Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    18 Jan '13 11:06
    Do you still think he was shafted norm?
  2. 18 Jan '13 12:25
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    Do you still think he was shafted norm?
    Lance Armstrong is the architect of his own downfall.
    No one else is to blame.

    Many people spoke the truth about him and were ridiculed.
    This includes Paul Kimmage.

    Lance Armstrong was a cheat a liar and a bully.
    There are no two ways about it.

    So get over it.
  3. Subscriber Kewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    18 Jan '13 12:35
    Cheat and liar, sure, don't see the bully though.
  4. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    18 Jan '13 12:48
    Originally posted by Kewpie
    Cheat and liar, sure, don't see the bully though.
    OW: Were you a bully?

    LA: "Yes, I was a bully. I was a bully in the sense that I tried to control the narrative and if I didn't like what someone said I turned on them."

    OW: Is that your nature - when someone says something you don't like, you go on attack? Have you been like that your entire life - 10-years-old, 12-years-old and 14-years-old?

    LA: "My entire life. Before my diagnosis I was a competitor but not a fierce competitor. When I was diagnosed, that turned me into a fighter. That was good. I took that ruthless win-at-all-costs attitude into cycling which was bad."
  5. 18 Jan '13 13:39
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
    Lance Armstrong is the architect of his own downfall.
    No one else is to blame.

    Many people spoke the truth about him and were ridiculed.
    This includes Paul Kimmage.

    Lance Armstrong was a cheat a liar and a bully.
    There are no two ways about it.

    So get over it.
    Come on. Cut the guy some slack will ya. He had to make a living and riding a bike was apparently the only "skill" he had...well that and being able to look you straight in the eye and lie. Wait a minute he could have been a snakeoil salesman. Hey Lance call me.
  6. 18 Jan '13 15:55
    I wonder why such a big deal is made out of a guy who rides a bike.
  7. 18 Jan '13 15:57
    Originally posted by Eladar
    I wonder why such a big deal is made out of a guy who rides a bike.
    Yes and had he not taken "enhancements" would he have, maybe, needed a trike instead?
  8. 18 Jan '13 19:22
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    Do you still think he was shafted norm?
    Yes, though apparently he did dope, whatever that is.
  9. 18 Jan '13 19:37
    I'm willing to bet he's just a cheater competing against a whole bunch of other cheaters.

    It's like chastising Arnold Schwarzenegger for using steroids when he won all those bodybuilding competitions.
  10. 18 Jan '13 19:57
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    I'm willing to bet he's just a cheater competing against a whole bunch of other cheaters.

    It's like chastising Arnold Schwarzenegger for using steroids when he won all those bodybuilding competitions.
    That sounds a lot like my kids (and probably me) used to say..."Well Johnny does (smoke/ride his bike to school/whatever) so why can't I?"
  11. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    18 Jan '13 20:29
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Yes, though apparently he did dope, whatever that is.
    So how was he 'shafted' exactly?
  12. 18 Jan '13 20:40
    Originally posted by Great Big Stees
    That sounds a lot like my kids (and probably me) used to say..."Well Johnny does (smoke/ride his bike to school/whatever) so why can't I?"
    Not really. A bodybuilder who doesn't use steroids has a zero percent chance of even making it into professional competition, let alone winning the whole thing.

    IF my (admitted) assumption about bicycling is correct, doing the same thing your competition is doing isn't exactly cheating.
  13. 18 Jan '13 20:59
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    I'm willing to bet he's just a cheater competing against a whole bunch of other cheaters.

    It's like chastising Arnold Schwarzenegger for using steroids when he won all those bodybuilding competitions.
    Most of his competitors at that time have already been caught or have admitted doping.
  14. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    18 Jan '13 21:00
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Not really. A bodybuilder who doesn't use steroids has a zero percent chance of even making it into professional competition, let alone winning the whole thing.

    IF my (admitted) assumption about bicycling is correct, doing the same thing your competition is doing isn't exactly cheating.
    Steroids weren't illegal when Arnie won is Mr Olympia titles so he wasn't cheating, so your analogy is a little off. If a bodybuilder wants to compete without using performance enhancing drugs then they can enter competitions sanctioned by organisations that are drug free and rigorously tested, the PNBA (Professional Natural Bodybuilding Association) and it's affiliates sanction such events.
  15. 18 Jan '13 21:02
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Not really. A bodybuilder who doesn't use steroids has a zero percent chance of even making it into professional competition, let alone winning the whole thing.

    IF my (admitted) assumption about bicycling is correct, doing the same thing your competition is doing isn't exactly cheating.
    Even if your assumption is true, I do not believe we should give Armstrong (or any athlete) a pass for using performance enhancers. It is still cheating and the fact that many of his fellow high performing competitors were also cheating does not somehow transform it into a legitimate competition. I truly have sympathy for those who would/ do not cheat who, as a result, are not currently among the leaders or are forced to drop the sport entirely and in the ideal world the best among that group should be crowned the true champion.