Lance learns the truth...

Paladin wrote:

Unlike most sports champions, Lance is a great role model, and when
you consider what he's overcome, and how he's done it, and where's he
gotten, even a hero. You won't hear that kinda talk from me about any
other GR's, but Lance is the true exception to the rule.

Paladin

But he ain't no saint. He's an actual, everyday dude from a poor family
who made his own way. This limits his utility as a role model for
(some) children.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

Sorni wrote:
"Raptor" wrote in message ...

Paladin wrote:

Unlike most sports champions, Lance is a great role model, and when
you consider what he's overcome, and how he's done it, and where's he
gotten, even a hero. You won't hear that kinda talk from me about any
other GR's, but Lance is the true exception to the rule.

Paladin

But he ain't no saint. He's an actual, everyday dude from a poor family
who made his own way. This limits his utility as a role model for
(some) children.


Um, how?

While I agree L.A.'s hardly perfect -- I'm sure he can be arrogant,
self-centered, demanding, etc. -- his story and achievements are what serve
as inspirations.

I don't see how being "an everyday dude from a poor family who made his own
way" limits his "utility as a role model". Quite the opposite, one would
think. (And hope.)

Just trying to get your point.

Bill

A hint: I live in Utah, and have for many years.

I probably should have mentioned his potty mouth (not too bad by most
standards) and agnosticism.

I for one respect the hell out of the guy.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

Raptor wrote:

Sorni wrote:

"Raptor" wrote in message
...

Paladin wrote:

Unlike most sports champions, Lance is a great role model, and when
you consider what he's overcome, and how he's done it, and where's he
gotten, even a hero. You won't hear that kinda talk from me about any
other GR's, but Lance is the true exception to the rule.

Paladin


But he ain't no saint. He's an actual, everyday dude from a poor family
who made his own way. This limits his utility as a role model for
(some) children.



Um, how?

While I agree L.A.'s hardly perfect -- I'm sure he can be arrogant,
self-centered, demanding, etc. -- his story and achievements are what
serve
as inspirations.

I don't see how being "an everyday dude from a poor family who made
his own
way" limits his "utility as a role model". Quite the opposite, one would
think. (And hope.)

Just trying to get your point.

Bill


A hint: I live in Utah, and have for many years.

I probably should have mentioned his potty mouth (not too bad by most
standards) and agnosticism.

I for one respect the hell out of the guy.

You're scaring me here. Why is it he has limited "utility as a role
model"? Because you have heard him swear and he may not believe in God.
I suppose one decides on role models based on their own personal
beliefs. I for one would like my kids to group up with a similar work
ethic and appreciation for those around him who helped him get there.
Listening to Mr. Armstrong's interviews on OLN recently, I really
appreciate his attitude. He comes across as one who never blames others
for his problems, understands he has good and bad days, realizes that
although this is important, it is just a game.
These are traits I want my childern to have and would like to continue
to develope in myself. Because he may have beliefs that don't match mine
should be of little importance, and in fact, should also be appreciated
as a good role model, one who believes what they believe indpendent of
those around him.
Sorry Mr. Raptor, I just don't agree with you.

--
Craig Brossman, Durango Colorado
(remove ".nospam" to reply)

"Craig Brossman" wrote in message
news
Raptor wrote:

Sorni wrote:

"Raptor" wrote in message
...

Paladin wrote:

Unlike most sports champions, Lance is a great role model, and when
you consider what he's overcome, and how he's done it, and where's he
gotten, even a hero. You won't hear that kinda talk from me about
any
other GR's, but Lance is the true exception to the rule.

Paladin


But he ain't no saint. He's an actual, everyday dude from a poor
family
who made his own way. This limits his utility as a role model for
(some) children.



Um, how?

While I agree L.A.'s hardly perfect -- I'm sure he can be arrogant,
self-centered, demanding, etc. -- his story and achievements are what
serve
as inspirations.

I don't see how being "an everyday dude from a poor family who made
his own
way" limits his "utility as a role model". Quite the opposite, one
would
think. (And hope.)

Just trying to get your point.

Bill


A hint: I live in Utah, and have for many years.

I probably should have mentioned his potty mouth (not too bad by most
standards) and agnosticism.

I for one respect the hell out of the guy.

You're scaring me here. Why is it he has limited "utility as a role
model"? Because you have heard him swear and he may not believe in God.
I suppose one decides on role models based on their own personal
beliefs. I for one would like my kids to group up with a similar work
ethic and appreciation for those around him who helped him get there.
Listening to Mr. Armstrong's interviews on OLN recently, I really
appreciate his attitude. He comes across as one who never blames others
for his problems, understands he has good and bad days, realizes that
although this is important, it is just a game.
These are traits I want my childern to have and would like to continue
to develope in myself. Because he may have beliefs that don't match mine
should be of little importance, and in fact, should also be appreciated
as a good role model, one who believes what they believe indpendent of
those around him.
Sorry Mr. Raptor, I just don't agree with you.

Not to speak for the Rapstor, Craig, but I think he was commenting/slagging
on UTAH-ians' holier-than-Lance attitudes, not his own. I didn't get it
first time, either.

Bill "oops, I'm not doing this any more" S.

Sorni wrote:
"Craig Brossman" wrote in message
news
Raptor wrote:


Sorni wrote:


"Raptor" wrote in message
...


Paladin wrote:


Unlike most sports champions, Lance is a great role model, and when
you consider what he's overcome, and how he's done it, and where's he
gotten, even a hero. You won't hear that kinda talk from me about

any

other GR's, but Lance is the true exception to the rule.

Paladin


But he ain't no saint. He's an actual, everyday dude from a poor

family

who made his own way. This limits his utility as a role model for
(some) children.



Um, how?

While I agree L.A.'s hardly perfect -- I'm sure he can be arrogant,
self-centered, demanding, etc. -- his story and achievements are what
serve
as inspirations.

I don't see how being "an everyday dude from a poor family who made
his own
way" limits his "utility as a role model". Quite the opposite, one

would

think. (And hope.)

Just trying to get your point.

Bill


A hint: I live in Utah, and have for many years.

I probably should have mentioned his potty mouth (not too bad by most
standards) and agnosticism.

I for one respect the hell out of the guy.


You're scaring me here. Why is it he has limited "utility as a role
model"? Because you have heard him swear and he may not believe in God.
I suppose one decides on role models based on their own personal
beliefs. I for one would like my kids to group up with a similar work
ethic and appreciation for those around him who helped him get there.
Listening to Mr. Armstrong's interviews on OLN recently, I really
appreciate his attitude. He comes across as one who never blames others
for his problems, understands he has good and bad days, realizes that
although this is important, it is just a game.
These are traits I want my childern to have and would like to continue
to develope in myself. Because he may have beliefs that don't match mine
should be of little importance, and in fact, should also be appreciated
as a good role model, one who believes what they believe indpendent of
those around him.
Sorry Mr. Raptor, I just don't agree with you.


Not to speak for the Rapstor, Craig, but I think he was commenting/slagging
on UTAH-ians' holier-than-Lance attitudes, not his own. I didn't get it
first time, either.

Bill "oops, I'm not doing this any more" S.


Thanks Mr. Bill.
Perhaps you are correct and I have missed the point. Mr. Raptor "seems"
to make the statement that "it limits his utility ...", I just want to
point out that I think Mr. Armstrong has sufficient utility as a role
model, perhaps not in every area, but then again a hammer has utility
but I never use it to cook.
If I took it all wrong Mr. Raptor, sorry, otherwise I'm not.

--
Craig Brossman, Durango Colorado
(remove ".nospam" to reply)

Craig Brossman wrote:
Raptor wrote:

Sorni wrote:

"Raptor" wrote in message
...

Paladin wrote:

Unlike most sports champions, Lance is a great role model, and when
you consider what he's overcome, and how he's done it, and where's he
gotten, even a hero. You won't hear that kinda talk from me about any
other GR's, but Lance is the true exception to the rule.

Paladin



But he ain't no saint. He's an actual, everyday dude from a poor
family
who made his own way. This limits his utility as a role model for
(some) children.




Um, how?

While I agree L.A.'s hardly perfect -- I'm sure he can be arrogant,
self-centered, demanding, etc. -- his story and achievements are what
serve
as inspirations.

I don't see how being "an everyday dude from a poor family who made
his own
way" limits his "utility as a role model". Quite the opposite, one
would
think. (And hope.)

Just trying to get your point.

Bill



A hint: I live in Utah, and have for many years.

I probably should have mentioned his potty mouth (not too bad by most
standards) and agnosticism.

I for one respect the hell out of the guy.

You're scaring me here. Why is it he has limited "utility as a role
model"? Because you have heard him swear and he may not believe in God.
I suppose one decides on role models based on their own personal
beliefs. I for one would like my kids to group up with a similar work
ethic and appreciation for those around him who helped him get there.
Listening to Mr. Armstrong's interviews on OLN recently, I really
appreciate his attitude. He comes across as one who never blames others
for his problems, understands he has good and bad days, realizes that
although this is important, it is just a game.

When/if I have kids, I'll ask them to work and live to the standards set
by LANCE Armstrong and John Stockton, plus any non-sports heroes I can
think of (certain firefighters, doctors, the usual).

These are traits I want my childern to have and would like to continue
to develope in myself. Because he may have beliefs that don't match mine
should be of little importance, and in fact, should also be appreciated
as a good role model, one who believes what they believe indpendent of
those around him.
Sorry Mr. Raptor, I just don't agree with you.

I know I'm not communicating it all that clearly. I meant that many
don't consider LANCE to be a useful role model simply because he's a
real guy. I don't agree with them.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

bomba wrote in message ...
Paladin wrote:

Unlike most sports champions, Lance is a great role model, and when
you consider what he's overcome, and how he's done it, and where's he
gotten, even a hero. You won't hear that kinda talk from me about any
other GR's, but Lance is the true exception to the rule.

You may one day come to eat those words...

Sure, no doubt it's possible, as it happens fairly regularly, but is
there any aspect of the statement in particular you're focusing on?
More roadies are good role models? Lance isn't a good one? ??

Paladin

bomba said...

I think one has to accept that the higher echelons of road cycling are
deeply competitive and it pays to have a healthy scepticism when it
comes to their performance. I'm not going to make any unfounded claims,
but history has shown that 'Le Tour' is rife with those capitalising on
performance enhancement.

I agree with your skepticism, but let's not forget that only a tiny
amount of time over may hours of racing separates the top riders.
Therefore if we are going to condemn one, we have to condemn them all.
Lance has admitted to visiting at least one doctor who was known to
dispense performance enhancing drugs, but if he does take these drugs he
has managed to keep it a tidy secret. I have to wonder if such a secret
could be kept over the years without a few particulars leaking out.

Another thing to consider is that Lance's endurance may not be his only
advantage. Let's not forget the vast resources of his sponsors. You
can't buy Lance's bike at any bike dealer at any price. Some Europeans
like to think that Americans are a bunch of illiterate morons, but the
truth is that no other single country has such a huge reservoir of
technical and manufacturing expertise, and Lance gets to tap into that.

I forget the name of the doctor, but a specialist called as witness
during the Festina trial testified that it was physically impossible for
a human to have climbed the Alpe d'Huez in 2000(?) in the time that
Armstrong did, without 'help'. Just worth bearing in mind.

I'm surprised that any scientist would make such a ridiculous statement.
It is completely unprovable, therefore it is at best an opinion, not a
fact. If a doctor actually said this, then it only reveals his personal
bias, and it says a lot more about this doctor than it does about Lance
Armstrong.

Super Slinky wrote:

I think one has to accept that the higher echelons of road cycling are
deeply competitive and it pays to have a healthy scepticism when it
comes to their performance. I'm not going to make any unfounded claims,
but history has shown that 'Le Tour' is rife with those capitalising on
performance enhancement.


I agree with your skepticism, but let's not forget that only a tiny
amount of time over may hours of racing separates the top riders.
Therefore if we are going to condemn one, we have to condemn them all.

My personal opinion is that they are competing on pretty much a level
playing field, albeit a field on a different plain to everyone else.

Lance has admitted to visiting at least one doctor who was known to
dispense performance enhancing drugs, but if he does take these drugs he
has managed to keep it a tidy secret. I have to wonder if such a secret
could be kept over the years without a few particulars leaking out.

I think most want to prevent a repeat of the Festina affair, and if, as
I suspect, everyone is in on it, then spilling the beans on one could
bring the whole house of cards crashing down.

Another thing to consider is that Lance's endurance may not be his only
advantage. Let's not forget the vast resources of his sponsors. You
can't buy Lance's bike at any bike dealer at any price. Some Europeans
like to think that Americans are a bunch of illiterate morons,

....not saying a thing...

but the
truth is that no other single country has such a huge reservoir of
technical and manufacturing expertise, and Lance gets to tap into that.

I think the quality of his bike is totally irrelevant.

I forget the name of the doctor, but a specialist called as witness
during the Festina trial testified that it was physically impossible for
a human to have climbed the Alpe d'Huez in 2000(?) in the time that
Armstrong did, without 'help'. Just worth bearing in mind.


I'm surprised that any scientist would make such a ridiculous statement.
It is completely unprovable, therefore it is at best an opinion, not a
fact.

I don't know under which criteria the claim was made, but I'm sure there
was sufficient basis for his opinion.

If a doctor actually said this, then it only reveals his personal
bias, and it says a lot more about this doctor than it does about Lance
Armstrong.

As I say, I don't know the ins and outs of the statement, but you don't
get to be an expert witness in a trial of that magnitude without some
sort of credence.

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 13:43:32 +0200, bomba wrote:

Super Slinky wrote:

I think one has to accept that the higher echelons of road cycling are
deeply competitive and it pays to have a healthy scepticism when it
comes to their performance. I'm not going to make any unfounded
claims, but history has shown that 'Le Tour' is rife with those
capitalising on performance enhancement.


I agree with your skepticism, but let's not forget that only a tiny
amount of time over may hours of racing separates the top riders.
Therefore if we are going to condemn one, we have to condemn them all.

My personal opinion is that they are competing on pretty much a level
playing field, albeit a field on a different plain to everyone else.

Lance has admitted to visiting at least one doctor who was known to
dispense performance enhancing drugs, but if he does take these drugs he
has managed to keep it a tidy secret. I have to wonder if such a secret
could be kept over the years without a few particulars leaking out.

I think most want to prevent a repeat of the Festina affair, and if, as I
suspect, everyone is in on it, then spilling the beans on one could bring
the whole house of cards crashing down.

Another thing to consider is that Lance's endurance may not be his only
advantage. Let's not forget the vast resources of his sponsors. You
can't buy Lance's bike at any bike dealer at any price. Some Europeans
like to think that Americans are a bunch of illiterate morons,

...not saying a thing...

but the
truth is that no other single country has such a huge reservoir of
technical and manufacturing expertise, and Lance gets to tap into that.

I think the quality of his bike is totally irrelevant.

I forget the name of the doctor, but a specialist called as witness
during the Festina trial testified that it was physically impossible
for a human to have climbed the Alpe d'Huez in 2000(?) in the time that
Armstrong did, without 'help'. Just worth bearing in mind.


I'm surprised that any scientist would make such a ridiculous statement.
It is completely unprovable, therefore it is at best an opinion, not a
fact.

I don't know under which criteria the claim was made, but I'm sure there
was sufficient basis for his opinion.

If a doctor actually said this, then it only reveals his personal
bias, and it says a lot more about this doctor than it does about Lance
Armstrong.

As I say, I don't know the ins and outs of the statement, but you don't
get to be an expert witness in a trial of that magnitude without some
sort of credence.



You just call yourself an expert (at least in the US). That's all it takes
to be an expert in a trial.

--
Bob M in CT
Remove 'x.' to reply