[Closed] Armstrong v Kimmage

I think Kimmage should keep hounding Armstrong and the other hypocritical drugs cheats. Armstrong supports known drug cheats, has a very dubious history himself and many folk believe Armstrong is an unproven drug cheat.

No - he should shout louder

Kimmage is a real hard liner. It's what's amde hi, - difficult to back out of that sort of position and retain integrity when you're pointing at others' hypocrisy.

Pro cycling is full of it. I have no idea if Armstong has doped. He certsainly was strong in a significant era of doping, but that doesn't prove anything.

Agree that Armstrong's attitude stinks - the whole favoured/non-favoured journalist thing (like the photographing of journalists who give him a hard time in press conferences - what are you going to do, Stapleton, set the CIA on them?) is too paranoid for a healthy sport.

More here:

[url= http://www.news10.net/video/default.aspx?aid=70159 ]video[/url]

Whilst I think that there is obviously doping in cycling (and other sports) and it's good that journalists try and dig it out, I'm not convinced Kimmage is particularly objective. I get a whiff of conspiracy theorist about him.

[i]many folk believe Armstrong is an unproven drug cheat. [/i]

People like Kimmage. In fairness to Armstrong he's been tested thousands of times and never tested positive. What more can he do? Saying he's an 'unproven drugs cheat' is like saying he's an 'unproven horse b*ggerer' or 'unproven lover of acid jazz'. It's meaningless.

IHN

It is clear that in the USA the dopers have been one step ahead of the testers. Big questions have been asked over Armstrong. Strangeness in sample, retrospective testing that shows anomolies that could not have been detected at the time and so on. Myself I am sure he doped.

Kimmage is good for the sport but he should relax a bit and look at the plus side of the sport for a change. Witch hunts are old news and hes dragging up old stories and history that should be left alone.

In my opnion he is frustrated and angry as he was a average pro at best and when he did take "the gear" himself (he admitted this) he was still getting dropped. So hes out to get the better riders.

Average cyclist turned hack turned troll

Kimmage admitted doping? I remember reading he felt bad about injecting vitamins but more than that?

[i]Big questions have been asked over Armstrong. Strangeness in sample, retrospective testing that shows anomolies that could not have been detected at the time and so on.[/i]

I agree, but nothing has ever been proved. It wouldn't surprise me if he had doped to be honest, but no-one has yet proved anything. Rather than the constant rumour campaign (that the French in particular seem to wage) they should concentrate on acquiring cold, hard facts.

I'm not an Armstrong apologist BTW. The more I've read about him the more he seems to be a bullying, horrible little man. Amazingly driven, raised squillions for a worthwhile cause, but I'm damn sure I wouldn't want to work for him.

Unfortunatly top sports people tend to be rather driven and unpleasant. Nice guys don't win!

IHN its called cold, hard focus.
Many successful sportsman 'suffer' from it. Watched a trashy 'siblings of the famous' last night and Ryan Giggs's brother was saying how he loved to live it up/drugs/party whilst Ryan really knuckled down etc. Reminds me of why people like Stan Collymore and Gazza fell to the wayside- loved to party and freakout too much. To be really successful sometimes you have to drop the niceties? 🙂

Edit. Oh gawd I agreed with TJ. Quick TJ send me a pamphlet on Soviet traction production! 😉

Oh aye, definitely. You can't be the best without thinking you're the best.

I bet the Pelaton can be a pretty evil place to be in at most times.

[i]To be really successful sometimes you have to drop the niceties?[/i]

Actually, I'll disagree there. You have to be focused, work hard, have the confidence etc etc, but there are plenty of examples of top-level sportsfolks who don't turn into self-centred egomaniacs. Take Beckham or Moore from the world of footie, both were at the very top of their game bit had/have reputations for being real gents.

Depends in the sport, if its a team sport etc etc etc. Many sports dont have a Pelaton.
I must admit, readily admit, I think the sun shines out of Armstrongs arse. I dont care. Back in the 90's EVERYONE was smacked up in the Pelaton to some degree. If he wasnt thats even more amazing that he beat those that were. If he was also then it was a level playing field.
Still, after his comeback from his illness I can only admire him. Sorry.

Take Beckham or Moore from the world of footie, both were at the very top of their game bit had/have reputations for being real gents.

Chris Hoy seems to have a brilliant reputation as well.

David Beckham being held up as a role model on STW........?

(Actually, I agree with you, but don't tell anyone)

Armstrong comes across as a nob in that video IMO. Self-righteous crap.

(FWIW, I chose to believe Armstrong has always been clean)

Armstrong is a total c0ck...end of discussion!
😉

In my opinion, i reckon he has cheated but obviously it's never been proven so i can't comment.
What gets me is his attitude to other riders, journos etc.

I find the Amstrong line about "most tested athlete on the planet so I must be clean" such bull*****. Marion Jones was tested 160 times and never tested positive, many many riders who now have admitted doping ( zabel, aldag, Riis, etc, etc )also passed the same tests he spouts prove he was clean, sadly they prove nothing.

Nice guys sometimes win

Indurain was a nice guy

(Doped to the eyeballs though)

I bet the Pelaton can be a pretty evil place to be in at most times.

Armstrong's famous bullying - and infamous chasing down in the 2004 Tour - of Filippo Simeoni in relation to the Michele Ferrari scandal is a case in point.

Armstrong behaved entirely irrationally. Any praise I had for him disappeared after that.

IHN - Moore came from a different era, not sure that same gentlemanliness would have stacked up under the different pressures today (I'm not knocking him, superb player and a legend for sure - just a different era)

Beckham - another vv good player, maybe a great, successful to a degree, but in the same class of total world dominance as Armstrong?

I'm sure LA is an absolute **** at times but equally that's what has driven him to the very top time and again. Whether clean or not, to do what he has from where he started from takes more than a nice-guy attitude. Pure selfish determination, and if that means clearing everything / everyone in front of him out of the way, so be it. What is it, 2 failed marriages now, etc.... Would I want to be like that - no, I have other priorities but that's why I'll never win a grand Tour. Among other reasons.

And so to Chris Hoy. So far at least, the exception that proves the rule that nice guys don't usually make great sportspeople. But equally, you wouldn't cross him would you....?

Nice guys don't win!

Nicola Vouilloz, Anne Caroline Chausson, Fabien Barel... All three very nice and accessible guys.

Hoy is deffo an exception - the very top of his sport without being an egomanic arse

I've read Lance's first 2 books and found them quite a good read but total Lance propoganda. I've just finnished reading "Bad Blood" by Jeremy Whittle and now I hate the guy (Lance that is not the author). Kermage didn't come over very well in Whittle's book either. I know journalism is rarely objective but given all the reports, whistle blowers and former US postal/discovery team-mates subsequent admissions, the guy is a cheat and a bully and shouldn't be given the time of day let alone a place in the tour. And yes his foundation does do a lot of good work for charity but i'm sure this is down to the hard work of the people running the foundation not the personal efforts of Mr L. Armstrong.

hora - Member
Average cyclist turned hack turned troll

Hora you really should engage brain sometimes.

Kimmage actually toured with the Garmin/ Chipotle team last year and wrote quite a positive piece about it actually giving him hope for the future after so many years.

Average cyclist

Amstrong world dominance! no! What other tours did he win? What classics?

[i]Beckham - another vv good player, maybe a great, successful to a degree, but in the same class of total world dominance as Armstrong?[/i]

Well, when he was at the height of his powers I doubt there was a team in the world (domestic or international) that wouldn't have been glad to have him.

Valentino Rossi & [to a lesser extent] Troy Bayliss are/were dominant in their sport & are about as pleasant a person as you're likely to come across

Forgot to had wendy ball players such as zidane, papin (probably other but I am not a wendy ball fan).
Dupont was a great guy and IIRC I think he is the most title sportsman on earth (ok it's waterskiing).

most of the rugby player I have heard sound like nice people too...

Well, when he was at the height of his powers I doubt there was a team in the world (domestic or international) that wouldn't have been glad to have him.

I agree, but that's the difference with a team sport. It still doesn't mean he was the dominant force at that time or any other, which Armstrong could at least lay claim to.

Amstrong world dominance! no! What other tours did he win? What classics?

A fair point, but equally you have to accept that everything he did was geared (hoho!) around dominating the biggest race in the cycling calendar, to the detriment of anything else he entered. And are you seriously saying that from the period when he returned from cancer to his retirement he was not the dominant figure in road cycling (or cycling in general)?

As far as the US oriented press goes then yes he was the most dominant in terms of column inches and media profile.
In terms of palmares he's nowhere near the best.

[i]Amstrong world dominance! no! What other tours did he win? What classics? [/i]

He was World Champion when he was 21 and a Tour stage winner back in his Motorola (pre-cancer) days. He's won Clásica San Sebastián in the past and plenty of US one-day and stage races. OK so he's not as dominant as Merckx was in his day but he's still the best ever Tour de France rider.

Kimmage. Hmm, unsure. He's got a reputation for controversy, maybe he's right, maybe not but regardless of the rumours and half-truths Armstrong is still legally innocent until [b]proven[/b] guilty. And there's never been any absolute proof.

Crazy - agree with much of what you've said.

LA youngest world champion ever I recall, then lost 10kg and upped power...pretty potent combo I reckon....drug use never proved unlike Kimmage,Millar, Landis,Indurain,Riis Basso et al

Kimmage has to make a living from journalism...hence riling Lance is a good way to up his exposure

Lance probably isn't a nice bloke but had a tough childhood and lives in an arena where a "troll" can make a fortune with a pic or story linking him to doping...he can't trust anyone can he?

We either have a 2 yr ban for doping then a clean slate or a lifetime ban...can't blame people for mistakes for ever

""aracer - Member

Average cyclist

Presuming you mean Kimmage, then he'd still blow the socks of anybody on here. He was average in the same way that Barrie Clarke was. ""

I said average pro. Still loads of respect for him or anyone who can hang on and complete any Grand Tour. You have to be "nails" to be able to complete one either "whizzing of your t1ts" or clean.

Anyone who has raced in a international multi stage RR will agree.

I can remember coming across LA in 90 or 91, probably before most of you had ever heard of hi. He was brash and loud and kinda exciting to watch riding. Yes, he was World Champion (a horrible rainy day as well) at a very early age, and I was very sad when he became very ill. When he was returning I was quite excited, then I read his book and although sad for him for what he'd been through it kind of put me off him as a person.
I just wish all those dear Colonials would stop thinking that he's the only cyclist who ever rode a bike.

kkf - my comment was aimed at hora (who I was quoting - sorry if that wasn't clear), not you.

drug use never proved unlike Kimmage,Millar, Landis,Indurain,Riis Basso et al

Anyone got a link for Kimmage admiting to drug use?

Here Kimmage says Lance tested positive for EPO:
[url= http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=54741&catid=2 ]http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=54741&catid=2[/url]

I think the ‘cancer’ that Kimmage is referring to is that during the lance year he perceives that lance had a negative effect on doping culture in cycling. Lances refusal and suppression of journalists such as Kimmage, Whittle and Walsh meant that doping issues were not brought in to the open. Any journalist speaking out about Lance (or doping in general) were refused access to him and often threatened with legals. Lance could have been a force for good and spoken out about doping – but instead pretty much forced it off the cycling sports pages. Kimmage is right to keep on about it, he’ll never prove that Lance was doping but he’s right to try and get journalists and cyclists to talk openly about the issues and stamp it out – rather than pretending it doesn’t exist.

Millar was busted by the Police after they searched his house and found two used syringes containing traces of EPO sitting in plain view on his book shelf. He said that he wanted to look at them every morning when he got up to remind himself that he was a cheat.

I think it's fair to give Millar a second chance so by that reasoning we have to stand by the 2 year rule for Landis et al.

aP, only if you can find first gear with your brain.

Hes decidedly average compared to the person hes attacking. **** me with so many people out to get Lance you'd think they'd have caught him by now wouldnt you?

Funny that. There seems to be more hairdressers around and in the Tours than there is on the average Essex High st. Ap, if your going to attack me, provoke discussion on a point, dont attack the poster ok?

No Giro, no Vuelta, no roubaix etc etc, etc. Targetting one race surely doesn't mean world dominance in anyones book. I am not saying seven tours is not phenominal. It just seems to me a reflection of the type of hyperbole, that goes with the legend that is Lance.

Anyone got a link for Kimmage admiting to drug use?

See his book, Rough Ride. He admits to charging in there. The whole "Paul Kimmage only writes about doping in cycling" comes from there. In fairness to the guy, he made his journalistic career writing about other sports before becoming a cycling writer. He stills does write about other sports.

Oh, and he was pretty handy, too. Irish road race champion aged 19, as I recall (mind you, Roche and Earley were already pros at that point).

I've also read the Jeremy Whittle book, Bad Blood. It would probably be good if it was such a poorly written, thumb-sucking tantrum.

So who are the true legends? I'm sure we all agree on Merckx!

hora - you were the one calling Kimmage average. I didn't attack you anyway, might have dented your car door though. 😛

ourmaninthenorth- its not worth a read then? I was going to pop out and buy at lunchtime. Whilst Im there any recommendations?

the Robert Millar book is pretty good, also The Flying Scotsman, Breaking the Chain is fairly eye opening 😯

Get Matt Rendell's Death of Marco Pantani

wrt to bad blood - when you get over the the fact that hes a bit upset about being spurned by lance i think it shows an interesting side to sports reporting thats rarely seen. ie what gets published and more importantly - what doesnt and why it doesnt. i think most journalist know a shed load more than they can report and this highlights that. piece this book togetger with rough ride and the press interviews that walsh and kimmage have done and you have an interesting take on lance and cyling/doping.

"ourmaninthenorth - Member

Anyone got a link for Kimmage admiting to drug use?

See his book, Rough Ride. He admits to charging in there"

My response as well. Quite a good book,it shows you how tough you need to be to a "pro". Would you stick caffeine slugs up yer poo pipe while racing, or shoot up while still on the bike racing. Not a chance. The mental fatigue is the worst to deal with.

Cheers for the recommendations, will look those up in a mo

I've read Rough Ride but only remember him mentioning injecting vitamins. I'll have a look.

Just finished reading Rough Ride and it gives a good insight to what went on "back in the day" plus some updates in the latest versions. Kimmage admits to being an "average" pro and is a very good journalist (on not just cycling) with regular features in the Sunday Times on top sportsmen. His vindictive reputation comes as being one of the first to break the code of silence about the use of doping in the peloton and his bitterness that the professional sport he worked so hard to become part of then turned out to be one where cheats abounded.

It will be interesting to see what happens when the more advanced testing that is now being developed is ever aplied to the stored samples - if the authorities ever have the nerve to do so - and if reputations are then broken. Armstrong - clean, or just has had access to better science than the testers?

Mudshark - he admitted to taking Amphetamines on a few occasions for (I think) post TdF criteriums.

It will be interesting to see what happens when the more advanced testing that is now being developed is ever aplied to the stored samples

Is that not what happened here?

Here Kimmage says Lance tested positive for EPO:
[url= http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=54741&catid=2 ]http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=54741&catid=2[/url]

Sixam the lab offered to test lance's famous 99 tour samples last year, he refused I also notice he has parted with Catlin , so much for complete transparency.

Mudshark - Yes but - Velonews article - "The tests on 1999 urine samples were done last year to help scientists improve their detection methods, the paper (Equipe)said.

L’Equipe said it matched urine samples from that Tour with medical statements signed by doctors, claiming that there were “characteristic, undeniable and consequent" signs of EPO in Armstrong's urine tests.

A spokesman for the World Anti-Doping Agency told VeloNews Tuesday that the agency does "not have enough information at the moment," adding that "it would be premature for us to comment on the specifics of this case."

Not sure if any more information led to any outcomes on this.

Ed2001 - I agree!!

The EPO use relates to stored samples...which they were not permitted to test, LA denied them permission, but again it's down to clear rulings I understand he doesn't trust the french labs or their staff and has had no control over the storage of the samples....would anybody on here risk their entire career/reputation on a bunch of guys of dubious morality (leaked results to journo's prior to official notification) who hate him for dominating their event?

Kimmage's book is ok but too outdated now...charged up at crits where team managers basically expected them to, and knew there was no testing

Don't read the Pantani tome unless you are prepared to lose half your childhood heroes...it's depressing as hell!

Kimmage, what a nice piece of work. Imagine saying Stephen Hawkings is a window-licker to the progress of science..

If Hawking (I note you have so much respect for him you can't even get his name right) had suppressed the views of people who disagreed with him then that might be a fair comment...

Though I'm not even sure why I bother responding to hora when he descends to that level of idiocy.

The problem with the drug testing is that it's far from transparent itself, there have been so many cases of info leaked to the press that it can hardly be considered a 100% reliable source. There's been cases of 'witch-hunts' by the press ever since the Tour started, LA is just the latest victim of it. Notice how a confirmed drug cheat like Virenque is still a household name and hero in France vs someone like LA who has never proven to have doped. The media can make or break careers (that goes for any sport or indeed pretty much any facet of life) and you'd be a fool to trust any journalist who has made it clear that he is gunning for you (regardless of the [b]facts[/b]).

Re books: Floyd Landis' book 'Positively False' is a good read (although obviously biased towards his case it's still thought-provoking) and 'Lance Armstrong - Tour de Force' by Daniel Coyle is well worth a read too, it's not all about LA by any means and it touches on the subject of doping too.

aracer I'm referring to the comment made 'Armstrong is a cancer on the sport'

wrt to bad blood - when you get over the the fact that hes a bit upset about being spurned by lance i think it shows an interesting side to sports reporting thats rarely seen. ie what gets published and more importantly - what doesnt and why it doesnt.

I think you make a good point. It has certainly gave an overall impression to that effect, even if his tone and repetition did grate.

Funnily enough, when I think how much I suffer on a Saturday morning chaingang, and how I can't hold on to the wheeles of even the Cat 3 riders, I realise how, for a pro rider, making the decision to dope [i]just to hang on[/i] can seem like the only viable option.

So who are the true legends? I'm sure we all agree on Merckx!

For me, Classics men like Kelly and Godefroot. Freddy Maertens, both on the bike and in his subsequent - impoverished - life. Paul Sherwen for being a super-domestique and finishing the stage out of Epinal in the 1984 Tour, riding on his own, badly injured, and finishing outisde the cut-off (and being reinstated after the journalists demanded the organisers respect such bravery). Reg Harris (an extraordinary sprinter, and the man who makes me proudest to be in Manchester Wheelers).

Right now, though, it's Mark Cavendish. I so want him to become the great Classics rider he can be. For me, the grand tours are very nice, but the real races of truth are the staggeringly tough, northern European Classics - Roubaix, Flanders, Liege, Amstel. Anyone who wins one of them is a true [i]Flahute[/i] in my eyes.

[b]hora[/b] - try reading Franco Balmamion: the Eagle of the Canavese by Herbie Sykes. I've read extracts and am assured the rest is glorious.

[i]but the real races of truth are the staggeringly tough, northern European Classics - Roubaix, Flanders, Liege, Amstel. Anyone who wins one of them is a true Flahute in my eyes[/i]

Paris-Roubaix is the best race ever, it's fantastic to watch.
In fact back (sort of) on-topic, Armstrong came within a tyre width of winning Amstel Gold as well and he's been 2nd at Liege on at least one occasion. Proof that he's more than just a Tour rider.

Proof that he's more than just a Tour rider.

He's rumoured to be going for [i]both[/i] hour records this year too.

10/10 one of the best reads on STW for ages.

Hora - Try Tim Moore's 'French Revolutions'. Funny and Informative - you can't really go wrong.

I'm referring to the comment made 'Armstrong is a cancer on the sport'

Hora ... you can't really go wrong.

aracer

Its a crass and ill-meaning comment to me.

true legends...bernard hinualt and laurent fignon. could be counted on to liven up any race, and won with style. i have no idea whether they were dopers.

I find the whole "Armstrong suppressing negative reporting" claim to be so far fetched. There must be more negative press surrounding him than any other rider/athlete, as to make that claim ridiculous. Ballester, Walsh, Kimmage to name three off the top of my head, who've more or less made a career out of "Lance Knocking." If I were a 7 times TdF winner, and they were constantly saying negative things about me, I don't think I'd be in too much of a rush to give them an interview either.

For people that like Armstrong then his involvement in cycling has been brilliant, for those that like cycling Armstrong's involvement is not necessarily positive.

Kimmage had a career (actually 2 - one as a professional cyclist the other as a professional and very well regarded sports journalist) long before Armstrong turned up, and his constant poking at the Texan steer hasn't exactly made him a lot of friends.

Kimmage had a career (actually 2 - one as a professional cyclist the other as a professional and very well regarded sports journalist) long before Armstrong turned up, and his constant poking at the Texan steer hasn't exactly made him a lot of friends.

What's the betting it's made him a lot of money though...

Anyone interested in this subject should read 'from Lance to Landis'.
Tells it like it is, and published round the world. The fact that Lance didn't sue the author says rather a lot!

Taking every advantage can be looked on as behaving professionally in some quarters. That's how the top guys seem to see it.

I would love to see an end to doping, but I steered my son away from a bikeracing future because of this very subject.