Liar Lance Armstrong

**wynn** · 21-Jan-13, 03:28 PM

there is already graffiti about Lance

**tec0** · 21-Jan-13, 04:25 PM

He is going to have to a lot of soul searching after this one. A lot of people are both sad and angry.

**Blurock** · 21-Jan-13, 05:42 PM

Money talks. Too much money in sport talks even harder.

The win at all costs and stuff the rest attitude is killing sport and has become the norm even at schools level.

**tec0** · 21-Jan-13, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by Blurock

Money talks. Too much money in sport talks even harder.

The win at all costs and stuff the rest attitude is killing sport and has become the norm even at schools level.

That is why I don't watch sport anymore. I rather play a old video game "new games are internet hungry can't afford to play them)

**adrianh** · 21-Jan-13, 07:51 PM

It is a lot more complicated than just calling him a cheat.

What happened is this:
There were very specific rules laid down as to the volume of specific "drugs" - that may be in the system.
The whole lot of them figured out how to ingest just enough to be below those thresholds.
Then a couple of years later testing methods improved and the rules changed.
They, the sporting control body, then retested his blood using the new techniques and new rules.
...and as they say, the rest is history...

Ok, so this brings up a whole new problem in sport;
1. if the sports body says that you may have a maximum of 100mg of caffiene in your blood and you have 99mg what then?
2. if the rule is changed 2 years later that you may only have 80mg in your blood and it is found that you had 99mg in your blood 2 years ago, what then?

I am not pro or anti Lance as such, but I do wonder about how rules are applied. If rules are applied retroactively it creates a whole lot of problems because then it is kinda difficult to know where the goalposts are. Are they planning to test the blood of each and every sportsmen that ever won any thing and retroactively apply current rules. Imagine if they did that to F1, then all cars having turbos, 6 wheels, movable wings, V8's and and and would have to be disqualified...which of course means that nobody actually won any F1 according to current rules...

eish...when the Americans go on a witchhunt then they not only burn the witch, they burn the entire country and what it accompished throughout its entire existence....aka Iraq, Afganistan and now their own hero Lance Amsrong...

**tec0** · 21-Jan-13, 08:22 PM

The reality is the regulators isn't interested ins healthy sport. How much money are invested in these drug tests? So each year "new tests" comes at new costs and each year someone is getting payed. But in order to proof that they are worthy someone needs to take a fall. There we go.

Money money money money money money money money money money money money money money money money money money money money money

**IanF** · 22-Jan-13, 07:13 AM

I used to cycle but gave when I attended 2 memorial services 1 day for cyclists.
Even if I used the drugs I would struggle to finish even 1 stage of the the TDF. So Lance must be a brilliant athlete who used drugs to get one hell of an edge. I lost all respect for him years ago when he came to SA and could only stay a few hours plus I read his biography and it seemed like it was written by a soft person which he is not. I have no problem with ghost writers but don't sell it as your own.
As for the interviews with Oprah he was trying to be very controlling and some of his answers were very guarded so I await the full truth.

**Blurock** · 22-Jan-13, 08:05 AM

For an athlete or sports person to survive in the jungle of big sponsorships and big money today, they have to be almost superhuman. Everything is driven by greed. No wonder they are resorting to drugs.

Maybe the problem starts with the organisers and sponsors. Just look at how Super 10 rugby evolved to Super 15. More matches, more income for the organisers and more exposure for the sponsors. The players' bodies are put on the line and they are always under threat of injury.

In cricket the 20/20 was introduced in addition to one day matches. So in stead of a touring side playing 5 tests as before, they now have to also cram in at least 3 one day internationals and a horde of 20/20 matches. I believe that the shorter game has improved the standard of fielding and cricket in general, but is it good for the players to play so many matches.

Boxing is a prime example of how athletes are being exploited for the benefit of a promoter or agent. How about F1 where we now have 20 Grands Prix annually? The only one creaming it is old Bernie.

**adrianh** · 22-Jan-13, 08:29 AM

We have to be honest though, no athlete is going to dedicate their life to being the best at whatever they do and not make money from it.

**Dave A** · 22-Jan-13, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by IanF

As for the interviews with Oprah he was trying to be very controlling and some of his answers were very guarded so I await the full truth.

I think the major problem there is he's trying to "come clean" without implicating anyone else. No suprise to me that his critics are leaping on it saying he's still trying to control the situation - and they're right of course.

Sticking to a principle can come at a heavy price at times