Lance Armstrong appears finally to have run out of rope. (Read 2696 times)

    Lance is going to be bleeding money. Here come more lawyer bills too. He's been asked to repay almost $4M in TdF prize money. I listened to a bit of a discussion on the news today; they expect more people will be going after him too.

     

    http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/i-team/lance-asked-return-4m-tour-de-france-prize-money-article-1.1193242

    "Don't feel like running today...suck it up and run ...you're an athlete." (John Stanton, founder & owner of The Running Room)

     

    "The person who starts the race is not the same person who finishes the race."


    Hawt and sexy

      I am keeping my eyes out for the UK paper he sued for libel. If pressed, the UK could put him in prison for their equivalent to the charge of lying under oath.

      I'm touching your pants.

        A perspective from a clean rider.

         

        How dopers stole the best years of my career

         

        The more I think about it, the more it makes me mad as hell. But I have to move on from the fact that I have, more than likely, missed out on results and revenue, plus more, because of others' doping. -Bradley McGee

        dpyles


          Just glad to see the truth come out. To many cheating athletes in the world. How do they sleep ?

            I saw the footage on CNN last night covering the interview of Armstrong back in, I think, 2005.  Maybe this was an interview that came about due to be subpoened?  Don't know.  And maybe this point has been already made here (there's been a lot of posts), but the thing that is really unbelievable to me is his utter convincibility- if you watch his responses, he looks like he is absolutely telling the truth about not doping.  Everything- his facial expressions, his body language, his statements and how they are worded, his own statement about how he knew he would "lose everything" if he were ever caught- everything - points to a guy who is either a masterful, masterful liar, or someone who is incomprehensibly unaware, or someone who completely believes his own words.  It is kind of spooky, actually.

              I saw the footage on CNN last night covering the interview of Armstrong back in, I think, 2005.  Maybe this was an interview that came about due to be subpoened?  Don't know.  And maybe this point has been already made here (there's been a lot of posts), but the thing that is really unbelievable to me is his utter convincibility- if you watch his responses, he looks like he is absolutely telling the truth about not doping.  Everything- his facial expressions, his body language, his statements and how they are worded, his own statement about how he knew he would "lose everything" if he were ever caught- everything - points to a guy who is either a masterful, masterful liar, or someone who is incomprehensibly unaware, or someone who completely believes his own words.  It is kind of spooky, actually.

               

              http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=713295n

              In an infinite universe, the one thing sentient life cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion

              http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white&fb_source=message

               

               

               

                I chanced on that CNN show as well. It was really interesting and gave me new perspectives on the whole story. I am of the belief that absolute power may corrupt absolutely, and by that time Lance surely thought he was invincible. Plus, for some, if you tell a lie long enough (and especially can get enough people to buy in) than it becomes the truth. Both of those might fit for him.

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 


                Needs more cowbell!

                  I chanced on that CNN show as well. It was really interesting and gave me new perspectives on the whole story. I am of the belief that absolute power may corrupt absolutely, and by that time Lance surely thought he was invincible. Plus, for some, if you tell a lie long enough (and especially can get enough people to buy in) than it becomes the truth. Both of those might fit for him.

                   

                  This is my suspicion, as well.  I suspect he'd be a really fascinating psychological subject.

                  I shoot pretty things! ~

                  '14 Goals:

                  • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

                  • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

                  jimmyb


                    "Jerry, just remember....it's not a lie if you believe it."

                    George Costanza

                     

                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ

                    (11 seconds)

                    Log    PRs

                    xor


                      For many years, LA has been described as exhibiting behaviors consistent with a sociopathic personality.  Not the serial killer movie kind; the clinical kind.

                       

                      This is an aspect of that.  Setting aside the cheating (or lack thereof, if you are still on that side), the way he has acted through that seems consistent with the term.

                       

                      But not only am I sitting in an armchair, I do not possess proper credentials to state this.  Except on the internet.  'cause I read it.  Also he was kind of a dick to me, twice, so there's that.  Nanny nanny boo boo

                       

                        The fall is not completed when the crowd condemns -- the ultimate form of rejection comes in the form of pity and diagnosis.


                        just a simple cat

                          We are internet warriors....analysis is our thang    Cool

                           

                          I  guess as you get more bodacious, you begin to lose more brain cells, because there is a limit to how much magnificence your body can house

                            For many years, LA has been described as exhibiting behaviors consistent with a sociopathic personality.  Not the serial killer movie kind; the clinical kind.

                             

                            This is an aspect of that.  Setting aside the cheating (or lack thereof, if you are still on that side), the way he has acted through that seems consistent with the term.

                             

                            But not only am I sitting in an armchair, I do not possess proper credentials to state this.  Except on the internet.  'cause I read it.  Also he was kind of a dick to me, twice, so there's that.  Nanny nanny boo boo

                             

                            Have you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express? Because if you have, I believe the commercials state that you are, indeed, in possession of the proper credentials. It must be true if it is said in a commercial, right?

                             

                             

                             

                             

                             

                             

                             

                              My understanding is that he can't come clean because of contractual provisions that let him keep money if he has not tested positive or admitted to doping.  So far he is OK under those terms.  

                               

                              Looks like they are going after him for "no longer being the winner of any Tour," not for being a jackass doper. 

                               

                              SCA Promotions demands that Armstrong return $12 million in bonus earnings


                              Feeling the growl again

                                Looks like they are going after him for "no longer being the winner of any Tour," not for being a jackass doper. 

                                 

                                SCA Promotions demands that Armstrong return $12 million in bonus earnings

                                 

                                Legally the bonuses were paid for winning....he is no longer a winner...avoids dredging into the whole doping thing at all during the course of the proceedings, methinks.

                                 

                                Of course, he is not a winner because he was a jackass doper.  But that is beside the point in this case.  Convenient for the insurer.  Good for them, I enjoy the irony here...LA will owe them like 3X what he was paid originally (they paid him almost 2X IIRC with interest and court costs).

                                 

                                But this is likely chump change compared to what he would owe former sponsors if...as HStreet has suggested....admitting doping triggers contract breech and liability to repay sponsors.

                                "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand