Will Armstrong confess??

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

Locked
Mr.Gib
Posts: 3013
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

Total BS. All hearsay and innuendo from a know liar and serial perjurer. You show me one positive test and then I'll believe Lance doped. He's clean I tell ya.
:P :P :P

(Couldn't resist, had to fill in for all the clowns in internet world.)

Seriously, If I am Frankie or Greg, I would settle with LA fast. There are a lot of folks who will be looking for a lot of money. I'd get mine before the well runs dry.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

User avatar
swinter
Posts: 1227
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:27 am
Location: Grosse Pointe, MI

by swinter

Tapeworm wrote:"Tells" denoting a particular psychological response, ie: an ear tug means the person is lying are complete bollocks. It does usually indicate the person is nervous which could be any number of reasons. Lying may or may not be one of those reasons.

There are tells for lying -- micro expressions of various sorts -- but ear-pulling is not one of them. It actually takes some training to pick them up -- and slowing the tape to catch them helps because they are micro expressions (that is, fleeting). They include things like fleeting smiles (pleasure from fooling people), crinkling of the nose (as when you smell something really awful -- like yourself), that kind of thing. I didn't notice any, but then I'm not trained (and I didn't watch the interview in slo mo).

I do think there were plenty of lies or careful shadings of the truth, as others have noted. I don't believe him about the Tour de Suisse; I think we'll hear more about that. I especially thought the stuff about not pressuring teammates was deliberately deceptive: He said he didn't direct anyone to dope, but we all know that wouldn't have been how it was done. All he (or Johann) would have needed to say is "do you want to win? are you willing to do what it takes?" They would have understood the implication.

Oprah did better than I expected.

I was disappointed that he didn't do anything to out the systemic problems. Without that, as Frankie has said, there is no real contrition. So, okay, you never called Betsy "fat." BFD. Tell us about being tipped off before the testers showed up. :smartass:
"I can't understand why people are frightened by new ideas. I'm frightened of old ones." -- John Cage

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/phpBB ... 928#126928

by Weenie


dereksmalls
Posts: 1975
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:20 pm
Location: New Zealand

by dereksmalls

I doubt we'll hear anything of the sort in this interview. That is for the courts. He won't dob anyone else in during this interview. It didn't surprise me he denied the Suisse tests and money.

We'll see what comes out in part two, but I'm not that impressed with Oprah, she hasn't linked follow up questions in from his answers as others have pointed out.

User avatar
trychle
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:36 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

by trychle

swinter wrote:
Tapeworm wrote:"Tells" denoting a particular psychological response, ie: an ear tug means the person is lying are complete bollocks. It does usually indicate the person is nervous which could be any number of reasons. Lying may or may not be one of those reasons.

There are tells for lying -- micro expressions of various sorts -- but ear-pulling is not one of them. It actually takes some training to pick them up -- and slowing the tape to catch them helps because they are micro expressions (that is, fleeting). They include things like fleeting smiles (pleasure from fooling people), crinkling of the nose (as when you smell something really awful -- like yourself), that kind of thing. I didn't notice any, but then I'm not trained (and I didn't watch the interview in slo mo).


I heared a rumour somewhere that he had a microphone in his ear so he could hear his lawyer.

Furthermore, is it just me or does anyone else think that the UCI payed him off to keep his mouth shut about the tour de Suisse?

User avatar
swinter
Posts: 1227
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:27 am
Location: Grosse Pointe, MI

by swinter

dereksmalls wrote:It didn't surprise me he denied the Suisse tests and money.

It surprised me only because of the advanced news stories that he would.

dereksmalls wrote: see what comes out in part two, but I'm not that impressed with Oprah, she hasn't linked follow up questions in from his answers as others have pointed out.

I agree she could have done better. But she still did better than I expected.

Best moment was when she showed him the tape of his SCA deposition testimony denying everything (which did have some tells) and asked him "how does that make you feel?" And he responded: "He's an arrogant pr!ck."
"I can't understand why people are frightened by new ideas. I'm frightened of old ones." -- John Cage

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/phpBB ... 928#126928

User avatar
majklnajt
Posts: 3681
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 6:40 pm
Location: Lenart, Slovenia EUROPE

by majklnajt

I dont understand.... he said that the 2001 Tour de Suisse etst is not true. But at the same time, he points out that he is no fan of the UCI.

Is he trying to cut the ban with "doping only until 2005" (like others BTW) and hoping that USADA reduces lifetime ban to 8 years (like mentioned by Tygart), starting with 2005.
This means he could race again this year. Or maybe next year.

I dont like his bullying and other stuff. But I am still a fan.
I like his riding style. Theres nothing wrong with that.

airwise
Posts: 1049
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:31 pm

by airwise

Still lying

Still trying to cheat the system

Still thinking somehow he is cleverer than mere mortals.

Disgrace to his country.

HillRPete
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:08 am
Location: Pedal Square

by HillRPete

Tygart is the man. Armstrong's lawyers sure are no lightweights, but they just couldn't find any way to derail the USADA. If only more *ADAs were that professional.

Even if doping was widespread, just for all the people who were bullied it was more than worth going after this one cause for so long. Except for Lemond, I'd rather he was a bit more careful: http://www.cyclingforums.com/t/477866/e ... mond-doped" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Wingnut
Posts: 1850
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 12:41 am

by Wingnut

airwise wrote:Still lying

Still trying to cheat the system

Still thinking somehow he is cleverer than mere mortals.

Disgrace to his country.


Governments do it, mining & banking corporations do it, IOC, UCI, FIFA do it...so why should sport, cycling or Lance be any different... :noidea:
"It's not the destination...it's the ride!"

me
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 7:44 am
Location: Australia

by me

Can anyone post a link to the whole interview online anywhere please

Thanks

metal
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:37 pm

by metal

EDIT again...

If your in the US, here http://www.oprah.com/own_tv/onc/lance-armstrong-one.html

Outside US, try this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co0vv0roMlQ

Or this one, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43EE9I8ZMFc (EDIT : This youtube clip is very poor quality, and after a quick look at the previous hq, doesn't quite have everything)
Last edited by metal on Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.

me
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 7:44 am
Location: Australia

by me

Cheers :beerchug:

I spent about an hour or so and could only find some short clips!

User avatar
ave
Posts: 1659
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Hungary

by ave

Obviously still lying.
Admits what was really undefendable, but keep on lying on all the smaller issues.

Disgusting.

metal
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:37 pm

by metal

EDIT again,

Think this link will have everything, let me know if it does or doesn't.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co0vv0roMlQ


My thoughts are... Lance was not exactly as honest and up front as he should have been. He could easily run for office given his question dodging. The specific questions asked by Oprah about other people were not answered :?

I'm glad he admitted it. But the whole interview is pretty much just that. i.e. he admits to doping...

It's a pity really. He could have been completely honest and up front. But instead he chose (or was advised by his lawyer more likely) that he would not answer some questions directly. He danced around with his answers :?


I believe he should have owned up about everything and everyone, even though it would mean financial failure for himself (bankruptcy). This outcome would mean that his actions would result in consequences. And for the people that know him, and the people that have followed this story, it would show that he would be punished.

As it is at the moment, he is still trying to cover up the full truth. And that would be the only thing that would see him set free.

He now needs to be put on a lie detector for me to regain any respect for him...

User avatar
mec287
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:18 am
Location: West Midlands, UK

by mec287

I haven't seen the interview yet, but reading a part transcript on bikeradar, my mouth fell open at LA having 'read the dictionary definition of cheat and decided he wasn't one'.

Not just a cheat, but based on the serial intimidation of others, a downright nasty piece of work. Even if he does ever get back into sport, I can't see anyone rocking up to cheer him on, can you?
S-works 2012 in Red viewtopic.php?f=10&t=111951" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

by Weenie


Locked