1st point. If he cheats in this aspect of his life who is to say it does not flow thru to other aspects, such as his charity. I like to see a really good acounting firm take a look at the books. He obviously thought of himself above the rules of his chosen sport and willing to do anything in order to win. It doesn’t matter that everyone else was doing it, I think my mother talked about jumping off a bridge with my friends when I was a teenager. I’d rather my money not go to a guy like that.
2nd point. His fame brought his charity money that could have gone to other charities. So yes, he brought that money into his charity under false pretenses. He presented himself as something he wasn’t. Once the accusations started to fly he could have fessed up, but he just doubled down on the lie. All things being equal, I’d rather my money not go to someone like that.
I am surprised you posted this, the flaws in this argument are huge.
However, to add a little bit, you should also understand that the those with a particular biology gain less from doping than others, it turns out that those who have the best natural advantages in cycling are the ones who have most to lose by others who dope.
You really need to read that thread in the Games forum, at least you’ll have a better understanding of the arguments.
Celebrity come with benefits, which he has richly enjoyed for many years.
Infamy comes with costs too. Just ask Monica Lewinski.
Neither one will ever get the stink off, nor do they really deserve to, for that matter. My bet is it isn’t going to be pretty. A guy this enamored of the admiration and respect won’t likely take well to being the low watermark in his sport, a joke in athletics.
I suspect he’s about to get exactly what he deserves, “Pity the fool!”
Interesting because he cannot do it as easily as all that, because anything the team leader wins he shares amongst his team, thats why the team fight so hard to keep their leader in Yellow, even one day in yellow is worth many thousands of $ to them.
Given that all his team were also doping, I wonder what sort of deal was made in return for their testimony.
If he refuses to return the prize money, I wonder if the UCI can enforce it through the courts, there’s lots of jurisdictions to go through here.
A good friend of mine died at 52 years old. He was impotent his entire life, suffered from chronic high blood pressure and a number of other problems all as a result of doping for high school football for 3 years. He thought he was taking vitamin B shots. I blame the coach, the booster club and the parents. Honest athletes don’t stand a chance anymore or it is at least a lot tougher on them. I feel it was the doping because he has 4 brothers and they all look pretty much alike and none of them had these problems.
I don’t think the money had to specifically go to cancer research to be used as a force for good. Livestrong’s site says their mission is to “inspire and empower people affected by cancer” and goes on to say “We have provided financial resources to more than 550 organizations that conduct cancer survivorship research or offer services to people affected by cancer, and 81 cents of every dollar raised has gone directly to support our programs and services for survivors.”
As a squeaky clean teacher, I’m willing to give it a shot. [/pun]
I think I’d be up to 35% faster in squelching teen snark, give up to twice the homework, and reduce rude rebels to puddles of politeness in record time.
[QUOTE=Me]
I understand the worship. If he hadn’t doped, then winning 7 times in a row would have meant a supreme dedication to hard work and strong will. That’s something folks look up to.
[/QUOTE]
Right. I agree completely. I only qualified my statement because I knew if I didn’t say, “If he hadn’t doped” someone would come along and point out the doping.
See,
[QUOTE=Terr]
Since everyone doped, the playing fiend was, in fact, even. Thus his winning 7 times in a row did mean supreme dedication to hard work and strong will.
[/QUOTE]
And sure enough, a poster comes along…
[QUOTE=casdave]
I am surprised you posted this, the flaws in this argument are huge.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe casdave disagrees with the part where Terr said the playing field was ‘even.’ Still, the essence of the post was to make the point that Armstrong worked very hard and had a will of steel. Those are characteristics that people naturally look up to…doesn’t make them idiots as some posters have suggested.
I had to qualify the “if he hadn’t doped” part though, or else I knew a poster would come along to make the point. I am quicker on the ‘*qualify **every **statement *on the dope’ draw than Terr is.
You don’t get it, MsWhatsit: Lance Armstrong was [del]like[/del] Jesus on a bike (band name!) to these people. He would come pedaling into their dreams every night to gently massage their genitals and promise that he wasn’t on drugs. Turns out he’s Satan. And all that money people were giving to his cancer foundation? Apparently it’s been giving kids testicular cancer. Even the girls. You obviously don’t get what a serious issue this is, so why don’t you just shut the fuck up? Maybe you’d like to get testicular cancer. Keep it up and it’ll be arranged.
I honestly don’t know the point of any of the posts in this thread, including the OP. But Clocks just made me understand that it is all worth it. I may even go ahead and read the game room thread now.
My WAG – $470 million dollars to support 2 cancer survivors – Lance Armstrong, and some hot chick with breast cancer whose breasts he’s managed to save – perhaps in a jar. 3 if each breast counts as a survivor.
Look, he’s a fraud. Did some money get raised through fraudulent means? Yes. An indisputable fact. He lied, he cheated. He doped. He rode around with his arms above his head in joyous victory because he cheated.
Did others cheat? I don’t know, I don’t care. Do all cyclists dope? I don’t know, I don’t care. THIS person conned millions out of millions of dollars.
People- some of whom want their money back- donated. In some cases, they donated millions.
We don’t know how much went into real research or directly to survivors/ families opposed to paying fat salaries to board members.