LANCE!

[wco81]

Well there may be a money angle in all this, though he may have to give money back for some libel cases he won in the past.

But if he gets a best selling book out of this for instance, he may yet come out ahead. Certainly his supporters have attacked everyone that has raised accusations, including his former teammates within the past year. So the fanatical may buy his tell-all book.

If the TV ratings for the Tour drop, maybe the racing organizers will cut a deal with him, though that's the other part, he's going to rat out other people now.

[EZSnappin]

According to our neighbors to the North, he's coming clean on something else entirely:

[10spro]

He's apologizing because he was caught, not because he's sincere.

Exactly. Here's a guy that knew vety well how to cheat the system and was very sophisticated at it. He was a master at manipulating his entourage group and kept denying year after year of any wrong doing.

A lying rat who's totally disappointed for being caught.

If I am correct he even won a small defamation lawsuit against a UK report worth half a million to which he should play it all back with interest +.

He should apologize to all the pro cyclists that try to bring some shine into the sport.

[Macca00]

I just turned on the news here in Canada; did you know that Lance used RUGS!?!

Scandalous. Wonder if it was a Persian.....

[Rodster]

I just turned on the news here in Canada; did you know that Lance used RUGS!?!

Scandalous. Wonder if it was a Persian.....

Was it because he had cancer and was going thru chemo?

[Danimal]

Saw this posted today.

I'm glad Lance Armstrong came clean. That took a lot of ball.

[EZSnappin]

I just turned on the news here in Canada; did you know that Lance used RUGS!?!

Scandalous. Wonder if it was a Persian.....

Was it because he had cancer and was going thru chemo?

Well he is a 'merkin.

[DChaps]

While I think there is no way for the governing and testing bodies of Cycling, Track and Field, etc. to ever be ahead of the curve on PED's and blood doping, the thing that bothers me the most about the Lance stuff is the vigor and vengeance he seemed to take trying to defend himself.

This article posed some interesting questions Oprah should have asked but most likely did not:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/questions- ... 49439.html

So here are some of the questions we hope Oprah asked Lance:

1. Why now, Lance? Is it because in one potential perjury case the statute of limitations has passed? Is it because you've already lost almost all your sponsors, had to step back from your foundation and are no longer getting the attention you once earned?

Did you have to lose nearly everything until you sought the only possible out? And at this point, why are you worth listening to at all?

2. Why are you doing this with me, Oprah Winfrey? I'm not known for my cycling knowledge or for pointed follow-up questions or my investigative journalistic skills. In fact, it's the opposite.

Wouldn't sitting down with Scott Pelley at "60 Minutes" have been a more legitimate forum? How about the Sunday Times of London, which you sued for libel for printing the truth? Or any of the French or American media that you bashed all along when in fact they weren't wrong at all?

You always fashioned yourself as a tough guy, Lance. You beat cancer for crying out loud, why go soft now?

3. Let's talk Betsy Andreu, the wife of one your former teammates, Frankie. Both Andreus testified under oath that they were in a hospital room in 1996 when you admitted to a doctor to using EPO, HGH and steroids. You responded by calling them "vindictive, bitter, vengeful and jealous." And that's the stuff we can say on TV.

Would you now label them as "honest"?

And what would you say directly to Betsy, who dealt with a voicemail from one of your henchmen that included, she's testified, this:

"I hope somebody breaks a baseball bat over your head. I also hope that one day you have adversity in your life and you have some type of tragedy that will … definitely make an impact on you."

When you heard about that voicemail, why didn't you call Betsy and apologize then?

4. By the way, did you take performance-enhancing drugs prior to your diagnosis of testicular cancer, as Betsy Andreu, who I now have every single reason to believe, says you admitted to doing? Do you think it played a role in your diagnosis?

And while the reason you contracted cancer does nothing to diminish the intensity of your battle, or the great example of strength it provided, don't you think it would've been an essential part of your public campaign against the disease to mention that you used performance-enhancing drugs?

5. Just to get it on the record, because the way things are going I'm pretty sure this will come out at a later date, did you or your minions ever pressure federal authorities to stall out investigations into your doping?

Now, you wouldn't lie to me, right, Lance?

6. What do you say to Emma O'Reilly, who was a young Dublin native when she was first hired by the U.S. Postal team to give massages to the riders after races?

In the early 2000s, she told stories of rampant doping and how she was used to transport the drugs across international borders. In the USADA report, she testified that you tried to "make my life hell."

Her story was true, Lance, wasn't it? And you knew it was true. Yet despite knowing it was true, you, a famous multimillionaire superstar, used high-priced lawyers to sue this simple woman for more money than she was worth in England, where slander laws favor the famous. She had no chance to fight it.

She testified that you tried to ruin her by spreading word that she was a prostitute with a heavy drinking problem.

"The traumatizing part," she once told the New York Times, "was dealing with telling the truth."

Do you want to apologize to her? Not in general. I mean directly and by name. I mean, Lance, of all the people to attack like that, of all the people you had power and wealth over, you had to go after her? How Lance, could you do this to someone, and why would anyone want to believe again in someone capable of doing this to someone?

7. In 2011, former teammate Tyler Hamilton spoke about you and doping on "60 Minutes." He later said you two ran into each other in a Colorado restaurant where he says you tried to intimidate him, saying, "I'm going to make your life a living hell both in the courtroom and out of the courtroom."

Yet you knew he was telling the truth, right Lance? So why threaten him?

8. Greg LeMond, a three-time Tour de France champion, once raised the following hypothetical question: "If Lance's story is true, it's the greatest comeback in the history of sport. If it's not, it's the greatest fraud."

The allegation is that you heard that and decided to use your influence with Trek bikes to drop its association with LeMond's brand. The company even went to court to end a long-term contract. "Greg's public comments hurt the LeMond brand and the Trek brand," a company official said at the time.

What comment? Wondering about something that was true?

The move cost LeMond millions. Did you try to ruin him financially simply for spite?

9. We've just scratched the surface on people you pushed around. There are more victims in your wake. Do you want me to continue with the others?

[Macca00]

While I think there is no way for the governing and testing bodies of Cycling, Track and Field, etc. to ever be ahead of the curve on PED's and blood doping, the thing that bothers me the most about the Lance stuff is the vigor and vengeance he seemed to take trying to defend himself.

This article posed some interesting questions Oprah should have asked but most likely did not:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/questions- ... 49439.html

So here are some of the questions we hope Oprah asked Lance......

I've not paid attention to cycling over the years so to read/see/hear Lance's previous denials and just how vehement they've been is truly astounding. What a d*****.

And don't forget...he used rugs!

[10spro]

I still think that he encouraged his teammates to follow after his sophisticated doping, blood transfusions, EPO, testosterone, human growth hormones despite saying otherwise. Clearly a master ring leader at what he was doing.

[pk500]

Armstrong's ability to parse what parts of the truth he wanted to divulge in the interview was equally fascinating and repulsive. But I'll give Oprah credit: She gave him no time to get comfortable and cut right to the chase at the start of the interview.

Oprah did a surprisingly good job considering she's not a journalist. Never attacked Armstrong but never was sympathetic. Asked questions, sought answers.

This tweet I read tonight best sums up Armstrong's confession: The most powerful drug that Lance Armstrong abused was narcissism.

I think the Livestrong bracelet may leave my right wrist tonight for the first time in more than seven years. I just can't separate Armstrong's lies and spin from the charity any more. I've been involved with the St. Baldrick's charity that fights children's cancer with my son, who has shaved his head for kids for cancer the last two or three years. Fantastic group. I need to find a St. Baldrick's bracelet.

[XXXIV]

Too bad for Lance a far bigger and filthier institution came along and stole his big day.

Poor lance.

[Jackdog]

At the end of the interview, Oprah should have gave away free bicycles. Downside of watching the Lance interview on OWN is seeing what else is on OWN.

[greggsand]

Much like cycling.. I forgot it was on.

[wco81]

Other thing that came out, not out of the interview but elsewhere, was that he made a lot of money as a "consultant" to Livestrong.

So however much money it made, he got a big chunk of it and no doubt Nike got their piece.

The apologists who said (or may still say) "he cheated but he raised a lot of money for a good cause" have pretty much nothing left, except the big crow they have to eat.

[Jackdog]

Other thing that came out, not out of the interview but elsewhere, was that he made a lot of money as a "consultant" to Livestrong.

So however much money it made, he got a big chunk of it and no doubt Nike got their piece.

The apologists who said (or may still say) "he cheated but he raised a lot of money for a good cause" have pretty much nothing left, except the big crow they have to eat.

Agreed. Like PK posted, his narcissism knows no bounds.

[wco81]

Just came across this BBC interview. January 2015 date can't be right though, since they reference the Oprah interview as if it just took place.

In any event, he says he'd do it (cheat) again, because everyone was doing it and during the time he was "winning" the Tours, bicycling business exploded and Livestrong raised huge sums of money:

DR: When it comes to the doping, would you do it again?
LA: "It's a complicated question, and my answer is not a popular answer. If I was racing in 2015, no, I wouldn't do it again, because I don't think you have to. If you take me back to 1995, when it was completely and totally pervasive, I'd probably do it again. People don't like to hear that."
'That's the man that really needed to change'
Armstrong claims he and his team-mates started to use EPO, and other doping products, in 1995 when it became clear their rivals were doing so. EPO, or erythropoietin, is a hormone that controls the production of oxygen-bearing red blood cells. Cyclists, and other endurance athletes, started using synthetic EPO in the early 1990s, as it gave an approximate performance boost of 10% and was undetectable.
DR: But that's the honest answer?
"Yeah, that's the honest answer, but it's an answer that needs some explanation.
"When I made the decision - when my team-mates made that decision, when the whole peloton made that decision - it was a bad decision and an imperfect time. But it happened.
"When Lance Armstrong did that, I know what happened. I know what happened to cycling from 1999 to 2005. I saw its growth, I saw its expansion.
"I know what happened to the cycling industry. I know what happened to [his bike supplier and sponsor] Trek Bicycles - $100m (£66.5m) in sales, to $1bn in sales.
"I know what happened to my foundation, from raising no money to raising $500m, serving three million people. Do we want to take that away? I don't think anybody says yes.
"I will tell you what I want to do. I would want to change the man that did those things, maybe not the decision, but the way he acted. The way he treated other people, the way he just couldn't stop fighting. It was great to fight in training, great to fight in the race, but you don't need to fight in a press conference, or an interview, or a personal interaction. I'd be fighting with you right now - I would be taking you on.
"That's the man that really needed to change and can never come back. So it's not an easy question, and I want to be honest with you. It's not a popular answer, but what really needed to change was the way that guy acted."

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/cycling/30955902