Comments on: Lance – No ordinary dope

By: KevinSheen

KevinSheen — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 17:55:45 +0000

RobChurchill I would agree. Especially now that the USADA report has been released and the facts / witnesses are far beyond plausible deniability.
Lately, what I’m seeing is perhaps someone that is so backed into a corner that they are now behaving completely irrationally. I don’t even know that he even sees it day to day – he just goes through the motions (deny, attack, pretend it doesn’t exist).
What’s sad is that even now, he could do a lot for sport and his own name – but then again, for him personally, there’s little to gain and a lot more to lose. He’s probably still hoping it just blows over.
I’ve said it before though – I hope this truly cracks open the corruptness worldwide, not just cleaning up American cycling.

By: RobChurchill

RobChurchill — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 11:00:31 +0000

ksheen Armstrong had/has the UCI in his pocket. He thought that gave him all the protection he needed, so why bother what USADA does? That was his miscalculation. He probably also made the mistake of believing his own propaganda about the UCI having sole jurisdiction.
And I think there’s some evidence that Armstrong thought the support he got from the UCI would also be forthcoming from other regulatory bodies. It’s the only explanation for the sheer hubris of his letter to the IOC members calling on them to sack the WADA president in the wake of the L’Equipe revelations.
Lastly, all Armstrong’s paranoia and reflex aggression to the slightest perceived threat – don’t you think there’s more than a hint of psychological complications of chronic steroid abuse there? It’s part of the reason the damn stuff is banned, after all.

By: Ericg22

Ericg22 — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 09:00:31 +0000

“By adopting its current position UCI is sadly destroying the credibility it has slowly been regaining in the past years in the fight against doping.” David Howman
When taking Mr Howman’s statement and Mr Hardie’s observations into the more recent context of the UCI’s decision to sue Paul Kimmage the very question of the UCI’s legitimacy has to be raised. It’s no longer a question of credibility. I can only hope that Verbruggen and McQuaid, by initiating the recent action against Kimmage, will draw the wrath of the whole community that they should have been responsible to. They have failed in their responsibility to deliver the UCI’s objective of “developing and promoting the sport… and its associated values”. http://www.uci.ch/templates/UCI/UCI1/layout.asp?MenuId=MTI2NjA&LangId=1
It’s a story of sporting tyranny. Almost laughable if it did not sadly have the cost of so much sadness written into it’s chapters.
How does a community depose of Tyrants? David Millar, the great repenter, calls for a revolution. I am inclined to agree. Let’s hope a leader of the revolution emerges and uses the Kimmage episode as the rallying call to depose the Tyrants that have poisoned a generation of cyclists and erased a decade of cycling from it’s history.
Eric

By: ksheen

ksheen — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 22:21:16 +0000

So I’ve read the massive conspiracy posts that have flourished and grown in recent days. It seems that the pendulum has now swung into how deep this rabbit hole goes and how clever, intimidating, powerful, etc.. the LA machine had become. Or perhaps the mic just got turned on for folks that have realized this conspiracy all along. Regardless – the observation I’d make looking at the @dimspace diagram is; “How in the heck than could USADA even get this far with the money / pressure that LA could bring to bear across the entire industry?” – yes, I see the LA suppression motions (mentioned in this post) but were those just a feint? I mean – how is it that LA with all this money and deep ties, couldn’t just make this ‘go-away’ before any of us even knew about it? Was this arrogance on his part, not thinking they’d get traction? Did he really miscalculate the play by play?Since when has a small US government regulatory agency not been able to be corrupted with a few well placed dollars and / favors? Again – you can say that he tried, but looking at from the outside-in at his wealth, supporters, business partnerships – I would assume if a guy like that tried, he’d succeed.Or is there a deal already cut with UCI to ignore the ruling? Did he just look at it and say; ‘Heck, nobody is going to switch sides. 6 months it blows over, doesn’t impact my fan base, personal wealth, business ventures. All I do is give up a Kona attempt and a couple years of WTC racing I have left. And maybe I doubt my chances in Kona (heat, field, whatever) so this way it’s more powerful – I’m illegitimately denied crushing the field there. That’s a decent story-line.I’ve lived nearly a 1/2 century now. I know I should be more cynical. But wow – I like to think that someone who so many admired and were inspired by for so many years is that manipulative – as well as that willing to just chuck it to cut his losses (or so egotistical that he misjudged the play by play). That would be really sad to come to grips with – he’s either completely morally corrupt / coldly calculating / inept – or any combination of the three.

By: ksheen

ksheen — Tue, 28 Aug 2012 22:21:16 +0000

Yes, I know USADA isn’t technically a US government regulatory agency….