The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[Boris Bajic]

Yes, I agree wih you you are trolling.

If you have something to point the finger at on Evans or Wiggins then say it. Otherwise don't link them to known dopers.

When a chap says he's trolling, I think it prudent to agree with him. Of course I'm trolling. I accept your homologation with good grace. Thank you.

I admire Evans and Wiggins greatly (despite liking Evans less than I did when he was the eternal bridesmaid). Evans was pretty successful as early as 2002 and wore pink in the Giro that year - plum in middle of the LA era when 'only dopers were making the podium'. But we like Cadel (I really do) so it is scandalous to mention doping. He had a tough childhood and comes from an MTB background and he's an honest cobber, so he never would. So you're right; I cannot 'link him to known dopers'. Apart from Michele Ferrari who was a 'consultant' in his decision to go 'road' full time. And quite a few known dopers with whom he rode. But I really do admire the guy...

It does raise a (non-malicious) chuckle when those of us who cannot possibly know the truth come quickly and assertively to the defence of Wiggins and Evans (both anglophone, both of broadly British heritage) on the matter of doping.

I recall the days (not so long ago) when many, many fans or self-appointed experts would get very angry defending the honour of Armstrong. He was sick! He simply wouldn't do that! Fact!

Similarly, there were ardent defenders of Indurain (another hero of mine) because he "had such a genetic advantage that he didn't need to dope". Indeed. Also, he was a modest man of farming stock who shunned the limelight, so we 'liked' him. No way would he dope. No way Jose!

And Stephen Roche (whose autobiography contains a strong condemnation of doping, amusingly).

And many others....

I do not say 'this one does dope and this one does not'. I just have a wry chuckle at the way it might seem we select those we approve of and those we condemn.

But as we both agree, I was trolling when I mentioned Indurain, Roche, Wiggins, Evans and doping. None of them ever would.

I raise these other names partly because (as this is an Armstrong thread) it tickles me that LA has become a lightning conductor. Everyone else (if we like them) is clean.

 

[rich p]

Boris, you're turning from the occasionally faintly amusing to the irritating troll some thought you were. I'd say this would be a good time to drop it until you have some evidence that Wiggins and Evans are dopers. There was plenty of evidence that Armstrong was doping which was what persuaded most of the admirers who followed the trail, to realise that some years ago.

 

[GaryA]

 

[Boris Bajic]

Boris, you're turning from the occasionally faintly amusing to the irritating troll some thought you were. I'd say this would be a good time to drop it until you have some evidence that Wiggins and Evans are dopers. There was plenty of evidence that Armstrong was doping which was what persuaded most of the admirers who followed the trail, to realise that some years ago.

Sir Rich P,

I post on CC to amuse myself. If I amuse others, it avails me nought. I imagine that 112% of posters in Pro-Cycling and Racing find me an irritating troll. Maybe even more. Calling me out as one aligns very neatly with my own announcements in several recent posts on this topic that I am just that.

In more serious posts (the Dyspraxia thread in Family Cycling) I am not trolling. Elsewhere I might be. It happens.

This is not some sort of exclusive club of The Great and The Good. I suspect it is about as far from that as a forum can be. It is a bunch of idiots (to a lesser or greater extent) like me who enjoy discussing things of no consequence with people they've never met. We are not discovering a cure for whooping cough or solving world poverty. Evans was advised by Ferrari in 2000. I don't suppose he doped, but the link is not a good one.

I'd give the opinions I've trolled in these pages over a coffee or a glass of wine with friends. I admire the impression you give of taking this whole thread very seriously, but I doubt whether the UCI, Lance's lawyers or anyone else involved will be quoting our learned outpourings in any forthcoming legal case. This is the froth, not the beer.

 

[rich p]

So you admit that you're content to troll on a thread some of us take seriously but refrain from doing so on one that you do. Very grown up.

 

[Crackle]

Boris, if you're going to continually talk shoot, can you do it briefly. Just follow Rich's method.

 

[ColinJ]

This is not some sort of exclusive club of The Great and The Good. I suspect it is about as far from that as a forum can be. It is a bunch of idiots (to a lesser or greater extent) like me who enjoy discussing things of no consequence with people they've never met.

You need to spend less time on here annoying people, and more time on your bike!

I have met and ridden with about 100 CycleChat members and I can't think of one idiot among them. I've liked most of them, and some of them I like a lot!

As for discussing things of no consequence ... I had a lot of support when my mum was dying, when I was depressed, and when I became seriously ill last summer.

Life is too short for talking about what you are not interested in - move on to something you are interested in!

 

[yello]

Point of order; Armstrong was not 'self delusional'. He knew exactly what he was doing and why. And probably still does. All very calculated.

 

[Boris Bajic]

You need to spend less time on here annoying people, and more time on your bike!

I have met and ridden with about 100 CycleChat members and I can't think of one idiot among them. I've liked most of them, and some of them I like a lot!

As for discussing things of no consequence ... I had a lot of support when my mum was dying, when I was depressed, and when I became seriously ill last summer.

Life is too short for talking about what you are not interested in - move on to something you are interested in!

You're right about needing to spend more time riding, but it's cold and wet and windy.

I apologise for any offence caused. My choice of words was insensitive. As one old enough to have lost both parents (several decades ago) and a sibling, I do not wish to appear to trivialise loss or illness. I've emptied enough bed pans for moribund loved ones not to want to bring those upsets to anyone. My reference to 'things of no consequence' was related to pro-cycling and other related matters, not to loss, depression or support of those in need. I had no idea there was a deeper function to these pages and apologise (sincerely) for my insnsitivity.

In my defence on the matter of things I'm 'not interested in': I take a very keen interest in stage racing (just TdF & Giro). I have done for many years and have a shelf of books on my favourite riders and races (not that that proves anything other than that I can read). I love the weeks when France stops for the TdF and in my youth I spent many hours in smelly cafes with a Camel Filter, a coffee and L'Equipe, looking for good articles and titbits.

What I do not and cannot take very seriously is the casting of 'wicked ones' into the depths of the Inferno and the hope-over-experience building-up of our own favourites into Marble Statues of Glorious Cleanliness against whom nary a whisper of doubt may be uttered. That all gets a little 'football fan' for me and it brings out the troll. But can see I've caused offence and will stop here on this topic with an apology.

I will still troll elsewhere and make the occasional serious post, but not on this topic.

 

[just jim]

Ace. Thanks.

 

[ColinJ]

A fine apology Boris!

I must confess that I was very idealistic when I first started watching pro cycling. In fact, it was watching Lemond's 1989 TdF win over Fignon that inspired me to buy a bike for the first time in 20 years.

I tried hard to believe what I was watching, but as the 90s wore on it became harder and harder to do so. Eventually, it got to the point where riders were just taking the p*ss!

I had heated arguments with people about Armstrong. We had all been inspired by him when he made his comeback, but the more robotic his wins became, the more unlikely it seemed to me that he was clean. I watched him make ridiculously hard efforts that would have had riders from an earlier era needing to be put on oxygen, and he'd be pumped up, waving his fists about but looking as though he'd just walked his dog in the park! I just felt so very let down.

It's hard to get back that lost innocence. I think that Lemond was clean, and that Evans and Wiggins are, but I could never be truly shocked by a doping revelation again.

I still enjoy watching bike racing but I am no longer obsessed by it. It's fun to watch, in the way that a Hollywood action movie is, but suspension of disbelief is required. I know that non-doping mortals cannot ride up Alpe d'Huez in under 38 minutes, so every time a rider does it in that time, or close to it, I know that he is cheating, even if I don't know how!

 

[Noodley]

Has he buggered off yet?

 

[yello]

Who? Boris or Armstrong?

 

[400bhp]

Lance Armstrong, The Seven Deadly Sins Complete Interview With David Walsh


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkARvYIwT8E

I haven't seen that before-thanks.

I can't properly describe this at the moment, but there's something spiritual about the whole story surrounding this. I don't know if that's because I ride bikes or what.

I really should write a book.

 

[lukesdad]

Boris, if you're going to continually talk s***, can you do it briefly. Just follow Rich's method.