Thank you. Probably what I should have expressed in my first post. Damn brain is cooked from racing...

Funny you say that, because just today this happened in the MLB with an rookie player who didn't know who Frank Robinson was as he was visiting the spring training site.


http://espn.go.com/...sh-hart-write-report

Gotta know your Orioles history. It's the same reason Showalter demanded a homework assignment of Hart about one of those players that line the clubhouse hallways. Hart, a 2013 supplemental draft pick, gladly obliged, writing a one-page report on Frank Robinson on Monday night after the Orioles great made a spring-training appearance and Hart acknowledged to Showalter he didn't know who Robinson was.
"I said, 'You go home, you research it and you come back tomorrow and have it on my desk,' " Showalter said, according to The Baltimore Sun.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

well, i don't guess that it'll keep dave up at night, but i'm disappointed.

he acknowledges that he's a bit ambivalent about the whole thing, but all the same there are some thoughts there i don't like. why are we willing to do this for our sport in exchange for media and money? what problems does kona currently have that lance's presence will solve? if what we really need is notoriety, why not just make the women wear beach volleyball uniforms, or allow full contact on the bike? if what we want is to grow and strengthen the sport in a sustainable way, surely there are wiser options than inviting possibly the most shamed american endurance athlete ever? lance and rob ford are now in the same league, when it comes to headlines: he's no longer "just" lance, he's "disgraced cyclist lance armstrong." so there's your header: "disgraced cyclist invited to triathlon champs."

second, and more subtly, it suggests that lance's fame/cash ought to buy him into the race. what about disgraced dopers who can't draw as much media - should they be invited too? what's the tipping point where an athlete is notorious enough to warrant an invite?

anyway, i think i agree with the others who point out that it mostly boils down to the idea that it would be 'cool' to lance take a crack at it. beyond that, i see no benefit to the sport. and since kona is a WADA event, the entire discussion is moot anyway.

-mike

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

"Is there something more specific I should know about him that I'm missing?"

dave won the hawaiian ironman for the first time when about 100 people were entered in the race. he was the person who showed the world the archetype of triathlete. he may not have been the greatest and most talented person ever to race a triathlon, but he really was the larger than life face of triathlon for its first decade. just as beach volleyball got to where it eventually got on the back of a very small set of specific attractive, well spoken personalities, at the precise right time, dave was triathlon's sinjin smith.

i don't think triathlon needs lance armstrong. i do think lance armstrong needs triathlon. the question is not whether triathlon can afford him, or can afford not to have him. triathlon can both withstand him or do fine without him. i think the question is just one of justice. i am not of the opinion that lance is ready to race again for the same reason that a lot of people have given michi weiss a hard time: we need more than just serving your time if you want to be welcomed back with open arms: we need a transparent airing of what happened.

but as for justice, i join others in thinking the issue is not lance's sentence, but lance's sentence compared to the sentences of others. i see very little difference between lance, george, levi, zabriskie and the rest. if lance is the greater villain because he was a jerk, george and levi knew he was a jerk and said nothing and what does that make them? i see a big problem with the system of anti-doping justice when one set of dopers is called heroes and victims and the other is banned for life. i think i get what travis tygart is trying to do: he's trying to change a culture, by drawing a line between those who are repentant and transparent and those who are unrepentant and opaque. but i think he's creating a new and false reality by placing riders on a pedestal and calling them worthy of admiration only because they knuckled under to his pressure. tygart looks more and more like the j edgar hoover of doping, with his lists and his files, and that makes lance look better and better by comparison.

i think lance is making a tactical mistake. he's waiting for the reconciliation commission to make him a deal. i think he should not wait for a deal. i think he should just do what's right and what's right is to be transparent and repentant, which is what tygart wants. the difference is, i think tygart will lose all leverage once that happens. i think the public pressure to restore lance's eligibility will be substantial. either way, he needs to do what's right for him, his kids, his family, his sport, and not wait for a deal. he needs to be a man, not a negotiator. i do not think he should be allowed back into triathlon until this happens but i think he should be allowed back when he does.

as for triathlon, it is one of the world's great sports, and it can prosper without lance or with lance back racing.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I don't buy that his racing brings any benefit to the sport. NBC was excited about him coming back last year because he brought all sorts of commercial synchronicity. He would produce ratings and bring top-shelf sponsors who would feature him in commercial's during the broadcast. That's not going to happen this time. He's toxic. He has no sponsors and sponsors don't want to be associated with him. Yeah he might boost ratings a bit the first time out because of the notoriety angle, but the days of this guy potentially bringing big money, audiences, and more participants to triathlon are gone.

Did the other dopers maliciously litigate and attempt to destroy the credibility and lives of anyone who dared to not lie on their behalf? How about the people he sued, knowing they didn't have the financial resources to defend themselves, behalf they appeared before a grand jury and wouldn't commit perjury on his behalf? Competing against other competitors who also doped is one thing. Willfully and intentionally destroying the lives of non-competitors who wouldn't facilitate his lie is justification enough to me for his lifetime ban.

your brain is cooked from too much namby pamby ski racing you mean?

---

Find out what it is in life that you don't do well, then don't
do that thing.

-----

Hell W.T.C does this quite often,are we going to ban them for being assholes as well? Welcome to the corporate world...



---

Do they do that to people merely because they refused to facilitate their illegal activities?

"Did the other dopers maliciously litigate and attempt to destroy the credibility and lives of anyone who dared to not lie on their behalf?"

no. but they knew about it, and knew that lance's actions protected not only himself but them. and they did and said nothing. everytime somebody brings up these things in an effort to show the disparity between lance and the others, to me it doesn't make the others look better by comparison, but worse because of their silence and complicity.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

----

The reasons are neither here nor there as the fact is most of the actions you described are quite commonplace in the business world and worse,government.Do I think it is right.of course not but do I think Lance is the only person in the sporting world who has done something similar,or worse,hell no.I wonder just how much behind the scenes scandals there are in cycling,swimming or any number of sports that make Lances asshole activities look tame.


---

EXTREMELY well said Dan! I am in complete agreement!

---

Gary Geiger
http://www.geigerphoto.com Professional photographer

TEAM KiWAMi NORTH AMERICA http://www.kiwamitri.com, Rudy Project http://www.rudyprojectusa.com, GU https://guenergy.com/shop/ ; Salming World Ambassador; https://www.shopsalming.com

As far as justice, I think it has been served appropriatly to Lance. He sued when he could of talked. He is only not allowed to race, not robbed of his pursuits in life or his money. Justice should not be served relatively. Was his case, in isolation, was he served unfairly? We can disagree on that. If it was, then it does not matter what others were served. If anything His should not be lighten, there should of been severer. If I rob you and am guilty and get a legal sentence, in your words..that is righteous. If another theif inappropriatly gets a different lightier sentence, it is not a righteuos argument that the other gets let off but the argument should solely be it was unfair that one was given a lighter sentence...............................

Fair enough. I don't agree Dave Scott knows the best way forward for the sport though.
Bringing in a celebrity is easy... WTC has been doing that forever at Kona.
It's not changing the sport for the better. Lance won't do that either.




I agree, the rest of them should be banned for life too. Although, I'm not cruel... 8 years might be sufficient.

Cue Alberto Salazar and Nike discussion...

No, this is false logic.....Lance suing others, demeaning their personal integrity, and his personal attacks are NOT under the jurisdiction of WADA. Those issues should not weigh in on his sentence.

That said, I have no problems with his lifetime ban because 1) he refused to cooperate, 2) he was complicit in corruption within the UCI and 3) he helped establish the USPS doping system.

Not the same as George, Levi, etc

---

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

"Bringing in a celebrity is easy... WTC has been doing that forever at Kona."

to me, at this point, the celebrity is triathlon. triathlon is the celebrity. the sport is plenty sexy enough, all by itself. i think it's nice that some celebrities like to do triathlons, but none of that moves me or interests me. it's like a celebrity visiting yosemite. like when teddy roosevelt visited yosemite, and had john muir show him around. yes, that was great for yosemite and for its establishment and protection as a national park. but the celebrity wasn't roosevelt, it was yosemite.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

though that's basically the opposite of dave's position, which is that lance is the star triathlon needs to bring in media exposure and money.

-mike

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

"though that's basically the opposite of dave's position, which is that lance is the star triathlon needs to bring in media exposure and money."

yes, i know.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I'd love to see LA race Kona, too...

What's done is done. LA was a bad guy during his racing days, but he wasn't the only one. Two year ban and then let it be, IMO.

For those of you that can't get past it, oh well...bigger things in life to worry about.

I understand your logic here to a point, but try explaining that to all of the pros whos jobs are triathlon. I don't think they share the same sentiment. I dont think bringing LA will do them much justice or prosperity really. I love triathlon, but I don't think LA or anyone for that matter will put IM on the radar of the public's eye for entertainment. In the end, it will simply serve LA. WTC isn't struggling making money.

---

The Rat Snake:
A Tribute Race at Gilbert Lake State Park, Laurens, NY May 16 2015
Follow the Rat Snake on Twitter

Nope. But a great many of the pro's are struggling to make money. In order for races to be able to increase prize purses and offer up the kind of cash in which 300 professionals, both men and women, can make a decent living. To do that, triathlon needs sponsors. Which means that the sport may need to change from 'niche' to 'main stream'.

I don't think that Dave was suggesting that LA even needs to race as a pro. Dave believes (if I read the article correctly) that Lance did some bad things and deserved to be punished. He's concerned that the punishment is extreme. But, he also believes that LA in Kona will attract more attention, sponsors, money, etc.

Personally, I'm not sure if LA getting allowed back into triathlon would be a good thing or not in the public eye (which is very different than the triathlon eye). However, I am quite certain that his return to sport (should it be allowed) would bring a lot of people watching. That's what I interpret Dave as saying.

---

---

---

Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/

Excellent point. You are right. They were complicit. They knew. They benefitted. Further, it wasn't distant or abstract. It was right in front of them so at some level they gave tacit approval by their silence.

So I think they were penalized too little ... as opposed to LA being penalized too much. Another difference is that he used those same litigating and bullying tactics against USADA and WADA. The others reluctantly cooperated. Not much different than trying to bullying and intimidate any regulatory agent (IRS, District Attorney, etc.) ... if you aren't successful you will not get much leniency when they push back.

I am not sure that the fact that Dave Scott was the face of triathlon in its inception, means we owe him gratitude, or necessarily need to give him any more respect than we should give the rest of us mere mortals. I believe we should respect his athletic accomplishments, and, if we respect the sport of triathlon, we should know its history and his place in it. However, Scott was not doing triathlon for for us, or for the greater good, he was doing it because he liked it and he received a lot of benefits from doing and promoting triathlons (nothing wrong with that). Accordingly, we should treat him like we should treat other superstar athletes - which is to admire their skills in the sport, but not to blindly rely on them as role models, or necessarily imbue them with wisdom greater than is justified.

I would be more included to grant automatic respect and gratitude to people in the sport of tri who spent decades volunteering, steering, promoting, etc., the sport, for the love of it.

None of this is to say I agree or disagree with Scott, it is just to split hairs on whether the stars of our sport deserve to be elevated above us for the mere fact that they are faster than us. I will concede though, that if a situation arises where the benefit of the doubt should be given - it should be given to those who have been in the fray in a meaningful way.