1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Bonds Vs. Armstrong - Who's the potentially biggest fraud?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Write-brained, Jul 12, 2007.

  1. I posted some of my thoughts on this on one of the Bonds threads but feel like it deserves its own thread.

    After reading the SI article on Armstrong last week I'm leaning toward the fact that Armstrong doped and doped for years.

    As much as I dislike Bonds - I think he deserves at least an asterisk - Armstrong would be the bigger fraud, if guilty.

    1. Armstrong has become somewhat of an American hero based on all those wins. Bonds has apparently cared less about endorsements and continues to be an asshole no matter public opinion. Armstrong has wooed the American public based on his good guy image and wraps himself in the American flag everytime the French come at him.

    2. Armstrong has become a poster boy for cancer. Sure, he showed kids everywhere that he didn't let cancer beat him but what if it comes out that he did it by doping? What message does that send?

    3. Armstrong's sport has been cracking down on doping for years. Baseball not so much.

    4. I think we give a lot of slack to Armstrong and I don't think it's because he only has one ball. I think it's because he's white. Ditched your family to hang out with Sheryl Crow? That's OK Lance. What if Barry ditched his family to hang out with Beyonce - he would still be criticized.

    I also find it interesting that most Americans don't understand why the French are so pissed. What if it was a French doper who was getting reading to break Aaron's record. We wouldn't be so happy about that. But we don't care that a potential cheater already holds their records.

    Just some food for thought.
  2. Idaho

    Idaho Active Member

    If guilty, it's Armstrong.

    At least Bonds has come up with the excuse of 'not knowingly' used roids.

    One reason Armstrong is given a pass of sorts is that cycling, while still having plenty of dopers, tests the crap out of them and suspends them fast and hard. They've never had anything more than second-hand gossip on Armstrong despite the hundreds of piss and blood tests he took.
  3. Good point. But if you believe some of the second-hand gossip it sounds like Armstrong had the equivalent of a criminal enterprise helping him beat those tests. It wasn't just him sticking a needle in his arm. He had a whole team.
  4. Simon_Cowbell

    Simon_Cowbell Active Member

    No one gives a shit about Armstrong.
  5. Really? How many LiveStrong bracelets are out there?
  6. Idaho

    Idaho Active Member

    Very possibly so. Same with Bonds. He wasn't alone in roiding up, either.

    IMO, Armstrong probably doped. But there's no way to prove it any more without a direct confession from him or his doc/trainer saying he injected him with EPO because all of his tests have been clean.
  7. Ashy Larry

    Ashy Larry Active Member

    the French went after Armstrong for years and tested him constantly, and they couldn't come up with anything. And it's not like other cyclists didn't get caught doping....many did, but they could never get the big fish. Plus when you consider the French press and how much time they spent digging up anything they could on Armstrong, the best they could come up with is rumors.

    Now, it wouldn't surprise me if Armstrong took steroids during his recovery (extra steroids because he may have been prescribed some), but after his first win, I don't think he took any EPO.
  8. Simon_Cowbell

    Simon_Cowbell Active Member

  9. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    Consider both sports are loaded with juicers, neither. They both fit right in.
  10. MartinEnigmatica

    MartinEnigmatica Active Member

    It's kind of a bizarre phenomenon...typically a fraud in baseball would be a bigger fraud in America than elsewhere in the world, and a cycling fraud would be a bigger fraud elsewhere in the world than America. But the cycling fraud's from America, and though respected in that sport's circles, not really the huge fan favorite in Europe that Richard Virenque - another doper - was.
    But Armstrong did really spark the cycling boom in the US, be it road or recreational. Say what you want about the sport - its ratings on Versus probably say enough about the competitive popularity. But the guy put asses in the saddles, people following his example.
    I don't really know how many kids picked up a baseball bat because Barry Bonds was jacking homers - maybe because cycling's more of a sport for life than baseball is.

    In America, Bonds would be the bigger fraud. There are just too many fans, young and old, who have the home run record tattooed on their brains. I really can't see a 90 year-old guy from Brooklyn giving a crap about a dude with yellow jerseys, or teenage kids . It's a huge population.
    But Armstrong would be a fraud in a more personal level. It would be very disenchanting to cancer survivors who propped him up as a hero, people who got back on bikes and straightened out their lives. Proof of Armstrong doping would cause so many people to sit there, non-plussed, for a while. It doesn't matter that the cancer isn't directly connected to the TdF victories and doping for sport. It's the same guy, and such a pillar of inspiration, integrity, and strength, would crumble away.
  11. SEC Guy

    SEC Guy Member

    There's no doubt it's Armstrong, but nobody wants to hear that and I guarantee you there aren't American journalists investigating him because no one wants it to be true.
  12. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Armstrong is not getting a pass just because he is white. To say this is all about race is an absolute joke. There are far too many other factors involved.

    1. Amstrong is retired. Bonds is not.

    2. Despite a massive effort to nail him, the evidence against Armstrong is even more questionable than that against Bonds. Anyone who thinks Bonds has been unfairly persecuted and used as a scapegoat should look at how hard the French have gone after Armstrong.

    3. People in this country care a hell of a lot more about baseball than cycling.

    4. Armstrong didn't just beat cancer...he beat a death sentence. It is absolutely amazing that he survived cancer that advanced, much less come back and return to being a world-class athlete. I don't care if he doped. I don't care if he has been a complete scumbag from the day he came back and continues to behave like an ass until the day he dies. His story is still an inspiration to anybody whose life has been touched by cancer...which is just about all of us.

    Bonds is an asshole. I love watching him play and I've been a fan of his since the day he was called up, but he's an ass.

    Race is a factor two, but I'd say it is a smaller one than those four I just listed. I wouldn't be surprised if both men broke the rules and that is definitely a blight on some amazing accomplishments. But to say the only difference between the two is the color of their skin is ridiculous.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page