The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[smutchin]

Is Tyler telling the truth?

http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderr...e-tyler-hamilton-and-lance-armstrongs-legacy/

 

[Red Light]

Is Tyler telling the truth?

http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderr...e-tyler-hamilton-and-lance-armstrongs-legacy/

I did wonder why nobody has any photos of this happening to share. If he's got a photo of the drinks can and it was contemporaneous then how come he hasn't got photos of anything else that was going on? People take photos all the time even in the days before smart phones.

And the fact that he can describe and get to a room he went to just says he remembers a room they went to not that what he saw in there was not an added fabrication. I could tell you about a hotel room I've previously stayed in and tell you all about how I saw David Beckham there making out with the Queen. The fact I could lead you to the room and it exactly matches the description I gave of it doesn't make the rest of the story true (its not AFAIK for the avoidance of doubt !)

The problem I have with Coyle though is he previously lived and travelled with Armstrong and the team for 2004 to write his eulogy, Lance Armstrong; Tour de Force and he didn't notice anything at all untoward in all that time living with them as a fly on the wall journalist? Did he not notice that they were doping or that suddenly they all became unavailable to him (while they doped with him not there) ? And then he added about 20 extra pages to the original 315 pages, gave it a new title, Lance Armstrong's War, and misleadingly (IMO) sold the same book all over again much to the upset of a number of purchasers. So not averse to trying to make a buck or two out of a story.

 

[smutchin]

Coyle is no Hamilton apologist. I'd suggest reading the book before making further comment on its content.

 

[Red Light]

Coyle is no Hamilton apologist. I'd suggest reading the book before making further comment on its content.

I don't think I said he was. I was just questioning his claims in the interview you linked too. But yes I will read the book as soon as it's out in a digital version.

 

[lukesdad]

After reading Tyler's book, the one I'd be really interested to hear from is Kevin Livingston.

d.

Really ? When that was suggested months ago only Yello saw the significance.

 

[Boris Bajic]

After reading Tyler's book, the one I'd be really interested to hear from is Kevin Livingston.

d.

I bought a signed copy of his first autobiography when I walked past a signing on Charing Cross Road in '84.

It was an OK read, but those were the early days. After that, I just thought he was way too bitter about the abolition of the GLC.

I didn't even know he rode a bike!

 

[smutchin]

Really ? When that was suggested months ago only Yello saw the significance.

If Livingston's name was mentioned previously, it may well have passed me by. I'm sure lots of other interesting detail has also passed me by due to the fast pace and low signal:noise ratio of the other thread.

d.

 

[Norm]

There is unlikely to be much by way of anything worth reading here due to the inactivity of the mods in dealing with the trolls, who have won out as the main contributors with anything sensible to say have vacated the room.

I thought that Shaun's post on this subject was fairly clear.

 

[rich p]

I thought that Shaun's post on this subject was fairly clear.

Norm, it may well be clear but unfortunately most of the more knowledgeable and thoughtful posters have vacated this thread or put the eejits on 'ignore'.
I understand that it's not easy for you and the mods but the end result is that reasonable debate has gone thataway.

 

[Noodley]

I thought that Shaun's post on this subject was fairly clear.

Just passing comment Norm, whatever the intention the fact is that the majority of the regular and informed Racing posters will not be seen here. I know of a few who have contacted me stating their intention to not bother coming back to CC - their choice, but not a favourable one to make, as they actually brought something to the racing forum. But I'l shut up.

 

[tigger]

It's probably run its course for now, a kind of limbo period until the UCI make a move? I wonder if they will play the long game and quietly back the USADA once the dust has settled?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19527032

 

[Norm]

Whilst the levels of frustration on both 'sides' are obvious to the impartial reader, the problem is that the accusation of troll could be equally levelled by both sides but that wouldn't make it correct. As said previously, two sides have strong opinions and little beyond gossip, hearsay and titbits of varying levels of relevance to support those opinions.

The parallels to religious debates are striking.

 

[rich p]

Whilst the levels of frustration on both 'sides' are obvious to the impartial reader, the problem is that the accusation of troll could be equally levelled by both sides but that wouldn't make it correct. As said previously, two sides have strong opinions and little beyond gossip, hearsay and titbits of varying levels of relevance to support those opinions.

The parallels to religious debates are striking.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

USADA released any evidence or direct testimony to anyone else yet? Or are we still in speculation mode?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Norm, it may well be clear but unfortunately most of the more knowledgeable and thoughtful posters have vacated this thread or put the eejits on 'ignore'.
I understand that it's not easy for you and the mods but the end result is that reasonable debate has gone thataway.

What is there to debate, reasonably or otherwise? No new evidence or testimony, just loads of rumour and speculation, press articles and the odd book.