Lance ... who?

That article didn't have a lot of detail about what Lance did to her.

The USPS isn't taxpayer funded. It pays for itself through delivery charges. While they don't disclose details, it's likely that Amazon's single largest revenue stream comes from partnership with Amazon and other large online retailers who use hybrid delivery systems partnering USPS with FedEx, UPS, and other carriers.

It's a weird hybrid between private industry and government because it's mandated by the government, overseen by Congress, and the GOP led Congress has attempted to interfere with and undermine the USPS through shenanigans requiring pre-funding a retirement system. But the post office has rebounded pretty well from that fiasco.

But it is a business and business do sponsor sports teams and all kinds of organizations, activities and events. It's not just Molteni sausage and weird looking brownie-orangy jerseys.

If you're referring to taxes paying for federal prosecution, that's true of all court systems, from the smallest local to the largest state and federal courts. Taxpayers pay for it. Yup, it's legitimate to criticize waste or abuse of the court system. But one way or another taxpayers pay for most of our law enforcement and court system. And so they should. Private industry has corrupted both. Corporate prisons and jails are a cancer on our system. Taxpayers *should* pay for it all because that makes people think a lot harder about how their money is spent and whether we really want to waste tax dollars and human capital on petty crimes like recreational drug use, scofflaws and free speech/political activists. Taxpayers have little incentive to punish the accused unnecessarily, while corporatized incarceration is incentivized by promoting depriving people of their freedom for profit.

I'm over the whole melodrama. Don't care anymore. It revealed inarguably that pro cycling has always involved doping and cheating. The only arguable bit remaining is whether Armstrong coincided with the most exciting era of the Tour de France, or whether the Sky method of dominating through overwhelming financial backing and a programmed approach is more interesting.

As a fellow Texan, while I wouldn't have done what Lance did I can understand why he did it. The ruthless, robber baron approach to success is bred into the Texas psyche. You end up being one or working for and being exploited by them. Not much in between. He's said he didn't want to end up as a plumber from Dusty Flatte Prairie, Texas, so he found a way out by perfecting and systematizing the doping and cheating that had existed for over a century.

I haven't met Lance but he participates in some events here. Many of my cycling friends have ridden with him. I haven't heard many negative comments. I think most Texans understand, even if they don't necessarily approve. We're also quick to forgive successful scoundrels. He was good at what he did, and he's still good at what he does now. He's outspoken, opinionated, entertaining and a bit arrogant, maybe even a bit of an *******. He's just a guy like many I know out here. I'd ride with him and drink a beer. I wouldn't join him in any business partnerships.

For that matter, I wish Floyd Landis well too. Floyd lacked the ruthlessness of a Texas iconic powerhouse like Lance Armstrong. But after watching the video of riding with pros up mountains for that fixed gear bike company, dang it... I think I'd like Floyd. He seems like a lot of guys I know. He seems like a likeable smartass and fun guy. Not the whiny waffler he seemed to be when he was caught doping. That Floyd just wasn't mentally prepared to cope with an overweening guy like Armstrong, who was certainly a bully in his pro career... just like any highly motivated businessperson.

I hope Floyd's cycling team does well. And he sorta indirectly caused me to reconsider my opinions on medical marijuana and even tried CBD several times this year for chronic pain. Didn't really help me much, maybe a bit of a mood booster but more like coffee than anything else. But it caused me to relax my negative stance on drugs in general. Coming from a large extended family with our fair share of alcoholics and druggies, I'd developed a rigid, condemning attitude toward druggies in general. But I've modified my opinions on the medical marijuana and therapeutic uses of CBD and THC after chatting with local friends who use these to cope with stress from head injuries, chronic pain and post-war PTSD.

Well, that's Texas off the touring agenda for me, then. Deeply unlikeable post about a deeply unlikeable man who, essentially, was a fraud throughout his cycling career.

[MENTION=418370]canklecat[/MENTION] says, in effect, that indirectly, Lance made him do drugs.

What higher condemnation can there be?

I wholly agree about the court system, the legal system ... i can no longer bring myself to call it the "justice" system" .......

I was a huge lance fan, and even though i knew he had to be doping (though I didn't want to accept it) --- he still won. he beat the other dopers. The question remains---was it that he had a better doping program, or that he was a better rider with a better doping program?

The more i see who he is, aside from what he did on a bike, the less i like him. He really went hard to ruin anyone who wouldn't play the game his way---had no issue with ruining the careers of anyone who wouldn't do things his way.

He still has some interesting opinions and a lot of knowledge ... but I bet he'd still turn vicious in a heartbeat. And he has never really accepted all the harm he has done to others ... as far as i can tell.

Some sportswriter once said he love to have a beer with Lance .... but not two.

Well, I'm not saying I approve or condone what Lance did. I just understand it.

If it's unlikeable, it's because we were forced to acknowledge that a sport we love is just another cutthroat business at the pro level.

And I can understand that as well. I remember the epiphany I experienced when I read a book of how the board game Monopoly is supposed to be played, which reduces the mere chance and introduces ruthless strategy and tactics. When I played that way I won by huge margins... and lost some friends. It was a real eye opener about what it takes to win and why most people are not temperamentally suited for corporate success.

For that matter, I'm not suited for corporate success. I enjoyed the ruthless game play of the board game. I would not enjoy doing that to people in real life. But that's precisely what the developer of the game intended -- to demonstrate to ordinary people how they were being screwed by big business.

Hah! Yeah, that's a funny example of a strained analogy some guy was trying to make on 50+ last year -- trying to equate CBD with EPO.

But now it's all clear. Lance did it, through his intermediary stooge Floyd.

Now that I've tried CBD I have a hankering for EPO to enhance my KOM efforts. Give me the entire alphabet and I can rule Strava!

I'm curious to know the reason you think he was a dbag when you meet him last year?

I've thought it would be funny to meet Lance during RAGBRAI while riding my LeMond Would RAGBRAI organizers remove me from the ride?

Eh, who knows. Froome got a pass because it was revealed the tests for salbutamol are so unreliable they're useless for establishing whether a threshold has been crossed. The test is basically a go/no-go test to reveal the presence of salbutamol/albuterol, but not reliable enough to determine how much was used or whether complicating conditions distorted the results.

I use albuterol and it's no wonder drug in ordinary usage for asthma. It's moderately effective as a rescue inhaler, but not as effective as the now-scarce epinephrine inhalers which worked within seconds.

Reportedly salbutamol/albuteral in large doses during training can enhance lean muscle mass. The amounts would be far more than most asthmatics would use in an inhaler. So the implication is ingesting or injecting it as a performance enhancer rather than medical necessity. I suppose Froome was an easy target for that accusation because he's unnaturally thin at 6'1" and 145 lbs, while still performing at world class level. When he weighed closer to a natural but still very thin 160 lbs, he wasn't competitive at the highest level.

But so was boxer Tommy Hearns, way before albuterol was known or used by athletes. In the 1970s Hearns was 6'1" and fought from 132 lbs as an amateur to 147 lbs as a pro when he won his first world title. Nobody ever accused Hearns of doping. Back then doping was associated with testosterone enhancers to build muscle mass.

So perhaps Froome is just one of those exceptional body types who can perform at world class level as tall stringbeans. It's uncommon but I've seen examples among pro boxers, including Hearns, Bernard Hopkins and Bob Foster, all exceptionally strong and agile for their height, weight and slender physiques.

I'm reminded of a time many years ago when I lived in Minnesota and saw an announcement that a local parents organization was holding a cocktail party to kick off drug awareness week.

On the topic, this article makes an argument for why performance enhancing drugs shouldn't be banned from pro sports.

"covering it up better" describes what Lance did to a tee.

It's pretty well understood that drug usage was rampant in that era. Actually, it's been a part of cycling for decades prior as well. Jacques Anquetil, one of the most revered riders in history, commented in an interview that he used to use amphetamines regularly.

Excuse me? Us Europeans are corrupt and you Americans are pure as snow? I think that pretty unlikely. In fact the British as a whole have a very strong sense of fair play which is why I think it unlikely that Wiggins was cheating. Look at David Millar - the one time he was persuaded to cheat he felt so guilty he deliberately got himself caught.

As for team Sky, think what you like but I think the penalties for being caught cheating now are so severe I doubt they're doing it.

It's not the performance, (a watt is a watt is a watt) it's the recovery. Day after day they wouldn't wear out & fatigue at the same rate. If the other racers are on day 4 or 5 of a race, & you are as fresh as day 2 or 3, that's an advantage they felt was worth risking.

He should have gone to jail for perjury. Every morning, he must thank statutes of limitations for keeping that from happening.

It's the scummy stuff he did to other people to protect the lie that makes him unforgivable,

I despise him for his treatment of Greg Lemond, and a whole lot more.

a post about Lance on BF!! (shoots the look)

this thread WILL reach 100 replies!

save the hate, it's wasted energy. it is what it is

in athletics, let them do whatever they want to themselves to improve performance and stop glorifying sports figures

If you cheat in competition then nothing else you did matters. All this excusing of cheaters is exactly what's wrong in competition today and sportsmanship is dead. You can see it every day in the way parents behave in youth sports. It's absolutely despicable. And it is btw the same mentality used by thieves who feel like if they were smart enough to pull it off and steal from you then they deserve the loot and did nothing wrong.

In response to the below, as a fellow Texan, that's a bunch of horse****! Please don't speak for the rest of us because you aren't representing us!

I agree. He vilified anyone that questioned his integrity. To me that's almost unforgivable. He was an amazing athlete regardless. And his Livestrong foundation did a lot of good.

He had raced prior to the cancer, but hadn't won the TDF.

If he had used the PEDs exclusively for post-cancer therapy, and then went off of them forever once he returned to racing, then I would have given him a "pass".

On the other hand, his association with Michele Ferrari apparently began even before the cancer diagnosis, and likely included PEDs very early, although not confirmed.

His charity was good, but, as much as anything highlighted his own hypocrisy.