Jump to content

the trolls back in the spotlight


Tumbleweed
 Share

Recommended Posts

this from the wires this morn:

 

 

Seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong went on the attack Wednesday ahead of the publication of a new book reviving claims the US cyclist was a dope cheat.
Armstrong criticized "From Lance to Landis", the latest book by Irish writer David Walsh regarding Armstrong and doping accusations from the Tour de France, an English follow-up to his LA Confidential, which was published in French.
"Predictably, on the eve of the Tour de France, I will be the subject of a repeated, baseless attack in yet another unobjective book," Armstrong said in a statement.
"Trying to jump on the bandwagon of current publicity surrounding cycling, Walsh now issues a recycled version of two earlier French books that were likewise founded upon a demonstrably false string of sensational, untrue and fabricated allegations.
"This latest attack will be no different than the first two - a sensationalized attempt to cash in on my name and sully my reputation.
"Like most fair-minded people, I am sick and tired of those who try to profit off the tactics of smear and guilt by innuendo or association."
Armstrong has denied numerous dopings against him, including a modern test performed upon an older urine sample that had been unavailable at the time of Armstrong's first Tour victory in 1999. He retired after winning in 2005.
"I raced clean. I won clean," Armstrong said. "I am the most tested athlete in the history of sports. I have defended myself and my reputation and won every court case to prove I was clean.
"Yet another Walsh book with baseless, sensational and rejected allegations will not overcome the truth."
Armstrong, 35, ripped Walsh for paying sources for information and incorrect information in the first books.
"The allegations and sources in the latest book remain just as baseless, unreliable and manufactured as they were in the first two books," Armstrong said.
"Continuing a pattern of distortion and fabrication started in the other books, the new book takes recycled allegations from the first books and cherry-picked allegations and testimony from the losing side of a court case I won and attempts to portray them as facts."
Armstrong reached a 7.5 million-dollar settlement with a promotions firm over payment of a bonus for his sixth consecutive Tour triumph and cites that payout in attacking critics.
"I responded in court to these allegations, most of which are made by a handful of grudge holders, axe grinders, and a so-called 'expert' whose graduate degree turned out to be by way of correspondence courses - and I proved them false," Armstrong said. "I was vindicated yet again."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

a bit more info:

 

Walsh co-authored L.A. Confidential: The Secrets of Lance Armstrong" in 2004 with French writer Pierre Ballester and a follow-up version, "L.A. Official," last October. That book, as well as much of the material in the new book, is based on testimony given in a legal dispute between Armstrong and a Dallas-based company that had a bonus contract with the cyclist.
SCA Promotions sold an insurance policy to Tailwind Sports _ in which Armstrong was part-owner _ to pay a $5 million (?3.7 million) bonus if the American cyclist won his sixth Tour de France in 2004. Armstrong sued SCA after the promotion firm refused to pay the bonus, citing allegations in Walsh's first book that the cyclist had used performance-enhancing drugs to win his sport's most-grueling test.
After a panel of arbitrators ruled the suit had merit and heard testimony in the matter, the cyclist reached a $7.5 million (?5.6 million) settlement with SCA.
The panel never ruled directly on the doping allegations. But Armstrong contends Walsh is motivated by a personal dislike for him and paid a source, former U.S. Postal Service masseuse Emma O'Reilly, for an interview and other information in "L.A. Confidential."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets assume for a minute he didnt dope. All he did was wheelsuck his domestiques for 99.9% of the TDF and the crossed the finish line in front... And we know they all doped... so whats the difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You did watch the 2005 TDF ? He man alone rode to win,  as his team members were not strong enough to even suck his wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So even tho everyone else was doped up to the eyeballs, he single handedly beat them without any "special medicine"... Does he think we're all idiots?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets assume for a minute he didnt dope. All he did was wheelsuck his domestiques for 99.9% of the TDF and the crossed the finish line in front... And we know they all doped... so whats the difference?

 

LOLLOLLOLLOLLOL

 

that was one of the most annoying things about postal/discovery: how the whole team worked for lance, rather than being like a traditional tour team: having a sprinter or two and breakaway experts to make it interesting
holy roller2007-06-21 01:00:22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was commenting on the 99% comment, was wondering how he managed to wheel suck when he increased his lead even further in the TT's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose i'm just the lone voice holding out he was not on something else other than bread and water when he achieved his wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

scotty, i would honestly love to believe that too. lance's problem is that it's harder - in terms of public opinion anyway - to prove that you didn't when everyone says you did.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rats, i'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for that very reason. i was talking about the court of public opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for a minute...........just one minute, some folk need to think further than the norms.

 

The issue is not......did he (LA) dope, didnt he dope, did "Lenny the Legs" dope.......didnt he dope - the issue is the "Culture Surrounding Doping." 

 

I dont care who doped or who didnt - but I care about international cycling as a sport, I like to think that the winner was the best man, I like to think the race results were not skewed, I like to think the end result was the outcome of long hard hours of sacrifice, I like to think the awards and accolades go to the right athlete, I like to think they are presenting an honest face to the world, I like to think when I read a magazine about an athlete its the truth and not open bald face lies.

 

Thats the issue......................not the individual athlete.!!

 

.............and in my opinion THATS VERY RELEVANT.!

 

  
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scotty you are not alone. Hendrik Petoors is also a Lance fan. So we sign in stereo!!!!!! David Walsh has tried and tried and treid like may French wnanbee cyclists to gain glory for Frnace in the premier race and did not succeed. Maybe this is his last gasp for his pension. He will just float away and rot like the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One quick question - Are you la disciples happy with the way the french lab handled all of la's samples?

PS: "Welcome back" Kimberley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

My Profile My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Settings Help Logout