew took it to a new level with the cold way they managed it along with the UCI.

For many, the issue is not the doping, there was so much dope to go around we have had local pros come out and admit they were on it, which supports the position that everyone was on it. Not everyone was on the same "it". Lance doped and entertained the hell out of us, before Lance we all loved watching the crazy fueled attacks of Pantani and Virenque in the mountains.

Lance's conduct to anyone who stood in his way was appalling, had he thrown a few dollars to Floyd and Tyler he most likely has a different story, but he had to be the man and grind people into the dust. That was his downfall and why no one is worrying about all the others.

For all that, it was much more entertaining compared to the snooze fest we get now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a simple summary of the whole Lance thing was that With all the people he shafted the one who really help finish him off was the guy who had the least to lose.....Floyd Landis.

People with a lot to lose are more cautious about there actions in general.Unless they are Psycos like Lance.

You take on a guy like Floyd who was rock bottom with nothing to lose and thats a massive risk.

Lance wasent smart enough to know better or too arrogant and thaught he had control .....he didnt by that stage.

Had he given Floyd a ride when he asked in 2009 it may have been many more years or perhaps never till the downfall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, zed said:

Yup. Missed that one. 

Dude. You missed his whole palmares before he had cancer. He was ranked No.1 when his ballsack was as big as a grapefruit in 96.

Let’s be blunt. Lance was a much bigger doper before cancer than after cancer. So was everybody else in the peleton. After cancer he was far more strategic about everything he did, including doping, whereas all his competitors where simply taking as much shit as they ever did. At the end of the day he was better than everybody else at the own race that mattered to him each year. That’s because he was ruthless in chasing the marginal gains. Better training, better bikes, tyres, better everything. Including doping. More scientific. For all of that he was also a prodigious talent. 
 

The so called victims on Lance? I’m sorry for the masseuse. That’s about it. Ironically they make their peace years ago. I give literally zero f#*ks about everybody else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Andrew #1 said:

Dude. You missed his whole palmares before he had cancer. He was ranked No.1 when his ballsack was as big as a grapefruit in 96.

Let’s be blunt. Lance was a much bigger doper before cancer than after cancer. So was everybody else in the peleton. After cancer he was far more strategic about everything he did, including doping, whereas all his competitors where simply taking as much shit as they ever did. At the end of the day he was better than everybody else at the own race that mattered to him each year. That’s because he was ruthless in chasing the marginal gains. Better training, better bikes, tyres, better everything. Including doping. More scientific. For all of that he was also a prodigious talent. 
 

The so called victims on Lance? I’m sorry for the masseuse. That’s about it. Ironically they make their peace years ago. I give literally zero f#*ks about everybody else.

Yeah...nah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Andrew #1 said:

Dude. You missed his whole palmares before he had cancer. He was ranked No.1 when his ballsack was as big as a grapefruit in 96.

Let’s be blunt. Lance was a much bigger doper before cancer than after cancer. So was everybody else in the peleton. After cancer he was far more strategic about everything he did, including doping, whereas all his competitors where simply taking as much shit as they ever did. At the end of the day he was better than everybody else at the own race that mattered to him each year. That’s because he was ruthless in chasing the marginal gains. Better training, better bikes, tyres, better everything. Including doping. More scientific. For all of that he was also a prodigious talent. 
 

The so called victims on Lance? I’m sorry for the masseuse. That’s about it. Ironically they make their peace years ago. I give literally zero f#*ks about everybody else.

I did write a longer response, but I'm over talking about LA. An average cyclist that wasn't that good and not particularly smart. He was busted multiple times, but he was a convincing liar who was adept at manipulating and coercing people. That's it.

Edited by zed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zed said:

I did write a longer response, but I'm over talking about LA. An average cyclist that wasn't that good and not particularly smart. He was busted multiple times, but he was a convincing liar who was adept at manipulating and coercing people. That's it.

Cognitive dissonance abounds.  Like you however I’m also over talking about LA, other than to correct the risible bullshit that he was ‘just an average cyclist’. Unlike you however, my distain extends to the whole pro peloton.

Edited by Andrew #1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Andrew #1 said:

Cognitive dissonance abounds.  Like you however I’m also over talking about LA, other than to correct the risible bullshit that he was ‘just an average cyclist’. Unlike you however, my distain extends to the whole pro peloton.

Armstrong was clearly "not just an average cyclist", but he was reasonably average the peloton in terms of his physiology. His Vo2 was nothing special for a pro ~79-80.

The thing that set him apart was not talent, but the fact that he had a natural hematocrit of 39 & could dope without worrying about getting busted. Pretty simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Nick777 said:

 

The thing that set him apart was not talent, but the fact that he had a natural hematocrit of 39 & could dope without worrying about getting busted. Pretty simple.

And he had a will to win that knew no boundaries, be that within the rules or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nick777 said:

Armstrong was clearly "not just an average cyclist", but he was reasonably average the peloton in terms of his physiology. His Vo2 was nothing special for a pro ~79-80.

The thing that set him apart was not talent, but the fact that he had a natural hematocrit of 39 & could dope without worrying about getting busted. Pretty simple.

Dude. He won the Professional Road World title at the end of his first year as a pro. He was never ‘average’. Your second sentence is pure ‘grassy knoll’ conspiracy stuff.

The reality is that even in the late 90s the ‘professional’ peloton was still a rolling shambleton of barely organised amateurism. Drug taking was rampant but also slap dash. The typical approach could be summed up as follows: ‘Do drugs work?’ Probably. Which ones and how much? Dunno exactly, but try this concoction of ‘pot belge’. Sure thing coach.

Given the state of the peloton the scope to capitalise on marginal gains through a systematic and methodical approach to everything was enormous. That was the biggest difference between pre cancer and post cancer Lance. Before cancer he just went along with what ever everybody else in the team and the peloton was doing. No real structure or application. He still won a bunch of big time races. After cancer, everything he did was meticulous.

I have little doubt he blames the indiscriminate drug abuse pre cancer for his cancer. That didn’t mean he wouldn’t dope after cancer, but it did mean that he just wouldn’t be indiscriminate anymore about what he shot up his arm.

But it wasn’t just drugs. Pre cancer Lance got by on a diet of tex mex and beer. Post cancer lance everything that he ate was measured down to the last calorie. Especially in the first six months of the year. Pre cancer Lance would simply do the training that everybody else was doing. Every turn of the legs on the bike for post cancer lance was measured and had a specific purpose. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignoring all the other elements, it's amazing he and the team held it together to win for 7 years. There are so many things that could go wrong.

Look at Cadel, he looks at the ground funny and gets a broken elbow. Froome had the year with the cobbles where he crashed before even reaching the stones. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lactate threshold has many definitions but is commonly known as the exercise intensity that an athlete can sustain for a specific period of time before their blood lactate concentration becomes too high. At a certain point lactate begins to accumulate faster than the muscles can remove it, and the intensity is no longer sustainable. A higher lactate threshold is a much better indicator of overall athletic performance compared to VO2 max because it provides insight on how the muscles are utilizing available oxygen.

Elite athletes have been measuring their VO2 max for over 50 years as a measure of overall aerobic fitness. VO2 max is defined as the maximum rate of oxygen consumption and is expressed in milliliters per minute per kilogram of body weight (ml/min/kg). Aerobic training improves VO2 max significantly. However, on its own is a poor predictor of athletic performance because it tells nothing about how efficiently the muscles are utilizing the available oxygen.

So the legends spread as a way of explaining why one person wins consistently. It happened with Miguel Indurain, a Spaniard who won five consecutive tours in the 1990's. Mr. Indurain's VO2 max, according to a widespread rumor, was 95 milliliters per kilogram of body weight per minute, a level so high it is unheard of. The real number was 78, Dr. Coyle said, but researchers who tested Mr. Indurain were reluctant to put the true figure in their paper for fear of demolishing the Indurain myth. (NYT)

Lance had pretty good numbers at LT and V02 mx of 85

At least we can agree that he was not a good person

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just remember, if you or I defrauded billions of people out of millions of dollars, we would have done jail time, and no one would have felt sorry for us. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Andrew #1 said:

Cognitive dissonance abounds.  Like you however I’m also over talking about LA, other than to correct the risible bullshit that he was ‘just an average cyclist’. Unlike you however, my distain extends to the whole pro peloton.

Agree. He wasn;t just an average cyclist. And I 100% agree what you have said re: the whole Pro peloton and that extends to today. Am not interested in watch any tours etc.

I just like to remember to the good old days when Lance was dancing on the pedals and winning. This was when the tour was exciting. But even back then only the naive thought it was drug free, but hey what a spectacle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

Agree. He wasn;t just an average cyclist. And I 100% agree what you have said re: the whole Pro peloton and that extends to today. Am not interested in watch any tours etc.

I just like to remember to the good old days when Lance was dancing on the pedals and winning. This was when the tour was exciting. But even back then only the naive thought it was drug free, but hey what a spectacle.

This is on the money, it was rocket fueled and we all knew and it was great. Now it's boring. Can cycling be exciting without drugs? Is it clean anyway or did a certain team simply make it so scientific that it became a procession a bit like the US Postal at its peak.

The real thrill of the tour is when two GC guys got at it day after day, Ullrich, Beloki and co going at Lance. That went away in the last two years of Lance.

Maybe that's as simple as leveling the playing field, given that the one team domination correlates strongly with the use of TUE and "legal" methods.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So maybe the issue with cycling today is that it's too long and boring watching a peleton trundle along hour after hour.  Kinda like triathlon?  So what specifically are the things that make it exciting?

Why not just shorten the daily races, include rough climbs etc, long sprint sections, rough cornering, and make the race about an hour long.  So less begging to conserve yourself to the finish?  That way competitors will be able to "dance on the pedals", maybe succeed in more breakaways, a few more crashes?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My theory has been that modern sport viewing has moved past Grand Tour cycling. Most sports are adapting to a more dynamic model, either via duration or rules etc. 

I agree with what you say above in general, that the style of stages would create more entertainment, but I had always worried that by shortening stages across a grand tour, you would drastically reduce overall distance and therefore the perceived challenge. My answer? Double Days. 
 

Imagine if approx 40% of TDF stages remained the same - HC mountain days, TT, TTT for example. The ones that are already entertaining. For the balance, each day has x2 shorter stages - morning and afternoon, approx 80-100k each. Mix in some hills, sprint finish, extra short TTs or the like, and the traditionally ‘dull’ days would be re-Energized. Instead of waiting 200km to see a 30 second sprint finish, you could see x2 in a day. It would enable more town to host start/finish sections, helping more local towns with tourism dollars in the wake of this inevitable recession. 
 

it makes a lot more sense to me than things like the already trialed grid start!

 

oh, and I loved the Lance doc so far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, goughy said:

So maybe the issue with cycling today is that it's too long and boring watching a peleton trundle along hour after hour.  Kinda like triathlon?  So what specifically are the things that make it exciting?

Why not just shorten the daily races, include rough climbs etc, long sprint sections, rough cornering, and make the race about an hour long.  So less begging to conserve yourself to the finish?  That way competitors will be able to "dance on the pedals", maybe succeed in more breakaways, a few more crashes?  

Some of the most exciting stages we've seen in recent years have been the shorter ones, like when Contador launched a long range attack less than halfway through a stage in 2017. The Dauphine has also had some cracker short stages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the big tours, is that usually the best 5-6 riders are on one team and the races is cleverly controlled...ie: they race defensively and cover ever move. It becomes quite boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...