Lance



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @sparky said in Lance:

    That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.

    yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.

    derp

    you're being deliberately obtuse. In Rugby, being slightly faster is useful, but you can have a great career (Conrad Smith) wihtout being a physical specimen. In athletics, though, strength, or speed is the win or loss, it's everything.

    That's why the risk/reward for Rugby is different, and I don' think doping is as pervasive



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    derp

    I don't know what derp means. Am I not doing the internet correctly?



  • @nzzp said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @sparky said in Lance:

    That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.

    yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.

    derp

    you're being deliberately obtuse. In Rugby, being slightly faster is useful, but you can have a great career (Conrad Smith) wihtout being a physical specimen. In athletics, though, strength, or speed is the win or loss, it's everything.

    That's why the risk/reward for Rugby is different, and I don' think doping is as pervasive

    Conrad Smith had to put on a fair amount of weight to make it though.

    There is such a broad range of PEDs that do different things, and the difference at the top level between making and not is so light, that i have no doubt it's rife. And in my mind it would be naive to think it is.

    Do i think it's like cycling where everyone is on it just to compete? No. But a couple of the comments here smack of "oh, rugby is different and above such things"



  • @sparky said in Lance:

    @nzzp I've read John Daniell's book and knew its author a bit at one point.

    Doping in Rugby is not uncommon and has been rife in top French amateur and South African schoolboy Rugby. This oa a few years old but worth reading.
    https://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/france-countries/doping-rugby-41475

    That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.

    Eat clen, tren hard.



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @sparky said in Lance:

    That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.

    yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.

    derp

    Lol, true. Isn't the point that a sport like rugby is more dynamic and multi-faceted than a sport like sprinting or cycling? So, whereas in sprinting and cycling, doping can significantly improve overall performance by improving the major facet of what makes a good performance, in rugby, or other ball and team sports, doping doesn't make you catch and pass better or improve your spatial awareness and decision-making.

    I'm not saying it won't improve physical output for a rugby player - it will almost certainly will. But it won't turn James Marshall into Dan Carter.



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @nzzp said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @sparky said in Lance:

    That said, at the elite level, it is much rarer and doesn't make the difference as much as good technique and nutrition.

    yeah, there is absolutely no place in elite rugby for being a fraction quicker, or a fraction more powerful, or to be able to sustain effort for a fraction longer.

    derp

    you're being deliberately obtuse. In Rugby, being slightly faster is useful, but you can have a great career (Conrad Smith) wihtout being a physical specimen. In athletics, though, strength, or speed is the win or loss, it's everything.

    That's why the risk/reward for Rugby is different, and I don' think doping is as pervasive

    Conrad Smith had to put on a fair amount of weight to make it though.

    There is such a broad range of PEDs that do different things, and the difference at the top level between making and not is so light, that i have no doubt it's rife. And in my mind it would be naive to think it is.

    Do i think it's like cycling where everyone is on it just to compete? No. But a couple of the comments here smack of "oh, rugby is different and above such things"

    Based upon stories of which people have been caught, and where, together with my own anecdotel evidence, I think it's mainly an issue at the level just below pro or semi-pro rugby, where there are heaps of guys on the cusp of making it and where the testing regimes are less rigorous.

    Once you've made that the pro grade, I just don't see there being the kind of incentive to dope, particularly when the clubs will be running their own nutrition and supplement programs, some of which might operate in the grey areas and through which you can get good gains without taking the unnecessary risk.

    EDIT: I'm not saying that there aren't some big-time pros who are doping - i'm vervain there are - i just see this being more of a problem at the lower levels



  • Watched Lance. I find it and him riveting. It's also great gearing so many of the other riders being open and honest.

    He was a prick no doubt, but he sure is charismatic. Lots of traits shared by MJ (e.g. inventing personal battles with people to get himself fired up), doping (hopefully) aside.

    Can't wait for the final episode.



  • @antipodean
    Anavar give up.



  • @voodoo I tried to suss him out using my homemade psychological analysis and the best I could come up with are all those same characteristics of all goats - proper goats like lance, Jordan, gretsky, hadlee, even Ritchie - they've just got to be different than you want them to be otherwise, no goatness.

    You can't be driven to the max and be a good fluffybunny. I reckon

    But Lance also strikes me as one of those blokes you don't want in your life, no matter the self esteem boost. A man with no remorse capabilities



  • It's interesting when a rugby player seems to have developed a Roger Ramjet chin over the off season ...

    Isn't the NRL reputed to be rife with doping?



  • @Siam add Tiger, Schumacher plus a few others to that list too, these types are typically so focussed on thier own goals, if you are of the right mind, they will drag you up with them, but while they are on that train, they probably arent the most interesting or likeable of people, yet I think once they can stop being what they were, and start living a 'normal' life, they show more of thier personality



  • @taniwharugby said in Lance:

    @Siam add Tiger, Schumacher plus a few others to that list too, these types are typically so focussed on thier own goals, if you are of the right mind, they will drag you up with them, but while tthey are on that train, they probably arent the most interesting or likeable of people, yet I think once they can stop being what they were, and start living a 'normal' life, they show more of thier personality

    Nick Faldo was a good example of that, by all accounts a boring unpleasant person whilst on his golfing quest but once he’d fucked up his Ryder Cup captaincy and properly retired he became a more human person.

    Still a dull bugger though.



  • So much capital built up to give people battling cancer hope.

    And he threw it all away.

    His book on defeating cancer was great. But it went straight into the bin when his cheating came out.



  • I wonder which PE drug he was taking might have given him (or at least promoted) the cancer in the first place? Not necessarily an issue, but who knows what they were up to in the early 90's.



  • @Snowy

    In episode 1 he said he had suspicions about HGH. That was the only time he took it. Not the cause, but he thought it may have helped the cancer spread

    Only a suspicion though. There's no solid evidence



  • I'm really looking forward to tonight



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    I'm really looking forward to tonight

    What time is it on, cobber?



  • @Siam said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    I'm really looking forward to tonight

    What time is it on, cobber?

    9 I think. Same as last week



  • @Tim said in Lance:

    It's interesting when a rugby player seems to have developed a Roger Ramjet chin over the off season ...

    Isn't the NRL reputed to be rife with doping?

    I think what is rife (based on quiet chats) is illicit drug use which acts as a performance enhancer because it can numb pain, heighten emotions, etc. The Joey Johns story showed this.



  • for those that watched it, what did we think?

    The first 10 minutes i thought it had devolved in to a redemption puff piece. Thankfully, it was not.

    I thought the most telling lines were from Floyd Landis, who would have every reason to hate Lance. But even he thinks it's shit how it all landed on him, just because he was the better athlete.

    If it wasn't for the drug part, people would have zero fucks to give about the bullying. Look at the Jordan documentary for a watered down example. But it's become a part of the "this is worse" story.

    I thought some of his answers were really open actually.

    But everyone who was not a cyclist fucking hates Lance. All the affiliated people were just scathing. Funnily enough, the riders not so much.



  • also, i, for what ever reason, really dislike that David Walsh. Which is weird, but he comes across as such a smug, condescending fuckwit.



  • @sparky said in Lance:

    He robbed clean, hard-working riders of wins.

    Along with unicorns, mermaids and the BFG.



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    also, i, for what ever reason, really dislike that David Walsh. Which is weird, but he comes across as such a smug, condescending fuckwit.

    The same Walsh that wrote the piece about the All Black myth around 2004?

    If one person did get fucked over by Lance, then it was probably Walsh.

    I'll be honest and say that I love Lance. I don't expect others to agree with me and I'm cool with that. I see his cancer stuff an foundations as much greater than this cycling things. But I also have nothing but respect to those that are driven beyond belief to achieve what they want, shoving everybody in their path out of the way. They are a special breed of people and I wish I had 10% of it.

    Instead of just being a slightly fat bloke on the internet talking about running 4 hours marathons.



  • @MajorRage said in Lance:

    Instead of just being a slightly fat bloke on the internet talking about running 4 hours marathons.

    It takes me two weeks to do that, so you're flying mate.



  • @Bones said in Lance:

    @MajorRage said in Lance:

    Instead of just being a slightly fat bloke on the internet talking about running 4 hours marathons.

    It takes me two weeks to do that, so you're flying mate.

    .....and I wouldn't have run the equivalent of a marathon in my whole life. stop putting yourself down @MajorRage



  • @MN5 said in Lance:

    @Bones said in Lance:

    @MajorRage said in Lance:

    Instead of just being a slightly fat bloke on the internet talking about running 4 hours marathons.

    It takes me two weeks to do that, so you're flying mate.

    .....and I wouldn't have run the equivalent of a marathon in my whole life. stop putting yourself down @MajorRage

    Ha, thanks lads ... I wasn't compliment fishing tho. I know my place in life. I dig my family-time, down-time and beers with mates time far too much to have ever been a super successful hotshot. I'm cool with it. Most of the time.



  • @MajorRage whatever you fat fluffybunny.



  • @MajorRage said in Lance:

    @sparky said in Lance:

    He robbed clean, hard-working riders of wins.

    Along with unicorns, mermaids and the BFG.

    Yawn. Same old line the Lance Armstrong apologists always trot out. "Everyone else was at it." No they all weren't.

    Each to their own, but a cheating **** (who rightly got caught) ain't my idea of a hero.



  • @sparky said in Lance:

    No they all weren't.

    caaaaan you point me in the direction of the ones who weren't?



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @sparky said in Lance:

    No they all weren't.

    caaaaan you point me in the direction of the ones who weren't?

    alt text

    I'll just point out that not testing positive doesn't mean they weren't doping...



  • @antipodean said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @sparky said in Lance:

    No they all weren't.

    caaaaan you point me in the direction of the ones who weren't?

    alt text

    I'll just point out that not testing positive doesn't mean they weren't doping...

    That's a lot of red ink....



  • @canefan i assume that's only guys who failed a test too



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @canefan i assume that's only guys who failed a test too

    Oh yeah, I assumed that. What about the little Aussie battler Evans?



  • @MajorRage said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    also, i, for what ever reason, really dislike that David Walsh. Which is weird, but he comes across as such a smug, condescending fuckwit.

    The same Walsh that wrote the piece about the All Black myth around 2004?

    Genuine question: was it?

    You're not getting muxed ip with Simon Barnes?



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    for those that watched it, what did we think?

    The first 10 minutes i thought it had devolved in to a redemption puff piece. Thankfully, it was not.

    I thought the most telling lines were from Floyd Landis, who would have every reason to hate Lance. But even he thinks it's shit how it all landed on him, just because he was the better athlete.

    If it wasn't for the drug part, people would have zero fucks to give about the bullying. Look at the Jordan documentary for a watered down example. But it's become a part of the "this is worse" story.

    I thought some of his answers were really open actually.

    But everyone who was not a cyclist fucking hates Lance. All the affiliated people were just scathing. Funnily enough, the riders not so much.

    I simply can't read the fucker. Can't tell if he's honest or not.
    That kitchen scene where the greatest cyclist ever can't cut cheese seemed so fake or staged.

    Do his good deeds outweigh the terrible treatment of people telling the truth? Probably not so I think my first impression of not wanting to be anywhere near the guy holds sway.

    He's certainly a winner but not a champion in my mind.

    Landis gets points for honesty and the power of his convictions.

    In every sport, administrators are complicit in the nefarious things but always the athlete goes for a skate.

    Good doco though.

    Been pondering 2 questions about the doco:

    Has the drugs in cycling thing been cleaned up in any measurable way?

    Why do we yearn for our sporting heroes to be good guys? What's with that?



  • @Siam good post. Agree on the reading him bit. The bit when he said lying was fucking easy because you do it all the time, made me sit back and think "even now?". But then, do i really care that he acted like a fluffybunny? Really?

    The good deeds bit? I actually do think that the work he did that has benefited thousands and thousands of people in a very meaningful way massively outweighs the hurt to a few people. And as i said earlier in the thread, i cannot categorically say i wouldn't have followed a similar path if it meant holding on to everything i had built.

    The winner v champion thing is an interesting question. My instant thought was "agree" but even with as much reflection time as typing this post, i'm wondering if i do agree. He won 7 fucking Tours, straight. That's extraordinary. Yes, drugs bla bla, and i get that. But if you can accept that all his challengers were on it...

    Last two questions:
    I doubt it. The sport is just perfect for it. It's probably better than the really wild days of 20 years ago, but i have a hard time believing it's clean.

    I generally don't care that much, as i can separate "the art from the artist", however i know that i am in a minority with that one. I reckon it's two things. We think we are good guys, and therefore we want to see a bit of ourselves in our heroes. And, for a lot of people, it's the "won't somebody think of the children". You love that sports guy, be like that sports guy. If that sports guy is a fluffybunny, that conversation becomes a lot harder to have.



  • @canefan said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @canefan i assume that's only guys who failed a test too

    Oh yeah, I assumed that. What about the little Aussie battler Evans?

    I'm not casting aspersions there. It's a pertinent question though. There are a couple of ways of viewing his win.



  • @canefan said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @canefan i assume that's only guys who failed a test too

    Oh yeah, I assumed that. What about the little Aussie battler Evans?

    he's the only guy on that page without a red mark that you'd defo hesitate to get the marker out... I'd mainly say that cause he had some massive bad days.. that's probably the biggest thing about doping - you can keep the same level for a 3 week tour when all of science tells you it's impossible.



  • @WillieTheWaiter said in Lance:

    @canefan said in Lance:

    @mariner4life said in Lance:

    @canefan i assume that's only guys who failed a test too

    Oh yeah, I assumed that. What about the little Aussie battler Evans?

    he's the only guy on that page without a red mark that you'd defo hesitate to get the marker out... I'd mainly say that cause he had some massive bad days.. that's probably the biggest thing about doping - you can keep the same level for a 3 week tour when all of science tells you it's impossible.

    yep. Although spent a lot chasing down breakaways, and then won with a huge effort on the last day...

    but in general, i actually agree with you. And i thought that tour nearly killed him.



  • @mariner4life said in Lance:

    The winner v champion thing is an interesting question. My instant thought was "agree" but even with as much reflection time as typing this post, i'm wondering if i do agree. He won 7 fucking Tours, straight. That's extraordinary. Yes, drugs bla bla, and i get that. But if you can accept that all his challengers were on it...

    He still had to beat his peers. You could give me enough drugs to wipe out a pod of blue whales and I still wouldn't peddle up some of those climbs in a month of Sundays.


Log in to reply