C'mon now, I prefaced my post by acknowledging Dr. Godwin!

well, I don't think that Vaughters had the risk/reward that Lance had so his decision process wasn't the same

I see your point but Lance knew what he was getting into long before he was worth $100 million.

Not to excuse him but once you are caught up in your own hype there's no going back as its now all about protecting the brand and the people depending on that brand. I don't know where after 1999 he would have said hey I'm getting away with this but I better come clean (that is just not how human nature works).

I agree after 99. I was referring to his pre cancer years. He was already a world champion and probably on the juice then but was also relatively unknown, at least compared to what he would become. It's true that even this level of success was more than Vaughters had achieved when he bowed out.

Had Vaughters body reacted to doping the way Lance's did and Vaughters won a single TDF do you think his arc in this saga would have been the same? Had Lance not had success, do you think his arc would have been the same? You are suggesting that Lance knew he would win with dope. Not so sure, he just knew he had no chance without it.

Add Giles Delion to the list. 5th place in his debut Tour in 1990.

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

I've mentioned this before, but I would like to reiterate my point; we (triathlete's) are all better off as a result of Lance Armstrong having doped. We may not like that he doped (which in my mind puts him as equal, but no worse, than other dopers, like Hincapie, Carl Lewis, The Boz, etc.). I, along with countless others, got into cycling because of Lance Armstrong. If some German were winning the TdF during the early 2000's I probably wouldn't have taken up cycling. Armstrong spurred a healthy cycling industry in the US which has resulted in me having better selection of bikes, shoes, clothing, and all sorts of other cycling equipment. Bikes are more technologically advanced, and we can get them at lower prices than we otherwise would've had Armstrong not helped the industry explode as much as he did.

I think it needs to be acknowledged that we (particularly American) cyclists reap many positive benefits from the choices that Lance made. As you say, it is not black and white.

"in my mind, there is not one thing lance is guilty of that george hincapie is not guilty of."

I agree with your POV most of the time but this one jumps the shark of sensibility. They all cheated and deserve what they got but LA was quite obviously the unapologetic ringleader. Reading his most recent comments explicitly highlights his inability or refusal to accept responsibility for actions. Did George, Levi, VDV, or any of the rest participate in the character assination or bullying of countless individuals? Just because the stood by does not make them willing participants.

He is the worst of the worst and gotten what he deserves.

If you get a chance ask some Canadian riders how they feel about Barry. Take Geoff Kabush, a very talented guy who most people have never heard of has some choice words for Mr. Barry and the magazine the elected to glamorize his doping.

Kimmage, yeah I'll give you him . He became famous for not doping or more accurately for not wanting to continue doping, but Obree was famous for setting the hor record and being an iconoclast.. He may have been more famous if he doped but who knows.

Vaughters had 10 year career, some of it doped then retired , then got religion. He hardly got out of the sport because of doping.

---

Styrrell

The cycling industry was healthy before LA (remember the MTB boom?) and it will be after LA (tri bikes being a significant growing segment right now). La helped fuel a road bike resurgence, but to say he was responsible for a better selection of shoes, clothes and whatever is more than a bit over-the-top. The bike industry is one that continually re-invents itself and drives forward with new ideas and technology.

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

I was just trying to get my head around the -

- Poc Helmet
- Moots Bike
- Specialized Shoes
- Enve Wheels
- Michelin Clinchers ( ST Approved??)
- And the cheap drug-store, check-out counter, aviators

It was all kind of weird!

:)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Sure he was the worst (or best) at doping and the cover up was huge. I totally agree that he got what he deserved but all the others especially the guys coming out now and admitting it deserve to get something also.

Take George seeing as he was mentioned. He could have easily gone to another team. Sure he may have taken a pay cut and even a popularity cut, but if he wasn't going to stand up against LA and the personal attack etc he could have at least not stood by him.

So GH watched these people get savaged at least some of whom were likely friends or at leadt friendly aquaintances, and also did PEDS and essentially served 0 penalty. Nothing at worst he maybe lost a chance at the OG teams.

---

Styrrell

After seeing what LA did to former friends and confidants, who in their right mind would go against him? It was omertà at its finest and certain career suicide. So how would anyone not stand by him without risking repercussions?

How much did he really do to guys that just left the team to goe elsewhere. Takje Livingston, he left and LA basicvally didn't talk to him anymore big deal.

---

Styrrell

Your polling, which I assume is tied to ST, is far different than national public opinion polls. Nielson, had a sports poll earlier this year, and LA won the dubious title of most disliked (active) athlete with him appealing to just 15% of Americans.

http://www.forbes.com/...t-disliked-athletes/

Reuters poll had similar results, too.
http://www.ipsos-na.com/...release.aspx?id=5973

Livingston never squealed on Lance. They are buds and he works in Lances bike shop. The list below adds his palmares... Maybe they can include his epo positive from the 1998 tour, too?

http://www.mellowjohnnys.com/training/

It would be interesting to see on a graph the extent, of increased adult bike sales during the Armstrong years. I assume we would see a pretty big uptick, but haven't actually seen a chart myself.


Here is an interesting quote though made recently (courtesy of KMVT):

"The road bike category was booming for about a decade during the Lance era and as we all know, Lance has sort of fallen from grace and with that, the bike business has also fallen on the road category," says Adrian Montgomery, Scott Sports.

I think the number of people he brought into the sport, is what built the economies of scale required to support such a robust industry. It would be over-the-top to say he is solely responsible, but he certainly played a pivotal role.

On the flip side though would be that his fall from grace may alienate so many future cyclists that eventually (once the people he helped usher into the sport start to leave it) the void can't be back filled. I would hope that we can keep up the momentum, but perhaps not.

Dang, Slowman, I thought you and I would would never agree on doping, but that's a pretty fat brush that you just painted on all the top cyclists, of which many of them have never tested positive. That being said, I'm glad you are finally stating that you see the forest of cycling for what it is and not just discussing isolated trees. Cycling stars have been doping since the inception of the sport, and in my humble opinion, are still doping at the top, just with different (less effective) methods. That being said, there are some good athletes of the 1990s that purportedly didn't dope.

Hour record holder gramme obree
Festina rider Christopher Bassons
Greg Lemond, won the tour in the 1990s, and he's made enough enemies with his outspokenness, that you would think he truly was clean.

This.

This.

Question is what would he have gotten if he didnt cheat?
no education ?

probably have a low level job somewhere...so no matter what he gained.
he still is a star and in 5 years most people other then a few will even care what he did.
he will still be Lance Armstrong. Given enough time everything is forgiven and forgotten.

It seems to me that your clear vision is blurred once Armstrong comes into play. Because I really don't think that you normally would put passive aiding on the same level as acting. Or even think it could be less bad. You dug yourself into a deep Armstrong hole already. Stop digging. It's ok.

---

_________________________________________________
CAMPAGNOLO GRAN FONDO NEW YORK

"I still feel I was robbed of part of my career. I was signed up to ride in the prologue of the Tour back in 1995, but it was made very obvious to me I would have to take drugs. I said no, no way, and I was sacked by my team. So there I was, 11 years later, sitting there waiting for the Tour cyclists to come by, and something welled up in me. I feel I was robbed by a lot of these bastards taking drugs. I also hate the way that people think anyone who has ever achieved anything on a bike must have been taking drugs. I was surprised how resentful I felt when I was in Paris. It had obviously been simmering away in there for years. That's something new I'll have to talk to my therapist about."