'Enough is Enough' - Lance Armstrong

irishbuzz

MPFG

No

Halloween Jack wrote: »

Anybody with an interest in doping in general would do well to check out:

http://tennishasasteroidproblem.blogspot.com

It suggest other governing/sanctioning bodies are following the uci's lead....

Depressing stuff, I can't trust anything I see now.....

I find it hard when cycling takes the brunt of the doping accusations when other sports are left unquestioned...I expect that is why many pros do not want to discuss PEDs in cycling ...they are afraid this constant narraitve for cycling will frighten sponsors while understandably they see not such investiagtion or media hunts in other sports....I mean tennis , c'mon 7 hour rallies at that speed ??

I would like to see a full debate on performance enhancing in football, tennis and all other sports ...just a level playing field.....maybe some of the more passionate anti doping journalist in cyclingcould broaden their net ..Maybe cycling is an easier target given its comparative openess and lack of big money

Hermy

No

dave_o_brien wrote: »

Their anger can only be aired in public so loudly before they'll be told be management and sponsors to keep it down.

If they're all so anti-doping why would any of them 'keep it down'?

Halloween Jack

MPFG wrote: »

I find it hard when cycling takes the brunt of the doping accusations when other sports are left unquestioned...I expect that is why many pros do not want to discuss PEDs in cycling ...they are afraid this constant narraitve for cycling will frighten sponsors while understandably they see not such investiagtion or media hunts in other sports....I mean tennis , c'mon 7 hour rallies at that speed ??

I would like to see a full debate on performance enhancing in football, tennis and all other sports ...just a level playing field.....maybe some of the more passionate anti doping journalist in cyclingcould broaden their net ..Maybe cycling is an easier target given its comparative openess and lack of big money

I think it's going to take something dramatic. There is no doubt in my mind that pro sports are absolutely riddled with dopers, unfortunately there is little appetite for exposing this. It will take a superstar to get busted/drop dead in one of the 'clean' sports before anything changes.

In tennis they seem to be doing less testing than they were a few years back, they are doing maybe a tenth of the number of tests cycling does....

dave_o_brien

No

Hermy wrote: »

If they're all so anti-doping why would any of them 'keep it down'?

Presumably because they want to keep their jobs. In order to do that, the sponsors need to be sponsoring. For a given sponsor to keep their licence, they'd probably not want to upset the UCI too much. By extension, a cyclist mouthing off about inaction on the UCI might soon find himself an ex-cyclist who was a victim of the corrupt system.

My sentiment, I hear you ask?

Kill the UCI. At least total reform. Make Travis Tygart an advisor in the process of reconfiguration. It's a sign of how f*ked up the UCI's system of governance is that riders do seem to be unwilling to be as vocal as triathletes.

Hermy

No

By 'all' I mean not just the riders but the sponsors and management and UCI officials et al and if enough of these were willing to 'not keep it down' about doping then things might begin to change. Sadly this isn't happening.

leftism

No

dave_o_brien wrote: »

It's a sign of how f*ked up the UCI's system of governance is that riders do seem to be unwilling to be as vocal as triathletes.

I think suing the head of WADA was a much clearer sign of how f*cked up the UCI are...

leftism

No

wonderfullife wrote: »

The part about the "Truth and Reconciliation" process, i DO believe he would be first in the door. If the UCI or any independent body offer cyclists an amnesty to come forward, then bingo Lance can spill every bean possible with few repercussions. If he does that now, there are repercussions galore.

Tygart and USADA offered him amnesty. Maybe not a full and complete amnesty (which i believe none of the witnesses got) but he certainly would have received a reduced sentence had he cooperated. He chose not to, so there's no point in whinging to Oprah now that other people got let off with lighter sentences.

Lance clearly made no effort to help USADA or WADA in their efforts to clean up cycling; if anything he did his utmost to prevent them from doing so. I think the UCI are looking at this truth and reconciliation commission as a last ditch effort to keep the whole debacle "in-house" and under wraps. They've the most to lose from being exposed as complicit in the sport's doping. So when Lance ran that idea up the flagpole again on Oprah, i could almost see Mcquaid et al. prompting it from behind the cameras...

MrCreosote

corny wrote: »

What was it Fuentes said? 'If i talk Spain wouldn't be World Champions'.

Tragic they're only going after the cyclists but the footballers have deeper pockets i suppose.

Yeah, but football is a skill-based sport so doping can have no effect! :rolleyes:

In fairness though EPO/blood doping and cycling were a perfect storm, more so than any other sport. Despite the UCI, cycling is working the hardest to eradicate it though.

dave_o_brien

No

leftism wrote: »

I think suing the head of WADA was a much clearer sign of how f*cked up the UCI are...

Totally agree. As far as i can see, cycling needs a restructuring, with a separate body for testing and enforcement to promotion and registration. Given that the one body does both makes it inherently compromised, in my opinion.

But to hermy, i agree with you, and as I've stated, i think it all stems from a structural problem in how the uci works. But while this system exists, i understand when riders who are believed to be innocent get repeatedly asked to proclaim their innocence only to have the fact that la did the same thing pointed to them get angry every once in a while. Is it clever? No. Is it understandable? Yeah.

doomed

No

What bothers me is when one guy steals the top prize in the sport 7 years in a row and deprives others of glory, fame and money as a result so few of his colleagues really are up in arms about it. Most people who are cheated scream blue murder. Makes you wonder.

Cienciano

No

corny wrote: »

What was it Fuentes said? 'If i talk Spain wouldn't be World Champions'.

Tragic they're only going after the cyclists but the footballers have deeper pockets i suppose.

Luis Garcia del Moral was another spanish doping doctor and he said "“you guys take nothing in comparison to footballers"
The money in football and the difference it could make your career it would be foolish to think there's no drugs in football. But the way the spanish goverment promote their teams I doubt there'd be much political support behind finding any information about it.

Beasty

No

Verbruggen states that Armstrong and other top riders were warned about blood values

And some people think that UCI is fit for purpose with this guy remaining as one of its "leading lights":rolleyes:

Colonialboy

Yes, but he's still great

doomed wrote: »

What bothers me is when one guy steals the top prize in the sport 7 years in a row and deprives others of glory, fame and money as a result so few of his colleagues really are up in arms about it. Most people who are cheated scream blue murder. Makes you wonder.

Deprive them of glory yes , deprieve them of fame (to a degree) ... but Money ... is the case so clear cut.
LA brought huge money into cycling, you only have to look at the contracts in pro-cycling to see how earnings grew exponentially along with LAs epo fulled rise. The sponsors flooded in , TV coverage grew , and with the sponsors money came , money that had a trickle down to all the riders in the peloton. Maybe thats another reason so many in the peloton are so quiet, why so many in UCI are quite. Just another angle to a very complex story a story that is a micorocosm for society and the race to teh bottom and much much bigger concepts.
Money the root of all evil... no...its The pursuit of money is the root of all evil.


yeah I know FrDMaguire .. LA was a devious individual who hid behind the big C to line his own pockets ...yawn... yeah I got it the first time, no need to repeat it again. Im just raising another angle.

Flandria

No

doomed wrote: »

What bothers me is when one guy steals the top prize in the sport 7 years in a row and deprives others of glory, fame and money as a result so few of his colleagues really are up in arms about it. Most people who are cheated scream blue murder. Makes you wonder.

But he never won the Tour of Flanders...;)

petethedrummer

No

Colonialboy wrote: »

LA brought huge money into cycling, you only have to look at the contracts in pro-cycling to see how earnings grew exponentially along with LAs epo fulled rise. The sponsors flooded in , TV coverage grew , and with the sponsors money came , money that had a trickle down to all the riders in the peloton.

Is this actually true? It's oft repeated but I've never seen an article with graphs explaining the rise in wages with the rise of Armstrong.

I well believe the profile of the TDF was raised in the Anglo world but what about the rest of the calendar?

I don't have an opinion either way, just wanna know has anyone any links to articles on the subject.

Hermy

No

Flandria wrote: »

But he never won the Tour of Flanders...;)

He never won the Tour de France either - although he was awarded the winners prize - something which was lost on Oprah.

In all seven of your Tour de France victories, did you ever take banned substances or blood dope?
"Yes."

Colonialboy

Yes, but he's still great

petethedrummer wrote: »

Is this actually true? It's oft repeated but I've never seen an article with graphs explaining the rise in wages with the rise of Armstrong.

I well believe the profile of the TDF was raised in the Anglo world but what about the rest of the calendar?

I don't have an opinion either way, just wanna know has anyone any links to articles on the subject.

I think LA brought huge money into the pro peloton 37 million from US Postal service, 37 million ! Ive seen the cycling world pre-during-post LA . The LA Ulrich years , had huge viewership and had big money coming from Deutsche Telekom. There was alot of marquee business names invovled in thsoe days , and since LA left the tour you only have to look at the sponsors deserting the sport, deserting it cos of its dirty record but also deserting it cos they wont get the same return for their investment.

Ever wonder why your OCLV carbon bike is so cheap nowadays, I reckon LA drove bike research at a pace never seen before, made it more affordable for everyone.
I dont have graphs or articles , Id guess google does.

Im not on LAs side , he is despicable , but theres mutiple facets to the story.
You could apply the same logic to any sport, why are children in third world forced slave labour to make sports wear for the western world so a sports star has 30 million in endorsments... its f**ked up.

(and yes FrDMaguire LA got the biggest chunk of the money cos he was etc etc ...I know)

iregk

No

Colonialboy wrote: »

Ever wonder why your OCLV carbon bike is so cheap nowadays, I reckon LA drove bike research at a pace never seen before, made it more affordable for everyone.

Serious? So Lance Armstrong is personally responsible for the technological advancement in bikes. Wow. Just wow.

mcgratheoin

No

For anyone who's interested in hearing David Walsh and Paul Kimmage (I can't make it unfortunately)

https://paviliontheatre.ticketsolve.com/shows/873490394/events

Hermy

No

Thanks for the link. Who is Alan English?

ozzy jr

No

Hermy wrote: »

Thanks for the link. Who is Alan English?

David Walsh ‏@DavidWalshST
I owe an apology to Alan English. His piece in June 2004 cost the ST £900k. If my piece had been published it would have cost the paper £9m.

lennymc

No

its now sold out

ThisRegard

No

Ok, which one of you is it ?



from http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/01/23/its-positive-wednesday/

Fr D Maugire

No

Colonialboy wrote: »

I think LA brought huge money into the pro peloton 37 million from US Postal service, 37 million ! Ive seen the cycling world pre-during-post LA . The LA Ulrich years , had huge viewership and had big money coming from Deutsche Telekom. There was alot of marquee business names invovled in thsoe days , and since LA left the tour you only have to look at the sponsors deserting the sport, deserting it cos of its dirty record but also deserting it cos they wont get the same return for their investment.

Ever wonder why your OCLV carbon bike is so cheap nowadays, I reckon LA drove bike research at a pace never seen before, made it more affordable for everyone.
I dont have graphs or articles , Id guess google does.

Im not on LAs side , he is despicable , but theres mutiple facets to the story.
You could apply the same logic to any sport, why are children in third world forced slave labour to make sports wear for the western world so a sports star has 30 million in endorsments... its f**ked up.

(and yes FrDMaguire LA got the biggest chunk of the money cos he was etc etc ...I know)

I don't disagree with the idea of Armstrong bringing more attention and visibility to the sport. Definitely in the anlgo countries and non-cycling nations, he brought cycling mainstream. Obviously in the US he had a huge impact. I think a lot of interest focused on Armstrong himself though rather than bringing new investors to cycling as a sport.

Companies like Trek, Cannondale, BMC, Cervelo and many companies were already in the market place but the increased visibility clearly helped their success. That is a direct knock-on effect of Armstrong. There has been an increase in wages, not huge but a definite increase, I don't know if there are any stats to back that up though. You could compare Lance to the Celtic tiger though, brought some people a lot of money but as it was built on BS, we are now seeing the downside but in saying that I down think sponsors deserted the sport because of Lance leaving.

In the traditional countries I am not so sure of the benefit of Lance. Back in the 90s, almost half the teams at the Tour were Italian teams but now there are just two top ranked Italian teams Lampre and Liquigas. Spanish cycling used to have loads of teams in the 90s, now there are just a handful. Cycling sponsorship has moved into new countries as well like Denmark, Germany, Australia, Luxembourg but that was more down to the success of riders from those countries, Riis, Ullrich, Evans, O'Grady, McEwen, Schlecks.

The UCI have not helped in attracting sponsorship either with their attempts to imitate F1 by introducing the ProTour. As noted previously, back in the 90s, there used to be loads of small Italian and Spanish teams and they were all assured a place in their national Tours which was their primary aim of the year.

With the introduction of the ProTour back in 04 and 30 rider teams + more support staff, it meant sponsors have to spend more money to field a team and were nor assured of a place at their national Tour if not in the PT. I think in the 90s £3-5million(usually 20 riders) was the max in terms of team budgets, now it's in the range of £15 million +. As a result, we have seen the decline of medium sized companies backing cycling teams.

As well as the doping scandals, the larger cash amounts required to sponsors teams make it more difficult to find a company willing to spend the cash. Most companies need to be multi-national's to be even capable of investing in cycling. Of course, the world economy has really suffered the last few years which of course had a negative impact on cycling as well.

Can't resist. Just came across this little tidbit last night reading an old copy of Cycling Weekly. In early 2000 after one Tour win, Armstrong was valued at $7.5 million. His agent Bill Stapelton said they didn't do deals for less than $1 million and an hour of his time cost $100,000.

13 years later and I still don't know of too many cyclist who are making $1 million annually. Maybe a Contador or Evans but that would be about it. I would almost bet that a significant number of pro cyclists are still on $100,000 or less per annum.

petethedrummer

No

ThisRegard wrote: »

Ok, which one of you is it ?

from http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/01/23/its-positive-wednesday/

Possible Explanations

1. It's a forfeit for losing a bet.
2. Phil Ligget is cyclo-touring in Dublin.

Capt'n Midnight

No

Colonialboy wrote: »

LA brought huge money into cycling, you only have to look at the contracts in pro-cycling to see how earnings grew exponentially along with LAs epo fulled rise. The sponsors flooded in , TV coverage grew , and with the sponsors money came , money that had a trickle down to all the riders in the peloton.

...
Money the root of all evil... no...its The pursuit of money is the root of all evil.

so somehow that trickle of money makes it OK to put the domestics in a situation where they'd be pressured to risk heart failure ?

any idea how much more money the domestics (not the super-domestics) got ?

yes you are correct in pointing out that the pursuit of money can lead to evil, and I'm not at all sure that having vast amounts of money at the top level for some sports is a good thing


as for new technology , efficient touring / commuting cycling has been held back by the insistence on the diamond framed bike and all the other restrictions that attempt to level the playing field in cycling - look at the changes made when Graeme Obree was trying to break records.

MPFG

No

Talking of money ..... take a gander at this

http://inrng.com/2013/01/wealthiest-men-in-pro-cycling/

Fr D Maugire

No

MPFG wrote: »

Taking of money ..... take a gander at this

http://inrng.com/2013/01/wealthiest-men-in-pro-cycling/

I think this reflects what I said about cycling now becoming a sport for the super rich to invest in. Most of these guys were all cycling fanatics as well, I know if I had their kind of money, I would have a cycling team as well.

dave2pvd

No

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

Obviously in the US he had a huge impact. I think a lot of interest focused on Armstrong himself though rather than bringing new investors to cycling as a sport.

There was a massive trickle down effect. The US Pro circuit was huge right up until the mid-2000s. At one point it seemed like every single Aussie pro ended up here on a domestic team, the likes of Navigators, Jittery Joes, HealthNet, Jelly Belly, Colavita, etc. Irish riders too: do you remember when McCann, Power, DO'L and Scanlon were all in the paid ranks over here? No longer was Asia Tour the biggest outside of Europe - North America was.

Then the economy crashed. The glory days were over, but pro cycling here still had a strong core. Not now: that core has been gutted in the last 6 months.

I mentioned trickle down. It wasn't just pro teams that were getting sponsor dollars. It was amateur also. Both men's and women's teams. Further support came from manufacturers. No one seemed to be paying much for Zipp wheels, Specialized frames, Hincapie kit, Crank Bros components,....those deals are much less sweet now - for economic reasons.