# Anyone else into the Lance Armstrong vids/podcast on WEDU?



## upstateSC-rider (Aug 21, 2004)

I became a fan of the WEDU sports videos and podcasts last year, anyone else? Love him or hate him Lance really shines with his racing insight, last year there was a daily recap within a couple of hours of the finale of each stage of the TdF and it looks like they're going to start it back up with this year with a recap of the Dauphine and Tour De Suisse...



I'm not looking to turn this into a doping discussion.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

I've watched a few of his podcast on cycling and they're good as he does give some insights into the world of world tour pro racing. But I must admit at first I was shy of visiting his site because of his history with cycling. But now, I think I'm sort of ok, not that I have forgiven him. However, I must admit again that with how Froome and Sky are allowed to do what they do in cycling, I'm beginning to move to the camp that cries "give Lance his 7 back".


----------



## ngl (Jan 22, 2002)

I find his podcasts very interesting and informative. He can give good analysis of why/how a rider wins or loses a stage (or a tour) vs Bob Roll, who in my mind, has started to lose his s!t.


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

Lance’s podcasts of the last tour was entertaining especially given the absence of any real in depth race coverage in the good ole USA. I appreciated the insights he brings to the table, the discussions on strategy, teams and the stages; expanding on these topics would enhance the value of the podcasts. In addition, I felt that he often gave us a sanitary or political take on some of the events, being less constrained would be helpful, like when Sagan was kicked out of the race. The only detraction was his co-broadcaster who frequently asked a ton of stupid questions. I plan to listen in this year if they are available.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

I haven’t listened before, but might try it this year. I obviously don’t love a number of the things Lance has done in the past and how those choices negatively impacted individuals, organizations, and pro cycling, but I see no reason why he shouldn’t be allowed to comment on races and share his insights. I plan to give at least one episode a shot to see what I think.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

I’m with Rashad... But I struggle because the damage he did to cycling is both permanent and intractable. And maybe it just is what it is, doping being everywhere... I’d like to get “inside” perspective? I can get past the doping, I can’t get past the human wreckage he caused, the lives he damaged... The brutal damage a narcissistic personality disorder causes to people around it... Especially when it is a productive narcissist. I struggle with that, I struggle to reconcile the damage he has caused to people, for some of his victims, serious damage.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

His insight be damned, he doesn't get my support.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

I'm with PBL450 on this with Lance. I can look past the doping. Heck my boy is a convicted doper who came back maybe stronger. My problem with Lance is all the other stuff and I can't look past that. Which is why I have a hard time considering listening to his podcasts. Now, I don't have a problem with him doing them as he should have great insight.
This is why I'm glad Christian Vande Velde is getting more and more comfortable talking on air with his knowledge of the current peloton. I do understand he still has a bit of a reluctance to say too much about the guys whom are his friends who are still racing (I know he's mentioned both Valverde and Cavendish as friends). Last year at the Duaphine it was nice to see him start to be willing to tell stories. I hope this continues. His insights would be very welcome.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

KoroninK said:


> I'm with PBL450 on this with Lance. I can look past the doping. Heck my boy is a convicted doper who came back maybe stronger. My problem with Lance is all the other stuff and I can't look past that. Which is why I have a hard time considering listening to his podcasts. Now, I don't have a problem with him doing them as he should have great insight.
> This is why I'm glad Christian Vande Velde is getting more and more comfortable talking on air with his knowledge of the current peloton. I do understand he still has a bit of a reluctance to say too much about the guys whom are his friends who are still racing (I know he's mentioned both Valverde and Cavendish as friends). Last year at the Duaphine it was nice to see him start to be willing to tell stories. I hope this continues. His insights would be very welcome.


you're right, he's still hesitant to tell everything because some of his friends are still racing. But my guess is as time goes on, as he has less and less friends who are active racers, Lance will start to divulge more and more in the podcasts. Right now, he just can't because he knows people will grill him again and call it hypocrisy (and probably rightfully so). Time heals many things eh.


----------



## Durt (Jul 28, 2008)

Now that his suit has been settled, I'm curious if he'll be more forthcoming with details of what went on.


----------



## coldash (May 7, 2012)

I watched this last year when it was listed under "Stages" on Youtube and thought his analysis of the various stages of the TdF was excellent (i.e. it more or less tied in with my views  ) e.g. the final TT stage where Bardet got his gearing completely wrong and Froome got his completely right. Similarly LA's views on the Giro were interesting and well thought thru. I don't agree with some of the stuff talked about e.g. 2 week GTs (a 2 week GT is not a GT) and find the actual broadcasts a bit slow and labored. However LA's knowledge and his attention to detail are orders of magnitude above the stuff that the likes of Cyclingnews produce, so IMV it is a good addition the road racing "world"


----------



## upstateSC-rider (Aug 21, 2004)

There's no doubt he was ruthless, I think even he acknowledges and regrets it, but as far as insider sports coverage goes I like his perspective and thoughts on how races went down.
I started to watch CVV when he first started announcing and he looked a little out of place but has definitely been getting much better.



Durt said:


> Now that his suit has been settled, I'm curious if he'll be more forthcoming with details of what went on.


I'm with you on that.


----------



## No Time Toulouse (Sep 7, 2016)

You know, it would be one thing if he had just been a 'doper', since back then, you essentially had to be to keep competitive. But when he started suing people who pointed out that he MUST be doping (due to blood epogin results that no normal human could possibly have), he lost me forever. He's not just a doper, he's a charlatan. It's sad that people today can't seem to tell the difference between those who may've told a lie or 2 and those who revel in lying (I'm not trying to be political here, but I guess some could construe it that way). For me, anybody who just lied like he did has forever lost my confidence. I frankly wish he would just STFU and slip into obscurity.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

No Time Toulouse said:


> You know, it would be one thing if he had just been a 'doper', since back then, you essentially had to be to keep competitive. But when he started suing people who pointed out that he MUST be doping (due to blood epogin results that no normal human could possibly have), he lost me forever. He's not just a doper, he's a charlatan. It's sad that people today can't seem to tell the difference between those who may've told a lie or 2 and those who revel in lying (I'm not trying to be political here, but I guess some could construe it that way). For me, anybody who just lied like he did has forever lost my confidence. I frankly wish he would just STFU and slip into obscurity.


That's just the other extreme in my opinion (opposite of loving him unconditionally). Who gets to decide who must to "slip into obscurity" and what the criteria are for deciding who is banished and for how long? Look, humans sometimes do and justify horrible things. That doesn't mean they don't ever get to share the opinion on topics or speak publicly ever again just because they did. Like I said before, I am nowhere near being a Lance fan, never have been given the time I started following the sport, but I recognize that he's as entitled as the next guy/gal is to share his thoughts and if people enjoy the insight, so be it. Don't let other people's ugliness make you reveal your own.


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

Rashadabd said:


> That's just the other extreme in my opinion (opposite of loving him unconditionally). Who gets to decide who must to "slip into obscurity" and what the criteria are for deciding who is banished and for how long? Look, humans sometimes do and justify horrible things. That doesn't mean they don't ever get to share the opinion on topics or speak publicly ever again just because they did. Like I said before, I am nowhere near being a Lance fan, never have been given the time I started following the sport, but I recognize that he's as entitled as the next guy/gal is to share his thoughts and if people enjoy the insight, so be it. Don't let other people's ugliness make you reveal your own.


No Time Toulouse isn't showing any ugliness, he just isn't an Holocaust Denier, so to speak.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

velodog said:


> His insight be damned, he doesn't get my support.


+1 - The thought of hearing him talk makes me sick. Listening to his podcast or taking part in anything that might lead to his gradual repatriation is the furthest thing from my mind.


----------



## Eretz (Jul 21, 2012)

His pod cast is okay.


----------



## Nazz44 (Jun 26, 2003)

I'm in the "He's a douchebag and I'm not supporting anything he does" camp.


----------



## FasterStronger (Jun 6, 2014)

The podcast is great. You get to listen to the perspective from someone who has been there and done it all. O started listening last year and found it much more interesting than last year's tour - which was the least interesting one for me in the few yers I have been watching.
This is year is off to a good start and I have listened to his first two and will likely listen to most if not all of the podcasts after the stage.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

his podcasts this year so far have been much less interesting than last year. I'm probably won't make it a point to listen to them this year.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

aclinjury said:


> his podcasts this year so far have been much less interesting than last year. I'm probably won't make it a point to listen to them this year.


I'm inclined to agree. Last year it seems his post race commentary was concise and deeply informative. Like 11-15 minutes. excellent entertainment product

this year he's piled on with the touting of his sponsored products and inane details of his current life, and just not so much commentary on the race and the pros. The runtime of his podcast is like 30-45 minutes, and he doesn't get around to discussing he race until 10 minutes in! It's a not very digestible product now, sadly


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

No Time Toulouse said:


> You know, it would be one thing if he had just been a 'doper', since back then, you essentially had to be to keep competitive. But when he started suing people who pointed out that he MUST be doping (due to blood epogin results that no normal human could possibly have), he lost me forever. He's not just a doper, he's a charlatan. It's sad that people today can't seem to tell the difference between those who may've told a lie or 2 and those who revel in lying (I'm not trying to be political here, but I guess some could construe it that way). For me, anybody who just lied like he did has forever lost my confidence. I frankly wish he would just STFU and slip into obscurity.


you have a good point. I listened to him last year because it was novel. This year I'm not, partly because 1) he's rambling to much now, 2) pushes his sponsored products, 3) I'm disenfranchised with pro cycling doping in general so I actually don't follow the races (other then looking up the results after each race). Pro cycling has lost me.


----------

