Armstrong is a good athlete, no question. Other than that, he's a fraud and he absolutely stole all the sponsor money. I really hope he loses it all.
6
While I agree financial restitution should be part of making amends, the panel's hyperbole [“it is almost certainly the most devious sustained deception ever perpetrated in world sporting history"] suggests to me an emotional, rather than rational, decision was made.
2
who followed competitive cycling during that time and thought they were running on healthy food and good work ethic? anyone? anyone?
No.
No.
6
Armstrong is a classic narcissist. He is quite simply incapable of seeing the world without himself at the center of it. It is quite sad, but not all that unusual in the world of individual sport.
10
A French friend of mine told me very early on (at the time of Armstrong's first or second Tour) that in France it was public knowledge that he was doping. I (another cynical European, although living in the USA and, thus, surrounded by USA media: NPR and The New York Times in my case) just could not believe her.
It scares me how much the media affects our perception of the world.
It scares me how much the media affects our perception of the world.
14
Lance Armstrong's new charity - "Lie Strong"
9
Lance Armstrong is a loser, a fraud and a world class jerk. He is a nobody who cheated to become a pseudo somebody, and has now been exposed, and been relegated to full nobody status. I could rack my brain trying to name a more pathetic specimen of humanity, but don't have the time. Lance Armstrong is beneath contempt.
20
I have been a cyclist for many years, have ridden most of the coast of California and many other places. I even tried racing for a couple of years but quickly found out just how much riding one had to do to be competitive even as an amateur.
I usually watch some of the Tour de France and, along with many others, was amazed at Lance Armstrong's string of wins when it was happening. We all admired Lance Armstrong then for his tenacity and should, I suppose, have foreseen how that tenacity would manifest itself after his and the whole of the cycling culture's widespread doping was revealed. It is disappointing to read about his behavior now but it is important. Maybe some kid will see this and think maybe cheating isn't a good idea, after all.
I usually watch some of the Tour de France and, along with many others, was amazed at Lance Armstrong's string of wins when it was happening. We all admired Lance Armstrong then for his tenacity and should, I suppose, have foreseen how that tenacity would manifest itself after his and the whole of the cycling culture's widespread doping was revealed. It is disappointing to read about his behavior now but it is important. Maybe some kid will see this and think maybe cheating isn't a good idea, after all.
8
Thanks, Juliet, for staying on this story. It's more important than the 7 Tour wins.
18
Brian Williams take note -- liars never prosper.
3
Excellent reportage by Juliet Macur and the Times. I hope that further reporting will continue to reveal the depths of Lance Armstrong's duplicity and vengeful personality. This is not the way true champions behave in their lives, and Armstrong's fall from grace remains a tragic reminder of the excesses of competitive sports.
7
Are Barry Bonds or ARod being sued by the corporations that sponsored them? Not that I have ever heard of. They were world class frauds along with Armstrong.
7
Everyone wanted to hate Lance (they still do), so it's an unforgivable offense. People don't want to hate those guys because, apparently, they are heroes.
Double standard in America? Go figure.
Double standard in America? Go figure.
2
What does the author expect him to do? To write checks to this insurance company until he has no money left?
The problem with Armstrong is that people who are too stupid to see he is never a saint are now crying foul because he is not, actually, a saint.
He beat cancer with multiple metastases and won the Tour de France 7 times, doping as much as his opponents did. That's enough for me.
The problem with Armstrong is that people who are too stupid to see he is never a saint are now crying foul because he is not, actually, a saint.
He beat cancer with multiple metastases and won the Tour de France 7 times, doping as much as his opponents did. That's enough for me.
7
You may not be familiar with the way he treated those who got in his way. That might change your opinion.
16
Actually Mariah, that's exactly what he should do. And when he's paid them in full, he can get his remaining fraudulent funds together and write checks to the US gov when he loses that case too. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
8
Enough What for you?
I'm a cancer survivor, and as far as I'm concerned it was my excellent doctors who beat the disease, not me. I just did what they told me.
And he "won" the Tour 7 times by cheating. Regardless of how many other cheaters were involved, he was a cheat.
Exactly what are you celebrating about him?
I'm a cancer survivor, and as far as I'm concerned it was my excellent doctors who beat the disease, not me. I just did what they told me.
And he "won" the Tour 7 times by cheating. Regardless of how many other cheaters were involved, he was a cheat.
Exactly what are you celebrating about him?
10
I think these stories... Lance Armstrong, Brian Williams, etc. are just part of an ongoing problem in America with telling the truth. I recently wrote for my blog, Aid.Works about International Relief and Development, the biggest nonprofit working in Afghanistan. They were just suspended from getting federal grants after they were found to have "seriously mismanaged" money... We're talking billions here... Did people know? Yes, yes and yes. There were so many co-conspirators in the case of Lance, lots who were bullied. It's time for the rank and file to step forward. http://aid.works/2015/02/ird-and-ethics/
2
I don't understand how this is even news.
For the apologists here that implicitly condone his behavior with the time worn,"everybody cheated" excuse, I would say cheating was just the tip of the iceberg with Mr. Armstrong. The abuse of power, relentless vendettas against both former friends and teammates who dared tell the truth, and fraud perpetuated on those giving him money for his "heroics" only scratch the surface.
Sadly, sociopaths often do win... but luckily not this time.
Sadly, sociopaths often do win... but luckily not this time.
32
I have zero interest in Armstrong's redemption or salvation. I generally agree with Juliet Macur's evaluation of whether he's a redeemable human being. But what's with Macur's axe-grinding? This piece reads as a personal targeting, fueled by vindictiveness and some kind of righteous indignation.
Are we supposed to feel sympathetic towards a multi-millionire/billionaire who runs an insurance company like Hamman? Or think that just because USPS had it in a contract, they actually believed the sport was so clean? And did USPS actuaally _lose_ money from sponsoring Armstrong during all those years?
Of course Armstrong won't just go and dump a load of money back with SCA. To do so would invite requests for payouts from everyone Armstrong ever associated with. No lawyer would advise a client to do that - ever. (If you don't like that, your problem isn't with Armstrong, but with the adversarial system). But putting it in those terms nicely frames the issue for Macur to say, "See, he's *really* bad." Again, the tone here comes across like some kind of personal attack.
Are we supposed to feel sympathetic towards a multi-millionire/billionaire who runs an insurance company like Hamman? Or think that just because USPS had it in a contract, they actually believed the sport was so clean? And did USPS actuaally _lose_ money from sponsoring Armstrong during all those years?
Of course Armstrong won't just go and dump a load of money back with SCA. To do so would invite requests for payouts from everyone Armstrong ever associated with. No lawyer would advise a client to do that - ever. (If you don't like that, your problem isn't with Armstrong, but with the adversarial system). But putting it in those terms nicely frames the issue for Macur to say, "See, he's *really* bad." Again, the tone here comes across like some kind of personal attack.
10
Well, from what I have learned through living in the truth is this, if you do not want a riot, do not engage in incite-full behavior. If anyone seems to be grinding an ax, it is Mr. Armstrong who refuses to live an honest life. His behavior resembles that of a sociopath.
I am sure many of the riders used illegal substances, and continue to engage in this unhealthy behavior, but this fact does not mean that it is mentally or physically OK. Nor is this behavior ethical. What is to be proud of when one cheats? Nothing.
I am sure many of the riders used illegal substances, and continue to engage in this unhealthy behavior, but this fact does not mean that it is mentally or physically OK. Nor is this behavior ethical. What is to be proud of when one cheats? Nothing.
14
Who doesn't cheat?
Trust me... It's not just the lawyers advice. It's his ego and stubbornness.
1
Everyone is trying to recoup money they payed out to Lance Armstrong because he admitted to doping. But it was pretty much an open secret that he was doping (along with every other cyclist in the elite levels) and yet these people still chose to do business with him. Not to mention the millions they made by sponsoring him. It's not like they gave him millions for just winning. They paid him millions as his "sponsors" and in turn they got to use his name on the advertising of their products and in turn made millions from sales based on his name. It goes both ways. I'm definitely not the first to step up and defend a super wealthy cheat but it seems a little preposterous to me that these companies that have made millions on his name are now trying to get "their money back." An of course, lets be honest with ourselves here, would any of us be like "Oh, my bad, here's your money back. All ten million." I seriously doubt it.
11
Many thanks to Juliet for her excellent reporting on this subject and others. The moment I see her by line I immediately dropped all other articles and read her articles start to finish. Every one has been excellent and well researched. The best of the New York Times!
7
In reading this story (and others she has written), it sounds like the writer has some personal interest (or perhaps some judgmental or vindictive take) on the whole Lance Armstrong story. If she does, maybe she should set those personal matters aside and practice a more disciplined form of journalism. For me, the tone of this story undermines its credibility.
11
I think a reporter's job is to expose the truth. I can't think of any subject in sports deserving a more harsh exposure of the truth than that of Lance Armstrong.
13
This guy is, and always has been, DESPICABLE...
7
Now, now, despicableness is bad, but is it really Lance Armstrong bad? Give the concept some credit here.
3
there continues to be a smattering of Armstrong defenders, to the amazement of the majority. None of these defenders would think the same if they were threatened or intimidated by this charlatan. When you start of with a timeframe for your road to redemption, you've started on the wrong foot.
13
Money's the root of all evil. Both sides here.
2
Sports definitely serve many purposes… Sometimes they allow us terrestrial creatures to witness and more importantly participate, adding our morally elevated and enlighten opinions as we describe and pretend to udnerstand the meteoric fall of those that where once like us, but one day said enough! and did everything they could, against all odds, to become space creatures that shine bright like stars... Oh how sweet it is to see them fall, especially when they validate our lack of guts to rise!
One word and one word only: PHARMstrong.
4
If only Joe Sixpack, who struts around calling Armstrong a "doper" and a "cheater", among other colorful epithets, got to see what goes on in an NFL locker room.
Makes Armstrong's doping look like a weekend of smoking dope on the couch.
And if writers hate Lance so much, and want him to go away, then stop writing about him every two weeks.
"Journalists" have become the monster that feeds itself...
Makes Armstrong's doping look like a weekend of smoking dope on the couch.
And if writers hate Lance so much, and want him to go away, then stop writing about him every two weeks.
"Journalists" have become the monster that feeds itself...
6
What's Anna Hansen thinking by allowing Lance to accuse her of crashing a car that he drove while drunk? Amazing that she would go out with such an unconscious criminal who would endanger her life and others on the road.
3
It's not about the bike. It's all about lance. Always was. Always will be.
5
To those who would say so what, he is/was only an athlete, our Iraq war criminals did not get prosecuted . .
In American society everyone is competing for credibility, fame, money or celebrity on some level, whether in popular culture, politics or whatever. Quite often there is crossover (reaching back to a distant example, Orson Welles wrote speeches for FDR and was heavily involved in at least one campaign). Actors and athletes run for office (Ronald Reagan, Al Franken, Arnold S., baseball player turned senator Jim Bunning). When someone lies or gets ahead duping the public, other people in whatever strata get the idea they can do it too. When one person gets caught it sends a message to everyone in the other strata.
The place I went to college pulled off a scam where a lower level operative got funding for a campus building while creating plausible deniability for the university president, an exact parallel of Iran-Contra that was fresh at the time. It raises the question of whether the goal for everyone is just to get away with whatever they see their social betters getting away with and emulating the example in a giant money see monkey do operation.
Bringing this guy down was for everyone's benefit.
In American society everyone is competing for credibility, fame, money or celebrity on some level, whether in popular culture, politics or whatever. Quite often there is crossover (reaching back to a distant example, Orson Welles wrote speeches for FDR and was heavily involved in at least one campaign). Actors and athletes run for office (Ronald Reagan, Al Franken, Arnold S., baseball player turned senator Jim Bunning). When someone lies or gets ahead duping the public, other people in whatever strata get the idea they can do it too. When one person gets caught it sends a message to everyone in the other strata.
The place I went to college pulled off a scam where a lower level operative got funding for a campus building while creating plausible deniability for the university president, an exact parallel of Iran-Contra that was fresh at the time. It raises the question of whether the goal for everyone is just to get away with whatever they see their social betters getting away with and emulating the example in a giant money see monkey do operation.
Bringing this guy down was for everyone's benefit.
1
Why is Lance being punished when 5,000,000 illegal aliens who violated US laws are granted de facto amnesty? We need to put everything in perspective. If we punish Lance surely we need to punish these 5,000,000 lawbreakers.
1
Aside form implying that Armstrong shouldn't be punished, it's apples and oranges time. But, hey, why not keep things irrelevant to the article? Why are people doing 10 to 20 for stealing a few packs of cigarettes while the former governor of Virginia is doing two years in a minimum security facility for massive fraud when the sentencing guidelines call for 8 to 10 years?
6
Apples and oranges
2
The only thing that makes Lance Armstrong the poster boy scourge of cycling, if not by vicariously and hypocritically the scourge of all sport, is the difference between the USADA and the other judicial investigative bodies in the other countries where cycling licenses were issued and whose holders, in the heyday of EPO and blood doping, were all doping consistently at the highest levels.
The American prosecutor Travis Tygart pursued Lance with all the singlemindedness of an Ahab going after the Great White Whale. He nailed Lance's teammates to the wall with threats of jail time for perjury, made them squeal for their salvation and then he brought down the centerpiece, Lance, in a hail of supercharged rhetoric that Lance's was the most concerted doping in the history of sport.
I'm not saying Lance isn't a dirt bag. But the great cycling nations of France and Spain plus a number of other national jurisdictions let their winning dopers off in a haze of rumors or fines or short-lived suspensions while never getting to the bottom of the massive unspoken conspiracy when everybody did it in a certain era.
Go down the list of Tour de France winners in the Lance Armstrong era and you'd be hard pressed to find a clean default winner among the top ten. Among the Still Greats of cycling, say the Merckx or the Indurain or the You Name Him, one does wonder how close they skated and whether their sleepless nights involve guilt free mind wanderings into the Cycling Hall of Fame.
The American prosecutor Travis Tygart pursued Lance with all the singlemindedness of an Ahab going after the Great White Whale. He nailed Lance's teammates to the wall with threats of jail time for perjury, made them squeal for their salvation and then he brought down the centerpiece, Lance, in a hail of supercharged rhetoric that Lance's was the most concerted doping in the history of sport.
I'm not saying Lance isn't a dirt bag. But the great cycling nations of France and Spain plus a number of other national jurisdictions let their winning dopers off in a haze of rumors or fines or short-lived suspensions while never getting to the bottom of the massive unspoken conspiracy when everybody did it in a certain era.
Go down the list of Tour de France winners in the Lance Armstrong era and you'd be hard pressed to find a clean default winner among the top ten. Among the Still Greats of cycling, say the Merckx or the Indurain or the You Name Him, one does wonder how close they skated and whether their sleepless nights involve guilt free mind wanderings into the Cycling Hall of Fame.
6
there is no dignity, or integrity for Lance in this particular story of his life, and certainly he is devoid of being anything remotely close to virtuous with regard to his cycling career, but until someone comes up with the remedy for "competitive edge" in a sport notoriously known for it's use of PED's, then let's stop focusing on Lance and not turn a blind eye to the next generation of Lance's. As another reader pointed out, nobody responsible for a hocus-pocus war on WMD's that has aided the creation of ISIS, is paying for their dirty deeds... So move on, and Lance stop being a dirt bag, and do something really good for the sport to rebuild your trust - maybe makes bikes for poor children around the world.
3
Armstrong played according to the rules of the day: he didn't invent doping, He is an elite athlete who worked and trained extremely hard and is very competitive and disciplined. He's the greatest TDF rider ever. Just ask those he competed against.
4
He is a fraud and his apologists are pathetic.
6
There is a lot of furor against a cheater. Maybe rightfully so. But if anyone here thinks the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB and every other professional sport with billions of dollars involved isn't rife with PEDs, you are either woefully ignorant or just plain delusional. The doping controls in US sports are pathetic compared to what Armstrong had to game. So if you are throwing stones, make sure you take your head out of the sand before so.
6
Most seem less concerned with his cheating than with the way he treated others to get away with it. ARod is a cheater par excellence, but never destroyed anyone to protect himself. The same can't be said for Mr. Armstrong.
8
Armstrong is expected to be honest but when he tells the truth (he'd dope again because it was so pervasive) people become upset? Better to lie and say he wouldn't? The truth isn't always pretty. Armstrong knows that more than most. Better living through chemistry pervades our culture.
4
I am disappointed to hear all this. But it is the way with many things - people feel that the end justifies the means.
Its a bad philosophy and way to live.
Its a bad philosophy and way to live.
2
It hard to believe some of the comments, especially those that are sympathetic to Armstrong. First because what he did was criminal (grand larceny) for which he is not being prosecuted. And second, because he breached the public trust.
To justify it on the grounds that everyone else does it or that he was doing good with his foundation, are the wrong messages. It is just as easy to say that so many young kids are being taught that it's okay to cheat. I have zero tolerance with that stupidity.
To justify it on the grounds that everyone else does it or that he was doing good with his foundation, are the wrong messages. It is just as easy to say that so many young kids are being taught that it's okay to cheat. I have zero tolerance with that stupidity.
6
Ms. Macur:
It's easy to spew vitriol at Mr. Armstrong; a lot more difficult to report on where most of the blame lies: with the cycling establishment who condoned a culture of doping - established long before Mr. Armstrong came on the scene - and, like other sports, reaped millions for sponsors, owners and the media, while fueling society's 'win-at-all-costs' culture.
I'm not surprised that you took the easy road.
It's easy to spew vitriol at Mr. Armstrong; a lot more difficult to report on where most of the blame lies: with the cycling establishment who condoned a culture of doping - established long before Mr. Armstrong came on the scene - and, like other sports, reaped millions for sponsors, owners and the media, while fueling society's 'win-at-all-costs' culture.
I'm not surprised that you took the easy road.
6
One word and one word only: PHARMstrong.
3
The biggest fraud in the dirtiest of sports
5
The dirtiest of sports? Oh my. You might want to investigate FIFA, FIA, and the IOC if you want to see corruption that'll make your eyes bleed. As for doping, in its worst days cycling was nothing like today's NFL.
3
While no one approves of Lance Armstrong's conduct in self-doping and in coercing team mates to do the same, SCA Promotion's suit against Armstrong does not, in any way, suggest that Armstrong has reneged on his promise to straighten out his life and make amends. On the contrary, this looks a lot like a money grab by SCA, which, during the period when it was paying Armstrong bonuses, surely enjoyed the promotional and revenue benefits of its association with Armstrong—an association that is now long forgotten, and probably would have stayed forgotten had SCA not piled on with its suit against Armstrong. Ms. Macur's logic here is seriously flawed, and this article really feels as though fueled by its author's deep-seated animosity, not by the facts.
4
There's no doubt that Armstrong is a perfect jerk. Frankly I thought that after the way he treated S.Crow, after she was diagnosed with cancer. But please, spare me the righteous indignation of SCA's 'mouthpiece"....hopefully he, and that other fraud, Landis, don't benefit financially from this fiasco.
Also frankly, a settlement is a settlement. Expect the arbitrators' award to be overturned by the court. I'm confident that Armstrong will never have his reputation rebuilt; deservedly so.
Finally, tour cycling, including the much-hyped Tour de France( that the French version of dopers can't win...) is, and has been, a 'dirty' sport for many decades.
Also frankly, a settlement is a settlement. Expect the arbitrators' award to be overturned by the court. I'm confident that Armstrong will never have his reputation rebuilt; deservedly so.
Finally, tour cycling, including the much-hyped Tour de France( that the French version of dopers can't win...) is, and has been, a 'dirty' sport for many decades.
2
This is the last thing Lance said to me during our interview in the midst of chemo in 1996: "I know I'm going to still make mistakes in the future. I'll still do stupid things from time to time and they may hurt some people. But I know, I'm going to try not to. I'm going to try to be the best person I can and make the most out of every day — and always look at the positive side of things. Always." Some things never change. You can see what he was like in those early years in my book "Taken for a Ride: Chasing a Young Lance Armstrong.
3
The very most stange question about this article is: Why did SCA pay Armstrong $14.5 million-plus over the years? SCA must have received some benefit for the monies paid to Armstrong and presumably the benefit to SCA was more than the amount paid to Armstrong.
5
Mr. Armstrong should consider running for political office; he possess the character traits that get folks elected in our country.
2
Don't you understand? The rules don't apply to Lance Armstrong. There is no right or wrong to him. There is only his wants and desires. What kind of "path" does that make him?
4
I admit it. I feel betrayed by Armstrong and take pleasure in his getting his comeuppance in all these ways. But I also agree with the poster who compared the effects of Armstrong's lies to those of the Bush/Cheney gang, lies that caused enormous human misery. I would like too to point out that the lies of the tobacco company executives whose products STILL kill half a million people per year in this country alone make Armstrong's abuses pale. I wish that the people responsible for all of that manslaughter could be brought to task. As a 69-year old who managed to quit smoking in my thirties, I am surrounded by friends and acquaintances who remained addicted and are dying way before their time.
5
Seems like he can't take advice. Should have said "everyone was doping but I was doping AND winning AND got so addicted to both I was willing to destroy anything and everybody that got in my way. I was psychiatrically impaired." People love a good addiction story. George Bush was an alcoholic, and countless authors and celebrities drug addicts...
4
In my books, Lance and redemption aren't words that should be used in the same sentence. The only thing that comes close is that he disappears completely from public view and is never heard of again. Don't expect Lance to understand that, but I wished the media did.
6
Years ago this writer told people armstrong was an ugly, dirty cheat. An interesting thing developed from that view. Some many people, some many of them jingo-singers were willing to defend armstrong's honor. Later as the cheating facts started to become clearer, some many continues to be apologists even though it was clear lance was not only an amazingly prolific liar. lance worked at ruining other peoples lives.
lance, I am glad that the facts of your life have come out to the cold light of day. People who continue to defend your actions do so from a malformed foundation of what is and is not acceptable in the world. Odd that those same people, were it a neighbor or say a co-worker who lied and stole this extensively would not come in for the same level of defense. Human nature is an odd thing...
lance, I am glad that the facts of your life have come out to the cold light of day. People who continue to defend your actions do so from a malformed foundation of what is and is not acceptable in the world. Odd that those same people, were it a neighbor or say a co-worker who lied and stole this extensively would not come in for the same level of defense. Human nature is an odd thing...
4
One of the things that really bothers me is that all of the people that made multiple millions off of Armstrong are the same people now lining up to make multiple millions off of him again.
While Armstrong perjured himself and should return the money the discussion always seems to revolve around him "cheating" in a professional sport.
I never saw anyone mentioning Superbowl halfbacks running 50 yards with all of that equipment on at Olympic sprint record times as if that were anything unusual. Or pitching 12 innings of 80-90 mph fastballs as if it were nothing more than the sign of a good pitcher.
The fact is that most of these super stars have something to prove to the world around them for one reason or another from the way they were raised or not raised to psychological problems. That forces these people to do anything to achieve fame and fortune and the people reading this are those responsible for it.
So perhaps if you're pushing people to achieve at any costs you should understand that some of them are going to spend more than they have.
While Armstrong perjured himself and should return the money the discussion always seems to revolve around him "cheating" in a professional sport.
I never saw anyone mentioning Superbowl halfbacks running 50 yards with all of that equipment on at Olympic sprint record times as if that were anything unusual. Or pitching 12 innings of 80-90 mph fastballs as if it were nothing more than the sign of a good pitcher.
The fact is that most of these super stars have something to prove to the world around them for one reason or another from the way they were raised or not raised to psychological problems. That forces these people to do anything to achieve fame and fortune and the people reading this are those responsible for it.
So perhaps if you're pushing people to achieve at any costs you should understand that some of them are going to spend more than they have.
1
The justifications I read about in the comments section make me realize that the cheating culture in sports is not going to go away. It's not so bad, it's only if you get caught, everyone else is doing it. It's really true that bad things happen when good people let them happen.
2
"Those are two of the qualities that led him to be a champion."
Lance Armstrong never was a champion. He just deceived people into thinking he was.
Lance Armstrong never was a champion. He just deceived people into thinking he was.
2
"Truth is still not part of his daily vocabulary. This month, Armstrong received two traffic tickets . . . but [his girlfriend] later admitted that she had lied because she didn’t want his name in the news."
Um, there are innumerable examples of Armstrong's lying. So why try to nail him with someone else's lying?
Um, there are innumerable examples of Armstrong's lying. So why try to nail him with someone else's lying?
To a large extent the American public made Lance Armstrong what he is. It fawns over winners and then wonders what happened when its winners turn out to be losers. Armstrong still appears to believe, like his followers, that winning is everything. He has the sporting public to thank for that little fantasy and, of course to a certain extent, his flawed personality.
12
I think the words never spoken about this fallen hero are that he has the mind of a seasoned criminal—denial breeds contempt, and there is definitely a deep split in his psyche that seems irreparable, and which continues to direct his thinking and his actions—it's almost out of his control—almost.
2
Very nice last line, Ms. Mancur!
2
Unfortunately, lawsuits are the only language Armstrong understands. Therapy would be wasted on him, as he thinks all he has is a PR problem. But getting his girlfriend to take the blame for his car accident is really beyond the pale. Girl, run, do not walk, away from this relationship!
1
No six-month or one year plan will save his reputation. It is destroyed forever.
His kids and his grandchildren will have to live with that long after he is gone.
His kids and his grandchildren will have to live with that long after he is gone.
1
Once a psychopath, always a psychopath.
3
Lance Armstrong's only redemption is righting his wrongs. Without being told by a court of law, he should repay those who piled millions of dollars into supporting him when one of the conditions of that support was "no doping". He needs to acknowledge those people whose careers he destroyed when he was busy trying not to be exposed for the fraud that was his life.
There is no shortcut to this redemption and I suugest he call upon his athletic training to win this race ----- it probably will be the only honest thing he will ever do.
There is no shortcut to this redemption and I suugest he call upon his athletic training to win this race ----- it probably will be the only honest thing he will ever do.
4
Lance Armstrong is not a good person and assuredly deserves the public scorn and legal difficulties he is now experiencing...but one has to question why he has lost his Tour De France titles while the other dopers...Ulrich, Pantani, and Contador have been allowed to keep theirs.
3
When did it start? Probably before he was born. His parents were just another pair of dance moms with high hopes and low scruples who passed their values on to their son like so many millions of other parents. We have seen the cheater and he is us.
3
Juliet M. sounds like another madly spurned female on the loose.
And what would you know about that, youthful ward?
That comment says a lot more about you than it does about Ms. Macur.
2
I don't understand why we look for redemption in a person like Lance Armstrong. People, it's not gonna happen. He's not sorry. He'd do it again -- tomorrow, next week, next year. He destroyed a lot of good people along the way and he's best forgotten and ignored (or repeatedly sued).
11
There are parallels to Pete Rose in Lance's case. It's certainly taken more than 6 months for Charlie Hustle to be redeemed. It is disturbing that Rose's case for the Hall of a Fame seems to be strengthening. My hope is never. Nor for Bonds, Clemens, et al. The name "Armstrong" should join the lexicon of how to cheat. As in "ARod pulled an Armstrong".
3
“it is almost certainly the most devious sustained deception ever perpetrated in world sporting history”
Omitted: 'that we know about'. I will bet that if we dug, not just into cycling but into sport in general, we'd find Armstrong was small potatoes. But because he is an individual, he makes an excellent target - he puts a face on the pervasive.
For heaven's sake, just admit 'sport' is all on the level of 'professional wrestling' and let them all 'cheat;.
Omitted: 'that we know about'. I will bet that if we dug, not just into cycling but into sport in general, we'd find Armstrong was small potatoes. But because he is an individual, he makes an excellent target - he puts a face on the pervasive.
For heaven's sake, just admit 'sport' is all on the level of 'professional wrestling' and let them all 'cheat;.
17
Anyone who followed the Armstrong saga or who follows cycling knows that Armstrong was a major factor in drug use. He not only doped to gain an advantage (because not everyone in cycling dopes..far from it) but he forced others to use drugs (that's forced, not assisted). He also used his position to attempt to destroy those who suggested that doping was inappropriate.
Armstrong has been proven to be a druggie and a thug. Defending him with the 'everyone else did it' is childish and, in Armstrongs case, ignorant.
Armstrong has been proven to be a druggie and a thug. Defending him with the 'everyone else did it' is childish and, in Armstrongs case, ignorant.
5
Winning seven Tours...seven!...the way he did it is hardly small potatoes.
Ditto Barry Bonds and his home run record, despite all the "cheating" that went on during that period. No small potatoes there either. If he somehow enters the Hall of Fame, instead of being shunned, then Messrs. Jackson and Rose richly deserve admission.
Ditto Barry Bonds and his home run record, despite all the "cheating" that went on during that period. No small potatoes there either. If he somehow enters the Hall of Fame, instead of being shunned, then Messrs. Jackson and Rose richly deserve admission.
Wow, just give in and "let them all cheat". Are you that morally bankrupt as to just accept, or borderline PROMOTE allowing cheating? Well, might as well let your kid bring crib notes to Algebra class. And your income tax? There are ways to skirt those pesky taxes, right? Oh, you paid a few hundred extra for your car repairs? Well, so your mechanic adheres to your philosophy of "letting them all cheat", so you should probably just shut up and pay the man. See where your cynicism leads?
1
The ONLY thing Lance feels sorry about is getting caught. I doesn't bother him in the least that millions put their faith and hope in him. To have suffering cancer victims believe in him only to have him throw them under the bus proves his cancer efforts were for personal gain only. Anyone who thinks his efforts are to be considered are as heartless as he is.The only resolve is to bring him to full and swift justice for the blatant fraud he committed.
19
Excellent description of this Evil Thing!
"Millions put their faith and hope in him."I cannot understand this statement: He is a supreme athlete with or without drugs, certainly, but he is only that, an athlete, not a supreme academic. He was also paid to be a narcissistic wonder. Enough already! Hope and faith indeed, please let's show some restraint; he is not the Mahdi.
2
Sorry you missed the obvious intent of my comment. Lance left cancer victims with the belief that if he could beat cancer and do great things then so could they. Admirable, but false hope at best considering it was a blatant lie. Lance is now paying for his transgressions. Fair enough already.
Why so much hate for this guy? He lied, he got caught and he is being pursued for his offenses. He road a bike, He didn't lie about WMD's and cause a war, he road a bike and doped like a lot of others.
Why such pleasure in kicking the man who is already down?
Why such pleasure in kicking the man who is already down?
60
You ask "Why so much hate?" The better question may be: "Why are you such an apologist for a person who perpetrated one of the biggest scams of all time in sports?" I was a fan like many others. I don't hate the guy – I feel sorry that he's been stupid enough to paint himself into this corner. You sound like the only thing he did wrong was to get caught.
33
Apparently arrogance has become a human value, something young people should model.
Because Lance enjoyed kicking people when he was up.
10
Chalk it up to desperation; and self-delusion. Penury is its own reward, for cheating, perjury and fraud.
5
Sorry but the USPS got what it wanted out of connecting its name to Lance during the heyday. And whether or not his place in that part of history was justified or not due to his cheating is besides the point. In other words, back then they got what they paid for. He is a dirtball but they paid to get advertising from a "World Champion" and that is what they got at the time. The present day has no bearing on that. Now if they want to sue because they feel what he has done has sullied their reputation being associated with him that's another story. But I think their delivery service does far more damage than his doping to that.
17
If the USPS contract had a doping clause (and that appears to be the case) Armstrong was not acting in good faith and sold a fraudulent product. Same for SCA and any other of his sponsors with a doping clause.
3
The USPS delivers far better in my neighborhood that FedEx or UPS. USPS delivers packages ot my house, not to some random house down the street. They do not leave large packages leaning against and blocking the outward opening door of the house. They check on elderly residents who have not picked up their mail.
UPS and FedEx employees are generally rude and unhelpful.
The USPS paid for an association with an apparent champion of good morals. They have every right to seek redress because the "champion" was a crook.
UPS and FedEx employees are generally rude and unhelpful.
The USPS paid for an association with an apparent champion of good morals. They have every right to seek redress because the "champion" was a crook.
2
true, true; and funny....
All professional sportspeople look for an unfair advantage. High altitude training, special diets, surgeries etc. Why are steroids of hormones any different? Besides who cares if its fair? Its just entertainment and Lance Armstrong delivered what the advertisers paid for - eyeballs on their brand.
16
How are high altitude training or specially designed diets the equivalent to steroids or blood doping? If I'm going to race a few hundred miles in the Alps or the Rockies, I better get some serious training work in at 6500 feet! And to do it, I better eat what the dietician prescribes. I also know that I have to pee in that bottle each day, so I had better be clean of the enhancements that would no doubt help if I hadn't trained and eaten correctly.
Because not all cyclists can afford a high-altitude chamber. It is NOT a level playing field. You feel O.K. about a shot of procaine in the knee of a football player? How about the say-hey kid taking a mouthful of uppers. That O.K. also?
Lance Armstrong seems to continue to behave in an ugly way - taking whatever he can, lying, and cheating. An unenlightened man who seems not to learn from his ways - but I find no pleasure in watching him destroyed and brought to his knees now. This is a sad example of angry, ugly behavior - we see so called leaders in business & politics conduct themselves in a similar manner and we just shake our heads, but I suppose something about an athlete doing this seems to upset us even more. The ruining of lives -ugh.
3
He lied and ripped them off. They want their money back. He sued them and lied under oath to get a judgment that he didn't deserve. You think they are vindictive for wanting the decision reviewed and reversed once it was proven that he was lying?
1
This thing is that Armstrong is an extremely vindictive man. His reaction to any negative press was to attack journalists at a personal level, attempting to smear their reputations for them reporting true facts about him.
Rather than own the truth, or merely lie about and move forward, Armstrong played dirty with anyone who might threaten his reputation.
Rather than own the truth, or merely lie about and move forward, Armstrong played dirty with anyone who might threaten his reputation.
“it is almost certainly the most devious sustained deception ever perpetrated in world sporting history”
Perhaps the only honor Lance will be able to keep in the sports record book.
Perhaps the only honor Lance will be able to keep in the sports record book.
11
Why should he refuse to take ownership of his cheating, Lying ways when mainstream media swallows his hollow mea culpa hook line amd sinker. Listening to him several months ago on the Dan Patrick Radio show the host acted as a born again Armstrong apostles. With help like this why would he ever speak the truth.
7
Six months to a year to rebuild his reputation? Wow, that's fast! I would think it would take years, if not a lifetime. Maybe his reputation-building was on PEDs, too.
17
I guess there's not much chance we'll see his face on a stamp anytime soon.
19
Why crush the guy further? Why is the scandal all about Armstrong and not about the sport and the sanctioning bodies where apparently the only way to win was by doping? Does Caveat Emptor not apply to SCA in this case? Armstrong may be no paragon of virtue but this has devolved into scapegoating and then some.
21
Apparently you don't understand caveat emptor. That's in regard to a simple purchase of goods under quite distant English law. It has absolutely no relevance to a case where a man perjured himself in an arbitration.
Why don't you ask some of the people whose careers and reputations he tried to destroy (sometimes succeeding) to protect his "secret"?
In pro sports there are dopers and losers, and who cares? It's just tawdry entertainment.
Lance Armstrong should lose everything. He's a crook!
6
If I were he I would be frightened; it's never going away. He can't spend the money he's hidden, the elephants at the IRS will forever graze his pastures. If you want retribution of him it's already in place.
6
He should not be allowed to keep the money earned by deceit. I'll not judge who should get it, but not Lance Armstrong. The redeeming factor here is the scandal is so large, the organisers of the Tour de France are finally taking actions against doping, will it be successful? We all hope so.
31
Jean-Louis: Maybe as successful as the Maginot Line was.
1
"He remains so stubborn, so unwilling to admit failure, but no wonder. Those are two of the qualities that led him to be a champion." Au contraire, it did not lead him to be a champion, it led him to be the biggest dope (pun intended) in the history of sports.
16
In a world of political deception that costs hundred thousands to millions their lives each year in wars, social injustice, plain wrong info on nutrition, etc. the lie of an athlete who hasn't really done any harm other than to just a few corporations seems over rated to me.
35
"the lie of an athlete who hasn't really done any harm other than to just a few corporations seems over rated to me"
Easy statement to make when it wasn't your money that was stolen.
Easy statement to make when it wasn't your money that was stolen.
17
One of those corporations just declared bankruptcy and is putting thousands on the street: RadioShack.
13
People work for those corporations. People own stock in those corporations. Armstrong has taken money out of all their pockets.
Lance Armstrong is nothing more than a lying, cheating, self-serving "athlete" who has lost touch with reality. His most recent pathetic performance was lying so his girl friend would assume responsibility for his DUI. What a miserable, cowardly excuse for a man.
45
He lied, he should pay it back. Period. I still think the guy a good bike racer and other then the drug use and being a liar. He still had to peddle up those mountains. And still had to ride those days in the flats in the heat. No He should give it back.
11
No one, not even someone who has hundreds of millions in the bank (Armstrong doesn't) says "sorry" by returning ten million dollars. Further, if anyone gives in on one point, people then line up to score money on the next and the next and there is no end to it.
All this piling on of Lance Armstrong is getting rather worn. He's not a murderer. He isn't running for office. It seems to me that everyone wants to demonstrate their moral superiority, or the presumption of same, by using Armstrong as a whipping boy.
As for doping because everyone else was doing it? That's the truth. I don't accept Armstrong's explanation of how "the team" reached that conclusion that I have read elsewhere, but some facts, please: 1. The time when Armstrong won the tours was a time when virtually everyone was doping. 2. Most of the people who came in second, third or fourth have been found guilty or admitted doping. 3. Almost all of the top people in the Tours have either admitted doping or been caught doing it.
If you are any sport and there is cheating and you want to win, you have basically two choices: join in or rat out the others.
If a teacher deliberately leaves the room during a test, it is an invitation to cheating. The people who ran the Tour knew there was cheating, but they got the benefit of an exciting time in cycling and didn't do nearly enough to stop it. Armstrong is not guilty alone, he is guilty with many other people. Why celebrate his current problems?
Doug Terry
All this piling on of Lance Armstrong is getting rather worn. He's not a murderer. He isn't running for office. It seems to me that everyone wants to demonstrate their moral superiority, or the presumption of same, by using Armstrong as a whipping boy.
As for doping because everyone else was doing it? That's the truth. I don't accept Armstrong's explanation of how "the team" reached that conclusion that I have read elsewhere, but some facts, please: 1. The time when Armstrong won the tours was a time when virtually everyone was doping. 2. Most of the people who came in second, third or fourth have been found guilty or admitted doping. 3. Almost all of the top people in the Tours have either admitted doping or been caught doing it.
If you are any sport and there is cheating and you want to win, you have basically two choices: join in or rat out the others.
If a teacher deliberately leaves the room during a test, it is an invitation to cheating. The people who ran the Tour knew there was cheating, but they got the benefit of an exciting time in cycling and didn't do nearly enough to stop it. Armstrong is not guilty alone, he is guilty with many other people. Why celebrate his current problems?
Doug Terry
48
Doug, because he was such a bold liar
23
chas, when is enough enough? Is there no room for compassion? I would bet without hesitation that most of the people eagerly condemning Armstrong have cheated on one thing or another in life. When I was in high school and college almost everyone thought it was "okay" to cheat in one way or another if someone could do it without being caught. I never understood this attitude, because it seemed like undermining the purpose of being there, yet it was a common attitude.
Armstrong gets no points for being "nice", that's for sure. Two of the people, Frankie Andreu and Betsy Andreu, who accused Armstrong of doping early on, based their claims on an overheard conversation with Armstrong's doctor when he was thought to be dying of cancer. How great is that to use such a private moment? Wouldn't that make anyone angry? This is a tangled web.
My view is that the reason people keeping jumping on Armstrong is that they just love to do it and can't stop themselves.
Armstrong gets no points for being "nice", that's for sure. Two of the people, Frankie Andreu and Betsy Andreu, who accused Armstrong of doping early on, based their claims on an overheard conversation with Armstrong's doctor when he was thought to be dying of cancer. How great is that to use such a private moment? Wouldn't that make anyone angry? This is a tangled web.
My view is that the reason people keeping jumping on Armstrong is that they just love to do it and can't stop themselves.
"Doping" is not even the real point here - it is fraud and deceit, 'winning' against the rules, and mocking those not clever enough to avoid getting caught (or even worse, threatening the whistle-blowers).
1
Armstrong is clearly a sick, evil person. You can't say he's lazy, though. It amazes me is that his cheating involved huffing and puffing up and down mountains, across extraordinary distances, at the limits of human endurance. There's got to be a better way to fake a living.
9
I find it hypocritical for all the vitriol spewing out against Armstrong as if all of us are lily-white purists, pure in our moral compass. Just look at the business world, the political system and government, the game that is played my most people of trying desperately to make certain it is the others OX that gets gored. His arrogance did without question to do enormous good for Cancer regardless of his motivation and ethics. None of us are pure..stop being so righteous!
15
Oh come on – read up on this before you write. He has pocketed millions of dollars on false pretenses. This is not your every day misdemeanor. I'm sure you would not be so forgiving if it was your money.
35
He destroyed the lives of many people close to him, so it's not just about the money and corporations, folks. His ruthless attempts to destroy those close to him is well documented.
That's lame. I had cancer and I don't think this liar did anything for me. Get a clue.
The road to redemption for Armstrong is a dead end. He's not someone who made a bad mistake our two, served his time, and wants to return to society. He cheated methodically for more than a decade, corrupted others to do the same, made millions doing it, destroyed those who tried to call attention to what he did, and is now choreographing a cynical, remorseless return. The only thing he's sorry about is that he got caught. Bye bye.
140
Everything about this story is sour and rotten: the sport; the teams; the competitors; their sponsors; the rules; the reward structure; everything.
Armstrong claims everybody cheats, or tries. Therefore, victory goes to the cleverest criminal. I believe it.
My solution to the ethical morass Armstrong epitomizes? Treat it as traif. Ignore it. Ignore the sport; teams; personalities; sponsors; rules; awards; everything. Pay no attention. Treat it like it's invisible, or dead. Utterly.
I hope all those defrauded by Armstrong and others retrieve their capital investment in something that never really existed, with damages and interest.
Armstrong claims everybody cheats, or tries. Therefore, victory goes to the cleverest criminal. I believe it.
My solution to the ethical morass Armstrong epitomizes? Treat it as traif. Ignore it. Ignore the sport; teams; personalities; sponsors; rules; awards; everything. Pay no attention. Treat it like it's invisible, or dead. Utterly.
I hope all those defrauded by Armstrong and others retrieve their capital investment in something that never really existed, with damages and interest.
"Best of the cheaters" is a title for scoundrels.
In 2006, Armstrong perjured himself in an arbitration hearing that he won. In 2013, he was sued to reverse the earlier ruling. The court did not do that, but fined him $10 million for the perjury. That's a huge award -- Barry Bonds was fined $4,000. Armstrong had offered to settle, but his offer was refused.
As a lawyer. it appears to meet that Armstrong had a valid legal argument but unexpectedly lost, big time. From a legal standpoint, he acted reasonably. Whether he should have caved because he's a creep seems like a toss-up to me.
But why are we talking about the arbitration? The hit and run was outrageous and criminal.
As a lawyer. it appears to meet that Armstrong had a valid legal argument but unexpectedly lost, big time. From a legal standpoint, he acted reasonably. Whether he should have caved because he's a creep seems like a toss-up to me.
But why are we talking about the arbitration? The hit and run was outrageous and criminal.
6
I wonder if the sponsors that made money off Lance are going to give that mone y back. It seems only fair if you ask me, not that I'm supporting LA in any way.
7
Those same advertisers also have to take it on the chin for supporting a drug-abusing cheat ---- not someone anyone would want to support, as its a black eye on them, as well.
1
Did THEY cheat to make the money?
This guy is a real piece of work. He wasn't just doping and denying it when asked (I'm not a huge cycling fan but that policy seems pretty common) but suing for libel and waging a war of intimidation and threats and defamation against any and all who tried to interfere with his deception... knowing the whole time they were telling the truth and he was lying.
33
I too want to see Lance genuinely contrite. I watched Tour de France because of him. I craned my neck to see him pass me by in the NY Marathon. I bought a Livestrong Nike dri fit shirt even if yellow is not my color. And I felt like an utter fool when the scandal broke out.
But that day might never come. I watched his Oprah and the more recent BBC interviews. In the latter, he was chaffing at his lifetime ban from USADA and WADA sanctioned sporting events which pretty ends his burgeoning triathlon career.
He doesn’t feel really sorry. But the important thing is that there are people and organizations out there who are stubbornly and diligently enforcing the rules and imposing punishment. Because if we wait for Lance to feel sorry and atone for his fraud, that day will never come.
But that day might never come. I watched his Oprah and the more recent BBC interviews. In the latter, he was chaffing at his lifetime ban from USADA and WADA sanctioned sporting events which pretty ends his burgeoning triathlon career.
He doesn’t feel really sorry. But the important thing is that there are people and organizations out there who are stubbornly and diligently enforcing the rules and imposing punishment. Because if we wait for Lance to feel sorry and atone for his fraud, that day will never come.
12
Good for SCA and everyone fighting Armstrong. And the last thing I'd want is redemption for one of the great bullies and frauds in sports history.
9
armstrong made a dumb and costly error by admitting guilt.what he really wanted was to get back into racing and thought that a quick guilty plea would open the doors to compete again..what he did not bargain for is losing this lawsuit- and of course now there will be many more.
he should ahve taken his money- disappeared from the front page..and enjoyed his winnings and the fact he beat cancer. and he should ahve taken care of the people who knew he cheated instead of trying to cut them out of the pie..a very stupid tactical error.
now he is officially a cheater- by his own admission...and may end up a very broke one now.
he should ahve taken his money- disappeared from the front page..and enjoyed his winnings and the fact he beat cancer. and he should ahve taken care of the people who knew he cheated instead of trying to cut them out of the pie..a very stupid tactical error.
now he is officially a cheater- by his own admission...and may end up a very broke one now.
2
can't help but smile to know that the Cheater is being brought to justice. He deserves accountability for his actions. Nothing more, nothing less.....
5
Those cases against Armstrong are without merit. The plaintiffs paid Armstrong for publicity/promotion/advertisement and that was exactly what they got for their money, regardless of later revelations about his doping. Now they are just trying to grab an easy opportunity to cash in, making the promotional benefits which accrued to them in the earlier years in effect free. How is that fair? One may argue that Armstrong should pay a price for his deception and not be allowed to profit from it, but that price should not be paid to the companies which he did not damage but rather benefited by winning those titles dishonestly. The money could go to charity, but not back to SCA and USPS.
41
You're delusional. He sued them after lying about his fraudulent means of winning. Why wouldn't they demand it back?
6
Rubbish and poppycock. Armstrong would never have rec'd any monies had he not been a cheat and part of a huge conspiracy with his team. So he obtained his monies illegally through fraud. Not only should LA be forced to repay the money (plus interest and legal fees), but he deserves jail time. What's different about Bernie Madoff and LA? Not much - both are cheats and frauds - except Bernie is behind bars and LA is laughing down his sleeves.
9
SCA did not use Armstrong for publicity. It insured Tailwind Sports for the bonuses it had promised to Lance.
14
Let's not kid ourselves. There is no redemption for liars. Stephen Glass spent years trying to redeem himself after getting caught lying. He is still barred from practicing law. Armstrong at least knows that the world will not forgive him. He is a scoundrel, and he doesn't pretend to be anything else.
28
Lance Armstrong is awful in too many ways to go on about. It may sound cruel, but I honestly hope he ends up penniless and finds he has to resort to signing autographs for a buck or two on those silly yellow wristbands that carry his name to the desperate and devoted followers of his.
LIESTRONG!
LIESTRONG!
49
No, Armstrong shouldn't "follow suit." Let him continue to go down the tubes, where he belongs. He deserves to lose all the money he received through lies and deception - plus - he should pay a price beyond what he pays back. I wonder if he lied about what he called testicular cancer????
32
I agree on all accounts. Perhaps his drug use was directly a result of his abuse of those drugs. He's a lot like the patients who feel if one pill is good, two are better. It's upsetting that people like Cadel Evans and perhaps others who didn't use these drugs never got to show their full potential.
4
The writer Juliet Macur no doubt has the same reaction to Armstrong's plan to rebuild his reputation as the one I heard at a French cafe after he was stripped of his seven Tour titles: “C’était trop beau pour être vrai”
10
That's exactly what Greg LeMond said, although in English, and it cost him millions due to Lance!
11
JC, thanks for remembering Greg LeMond. At 61 I can hardly identify with lean, mean, bad-boy Lance, but I was riding bikes back when Greg (who also came back from a life-threatening episode) won his Tours.
Time has not treated Greg kindly (he could stand in for the old Michelin tire man) but I would much rather tag along with a group ride which included him than breathe the same air as Liar Lance.
Time has not treated Greg kindly (he could stand in for the old Michelin tire man) but I would much rather tag along with a group ride which included him than breathe the same air as Liar Lance.
1
What would one expect form the greatest fraud in sports history. Armstrong has demonstrated several traits of sociopathy in his attempts to protect his reputation and his pocket book. He threatened to publicize Greg Lemond's sexual abuse by his uncle to keep him from testifying in a doping allegation case. He practically destroyed the life of the US Postal Team massage therapist who witnessed much of the doping to keep her from testifying. And let's not forget that he dumped his wife once she developed cancer even after she stuck by him during his testicular cancer sage. Mr. Armstrong is simply a very poor human being, by any definition. His fall is nothing but just.
189
Fantastically said!
9
Armstrong is guilty of quite enough. No need to make stuff up. It was Floyd Landis, through a friend, who threatened Lemond in the way you describe in an attempt to cover up evidence of Landis's doping. Armstrong had nothing to do with it. As for the other charge, you're probably referring to his relationship with Sheryl Crow. She didn't even know him when he had cancer (that was Kristin Armstrong) and they never married. Whether he dumped Crowe in the wake of her cancer diagnosis remains, at best, speculation. Let's at least keep the facts straight.
How much money does Armstrong have anyway?
8
Estimated at $125 million. But hopefully, that will be $0.00 soon...
5
He likely doesn't own anything; it's all in trust which means all these lawsuits are in vain because trusts cannot be sued.
1
None of this should be surprising. People generally don't change their true colors, and before he became a phenom at winning, Armstrong was routinely pegged as an arrogant narcissist. Funny how folks got so caught up in his athletic accomplishment that they forgot he was not a particularly good person.
73
No kidding! Where was the press before his downfall? Plenty of people knew he just wasn't a very nice human being, but the public could not get that information. Shouldn't some element of the press have reported on just who he really was? Or was it written and I just never saw it. Once he fell from grace, there were plenty of articles about the "real Lance." How come we never know about Lance or O.J. until it's too late?
I dont care for Lance Armstrong, but I detest blood sucking lawyers and corporate geeks who think they have a cause here. Sure the guy lied, but that clearly doesnt mean the sponsor didnt get the value they signed up for at that time. Just because a sports personality goes wacko at some point after the payments are made, doesnt mean they were damaged. You pay a guy to where your logo for 2005, and he gets paid. So he screws up 5-10 years later, so what. These are just the same bully lawyers going after someone frivolously, because they know he has some money, and its civil, so you can sue as long as you have the money to pay the prostitute lawyers. Heres to hoping they lose on this ego driven suit.
18
Gil: Google "Rule 11 sanctions" after you catch your breath.
OTOH, I do agree with your basic point about Lance giving value-for-money back in the day. Just for laughs, I wonder if Wheaties is considering asking for its money back now that Bruce Jenner is (reportedly) trying to change gender?
OTOH, I do agree with your basic point about Lance giving value-for-money back in the day. Just for laughs, I wonder if Wheaties is considering asking for its money back now that Bruce Jenner is (reportedly) trying to change gender?
Did you read the article? Did you read that he hired his own lawyers to sue the insurance company and lied in his deposition about his doping?
What makes you so sure Hamman has "found happiness"? They both could give 99% of their money away and not feel the lack. In fact, that's a good idea for both these "champions," haggling over their millions.
3
Armstrong is a psycho. I'm not surprise he doesn'tunderstand the fact other people are people too.
10
This isn't schadenfreude (sp?)- it's outright glee. Armstrong is getting exactly what he deserves. No one will be sorry for him, as he gets picked clean on the way down to oblivion and poverty. Some of us may live long enough to see him on food stamps. No one will be sympathetic- not because he used to be a champion, but because he's such a vindictive and morally bankrupt individual. He's never going to learn anything. For him, it's still all about lying and getting away with it.
79
Let's be clear. Armstrong was never a champion. He was a fraud. It's like saying Bernie Madoff was a great investor...
46
Excellent article and analysis by Juliet Macur! For all those people that still defend Armstrong, the problem is that Armstrong tells everyone (since his Oprah confession) how he is supposedly sorry for the cheating and maybe even more sorry for the way he treated people who had the gall to call him out on his cheating. Well, the fact that he is not willingly giving money back to SCA show how sorry he really is! (Remember, he got the money by, first, cheating to win the seven Tours de France. He then followed up by flat out lying at the SCA arbitration back in 2004.)
So for all those people who think Armstrong understands what he has done was wrong and is truly sorry about it. That he should be given sympathy and a second chance. That his attempt to reconcile with people he has smeared over the years shows a changed man...Well, don't hold your breath! To Armstrong, it is all about the money. The man has no morals or ethics. And to think that he tearfully said on Oprah that he worries about what his kids will think of him as they grow up and learns more about their father's reputation...
So for all those people who think Armstrong understands what he has done was wrong and is truly sorry about it. That he should be given sympathy and a second chance. That his attempt to reconcile with people he has smeared over the years shows a changed man...Well, don't hold your breath! To Armstrong, it is all about the money. The man has no morals or ethics. And to think that he tearfully said on Oprah that he worries about what his kids will think of him as they grow up and learns more about their father's reputation...
38
he's a born cheat and a louse
19
Lance Armstrong has done wrong and is paying for it. But Lance Armstrong has also done incalculable good for the fight against cancer and for people suffering from that horrible disease. In my book that buys him a certain amount of forgiveness and compassion. I know it's a column, so there's some latitude for the expression of the writer's opinion. But Ms. Macur seems to be enjoying Armstrong's public humiliation a little too much.
22
I know what you mean. But as the author of the definitive account of Armstrong's life, and having (arguably) the deepest understanding of the man after interviewing him countless times, her perspective on the matter is very rich. I give Macur latitude for that reason alone.
His foundation raised a lot of money with those rubber bands for the wrist. He got to use a lot of that money as head of the foundation. And just what did that money do for cancer? Did they find a cure? Just what "incalculable good" came from it? And if the "good" is "incalculable," could it be $5 rather than $50 million; or no lives saved as opposed to ten?
Sir Liesalot - crashing into things, helmet on and face down, still peddlling with his pants afire and in a tailwind with'al. What a guy!
7
Is Armstrong a sociopath? How does he look at himself in the mirror each morning?
13
I believe he is a sociopath in the clinical definition of the word, and I believe that when he looks in the mirror he enjoys the view.
For Armstrong, nothing in the world is real except those things which satisfy his needs and desires.
For Armstrong, nothing in the world is real except those things which satisfy his needs and desires.
21
After years of lying it is amazing to think that Lance expects us to accept anything he says now. Even all his work raising money to fight cancer becomes questionable, was it really just smoke to hide the doping?
Lance, no matter what you do you will never live in the world you once did.
Lance, no matter what you do you will never live in the world you once did.
31
Lance Armstrong's case has moved from the realm of cheating in sports, one kind of ethics, to the realm of a public figure attempting to rehabilitate his image and reputation, how to go about that, and how to distinguish success from failure--another kind of ethics. Usually if a big name like Armstrong comes clean and stays clean, the public eventually cuts the person some slack and allows that he has changed his level of personal integrity and honesty.
Why is it so hard for Armstrong to do that? Perhaps in part because of the sheer magnitude of the cheating he did, which makes it a daunting proposition to own up to every one of the dozens of transgressions involved, especially when each one equates to a sum of money in the millions. In other words, he's likely to end up flat broke if he isn't already. Or millions in debt; how does a disgraced public figure get back to earning millions to pay for his crimes? Writing a tell-all book, perhaps?
But there is a deeper level of human integrity involved which relatively few people ever seem to fully reach. That is when, no matter what the cost to you, as a disgraced, fallen individual, you fully accept responsibility for what you have done, and decide to do everything within your power to set it to rights. Even then, not everyone will forgive you, but you will be able to live within your own skin knowing that you've done your very best to change. I hope for Lance's sake he reaches that point some day.
Why is it so hard for Armstrong to do that? Perhaps in part because of the sheer magnitude of the cheating he did, which makes it a daunting proposition to own up to every one of the dozens of transgressions involved, especially when each one equates to a sum of money in the millions. In other words, he's likely to end up flat broke if he isn't already. Or millions in debt; how does a disgraced public figure get back to earning millions to pay for his crimes? Writing a tell-all book, perhaps?
But there is a deeper level of human integrity involved which relatively few people ever seem to fully reach. That is when, no matter what the cost to you, as a disgraced, fallen individual, you fully accept responsibility for what you have done, and decide to do everything within your power to set it to rights. Even then, not everyone will forgive you, but you will be able to live within your own skin knowing that you've done your very best to change. I hope for Lance's sake he reaches that point some day.
9
The sad fact is Armstrong will likely remain a very rich man, absent some stunningly large legal judgements. But that's unlikely as he has the cash to pay legions of lawyers and they'll ensure he remains wealthy, if nothing else to ensure the exorbitant legal bills get paid.
Many of us who follow cycling knew early on what Armstrong was up to. He not only aggressively went after any accusers, such as journalists, he cynically used his supporters time and time again to help defend him which, depressingly, they often did with great zeal. I recall, for one example, all the rude accusations about the French. I don't know if I resent Armstrong more, or those staunch defenders who didn't seem to care what the truth really was. It left me realizing there are many people among us whose moral compass needs adjustment.
82
Sorry Paulo, but I was one of those foolish supporters. LA was touted as the most tested guy in history. As such, niave me was sure that with so much suspicion/testing that they'd have caught him long before he had a chance to win a second TDF, let alone 7. So I though LA had to be clean - and that is was just sour grapes by jealous competitors and disgruntled French media.
Instead, what it eventually proved was the people doing the testing were totally incompetent...as was amply exposed during the testimony offered in the Floyd Landis arbitration (mixed up samples/improper sample testing/absurd analytical results etc etc etc).
What's more disgusting is LA's teammates formed a cone of silence - none of them are facing the same scrutiny/lawsuits/opprobrium as LA - and they are just as complicit (I'm specifically talking about "nice guys" like Hincapie)
Instead, what it eventually proved was the people doing the testing were totally incompetent...as was amply exposed during the testimony offered in the Floyd Landis arbitration (mixed up samples/improper sample testing/absurd analytical results etc etc etc).
What's more disgusting is LA's teammates formed a cone of silence - none of them are facing the same scrutiny/lawsuits/opprobrium as LA - and they are just as complicit (I'm specifically talking about "nice guys" like Hincapie)
1
If so many people knew he was doping, then how is it that everyone today, from SCA to Hamman to the US Postal Service, can claim they had no idea and were totally duped?
I agree that this was a pathetic, tragic downfall. But Armstrong was an inspiring and gifted athlete, and he gave hope to millions with his charity. The hatred reflected in a number of these comments, all of which are made by people who could not match his accomplishments and determination, fails to recognize that many other cyclists were also doping and failed to achieve what Armstrong did. Those victories were not made by dope alone. Let this tragic fall be as constructive to people as his cycling was.
I agree that this was a pathetic, tragic downfall. But Armstrong was an inspiring and gifted athlete, and he gave hope to millions with his charity. The hatred reflected in a number of these comments, all of which are made by people who could not match his accomplishments and determination, fails to recognize that many other cyclists were also doping and failed to achieve what Armstrong did. Those victories were not made by dope alone. Let this tragic fall be as constructive to people as his cycling was.
4
Funny, but I recall Wiggins doing the same thing at several TdF press conferences, yelling and screaming obscenities at the press who actually asked him questions about doping. They're still doing it, no doubt about it. And Armstrong was no different than anyone else in that era. They just had to set an example and who better to go after than the big kahuna.
1
This arbitration is just the beginning of the legal payback for a life of lies, deceit, illegal drugs, threats, intimidation, and a complete absence of ethical behavior. Anyone who believes that Armstrong ever was or ever will be sorry for anything he has done - except lose in legal proceedings - needs to cal me as I have several bridges for sale.
53
It's obvious that Armstrong has already hidden most of the money elsewhere. He is not that dumb.
3
He should be in jail.
19
For what?? He committed no crime. He didn't take money from supporters for a defense fund, like Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton. Those two guys both should be in jail for fraud of taking money for legal defense funds knowing full well that they were lying. But, they weren't big enough players, so they went after Lance instead.
1
Lance Armstrong can't land in the poor house quickly enough. Bring on the lawsuits, keep them them coming until he is completely destitute, homeless and eating from trash cans and soup kitchens. Then. maybe, he can begin to feel the pain that others whom he set out to destroy had to live through.
21
Obviously you haven't heard of trusts. All his wealth is tied up in trusts and if you truly believe he's going to end up destitute, guess again. Trusts cannot be sued. He and his children will be taken care of nicely and all these lawsuits are frivolous.
2
Are you saying that if I steal $1 million and put it in a trust that the victim cannot get it back? I don't think that's true. That couldn't be true. If it were true, then everyone with funny money, and there are plenty of such people, would be shielding their money in trusts so that the government and victims of fraud could not reach it.
Every dime that Lance Armstrong collected during his cycling career (and he started out with nothing) was fraudulently obtained. Thus, every dime, plus interest, belongs to someone else. While it is true that money no longer belongs to you if you put it in a trust, that doesn't apply in this case. Trusts are named in lawsuits every day. But don't take my word for it. Check the docket at your local courthouse.
Every dime that Lance Armstrong collected during his cycling career (and he started out with nothing) was fraudulently obtained. Thus, every dime, plus interest, belongs to someone else. While it is true that money no longer belongs to you if you put it in a trust, that doesn't apply in this case. Trusts are named in lawsuits every day. But don't take my word for it. Check the docket at your local courthouse.
1
Attempting to be honest while being addicted to a drug or alcohol, or anything for that matter, is futile. Doping is a drug addiction. The best, and perhaps the only way to recover from the addiction is to attend a 12-step program such as Marijuana Anonymous. It is a terrible illness which corrupts the individual and destroys him/her.
7
Oh, go away! You would excuse him for what he's done because he was "addicted." I don't think he's still "addicted" to these substances now that they wouldn't permit him to earn millions of dollars per year. And he didn't do a 12-step program to get off the dope.
Going back to Indurain and excluding Froome and Nibali, isn't it general knowledge that all TdF winners doped? And all non winners as well.
Why isn't there an effort to strip the other winners of their titles? Lance was a hero to me and he let me down tremendously. But, there is something to his statement that he would dope again, because everyone did! Its been a dirty, dirty sport for decades. And, indeed, I don't know whether it has been cleaned up.
But it's not like Armstrong "Rosie Ruized" his way up Mount Ventoux. Everybody cheated; so nobody cheated.
Why isn't there an effort to strip the other winners of their titles? Lance was a hero to me and he let me down tremendously. But, there is something to his statement that he would dope again, because everyone did! Its been a dirty, dirty sport for decades. And, indeed, I don't know whether it has been cleaned up.
But it's not like Armstrong "Rosie Ruized" his way up Mount Ventoux. Everybody cheated; so nobody cheated.
21
Yes, he has a point that everyone did it, so he was compelled to. But based on the stories, he was significantly more arrogant and ruthless in dealing with doubters, even now in dealing with SCA. He could argue that his relative success and visibility required him to be more ruthless in fighting those doubters. If so, however, his huge success (and visibility -which he didn't seem shy about courting) is also what now leads to the relatively harsh treatment by the court of public opinion. He had no complaints about getting put on a pedestal; now he has to accept the obvious flip side of that. His battle with SCA just highlights his character flaws and lack of self-awareness.
10
Agree with your point on public opinion.
But as far as the TdF goes, it is just silly to say that if you cheat but are a nice guy, you can keep your Yellow Jersey. But, if you cheat and you are a creep -- which Lane clearly is -- then you have to give the jersey back. That makes no sense whatsoever.
I don't want to deflect blame form Lance. He deserves it. But, my heavens, the people who have run the TdF over the last two decades have done a horrible job of ensuring a clean, fair Tour. And I thought the French were unparalleled when it came administration.
But as far as the TdF goes, it is just silly to say that if you cheat but are a nice guy, you can keep your Yellow Jersey. But, if you cheat and you are a creep -- which Lane clearly is -- then you have to give the jersey back. That makes no sense whatsoever.
I don't want to deflect blame form Lance. He deserves it. But, my heavens, the people who have run the TdF over the last two decades have done a horrible job of ensuring a clean, fair Tour. And I thought the French were unparalleled when it came administration.
2
I totally agree that it's arbitrary of TdF to strip him of his titles, and not others.
The true arrogance of Armstrong is that he tbought appearing on Oprah and admitting truth would not result in all these lawsuits. What stupid decision to make that appearance.
2
I lack the expertise to be specific, but terms like sociopath and narcissist come to mind. Armstrong behaved like a cruel bully to anyone who was vulnerable in order to maintain the lies and his own "heroic" image. I see no reason to listen to his self-justifying BS any longer. I don't like to wish ill on anyone, but for Armstrong I'm willing to make the exception. Please don't waste any more column inches on him. Just report the final outcome of the trials, that'll be enough, thanks.
128
Sounds like a winner to me.