Lance is a cheat? Yes or no

Armstrong has people wanting to sue him because Armstrong sued all and sundry during his career - the guy was particularly litigious and vindictive. I hope that the British newspaper (whose name I've forgotten; was it The Times?) sues the hell out of Armstrong and gets more than their money back (if you missed it, they dared to run an article in the mid-2000s which quoted someone who had seen Armstrong dope, and Armstrong sued the pants off them in retaliation). That's just one example; there's heaps more I can use Google to find.

But I agree with your opinion on getting all of them. Personally, I just want to move on from that era in cycling, and I see Armstrong as basically being representative of all that is wrong with that era. There are still many caught and uncaught unrepentant dopers from that era, but I see Armstrong being caught as an important admission to what occurred, and being able to move on. A part of moving on has to be change in the UCI, which hopefully this will bring about.

Basso is a funny case. He was suspended for two years and came back, but he's at a much, much lower level than he was before he was suspended, leaving little doubt as what he was up to before. Basso was basically caught in Op Peurto, yet used the excuse that he was "planning to dope", but hadn't yet. Not much of an admission, really. Guys who come out and tell all fairly honestly (recently like Thomas Frei and Bernard Kohl) are few and far between. Much easier to maintain the omerta and be allowed back into the peloton.

To be honest, I don't have much time for Basso either. Or other unrepentant and denialist dopers, like Valverde.

Lance is very unlikely to make any sort of confession because he has an insurance company suing him for the millions they paid out on behalf of US Postal as bonuses for his TDF wins. If he confesses, he'll have to pay it back.

Not to mention the fact that he's always seemed as far away from remorse or guilt as it is possible to be.

News.com.au reporting Lance admitted to doping in the Oprah interview.

IF, and it's a big IF, Armstrong admits to doping on the Winfrey couch (or at anytime thereafter), the following should occur in quick succession:

1) He is sued for the return of every cent he made by every sponsor and government subsidy (including payments won against media organisations who were successfully sued for slander when they dared suggest Armstrong was a drug cheat).
2) A warrant for his arrest is made by the local/state/federal government, and subsequent trial, conviction and jailing is carried out.
3) His ban from competing in ANY event, anywhere in the world, is upheld.
4) He should burn in hell.

But maybe that's just me.

Sadly, I agree with you BH. There is no way Armstrong will come out and say "I'm a drug cheat" this week unless he has written and lawful immunity from all sorts of post-admission issues.

He spent years evading detection and more years being extremely wilful in his denials. He also has a lot of money to protect. He is not stupid enough to just walk into a room and throw all that away. Not even Oprah could protect him!

I do wonder though, if he could genuinely admit to steroid-doping as a cure for testicular cancer; namely, the drugs shrunk his balls away.

There was a report last week saying that the statute of limitations for him to be convicted over lying to the grand jury expired last month, so he won't go to prison. Only have to deal with the civil claims.

Cynical timing much?

He is just your bog average psycopath. There will be no real remorse, guilt, or empathy to those he cheated.

Here is a testimony on riding clean by Nicole Cook. Brilliant in this context.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/14/nicole-cooke-retirement-statement

Lots of fantastic and interesting articles have come out recently on Lance.

Here's some, if you interested in reading:

Behind Lance Armstrong's Decision to Talk:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324734904578241801441261928.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet

Excerpt:

Justice Department Takes Aim at Armstrong:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323596204578242250517426858.html

Excerpt:

Lance Armstrong's doping admission: Questions Oprah should have asked:
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/questions-oprah-should-ask-lance-armstrong-230849439.html

Excerpt:

The one above really resonated with me on how much of a bastard the guy is.

For example:

Lance Armstrong may return some taxpayer money team received:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-400_162...may-return-some-taxpayer-money-team-received/

Just to answer the original question posed in the title of this thread, the answer from the horses mouth, is yes.

In the interview he came across as a dud bash of a bloke.
He's a cheat and he's boring too.

To me, he came across as a bit of a sociopath.

He appears to be so sociopathic, he has gone one more step and has no empathy for himself either. I got through the whole interview feeling like I was watching a robot. No genuine emotion, just answers he thought were expected of him.

I don't even think he did it to clear the air, he just did it so everyone would leave him the fuck alone.

That's what I thought beforehand, and it got massively re-enforced today. I simply stopped watching because I got tired of his attitude.

He would admit to cheating and ruining all these people's lives. And instead of concluding "yeah it's best if I take time off and make big changes to my life, I have really screwed up". He thinks calling them to say sorry is a great start and that he should get back to winning ironmans in the meantime. Against athletes who haven't had the benefit of training on EPO for the last decade.

Paul Kimmage putting the boot in.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/19/lance-armstrong-cycling

About the only thing that Lance is sorry about is that he got caught.

Interesting article on the legal side of Lance’s confession/denial

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/cycling/article3669933.ece

Words fail me, what a dog.He is shameless.