Mountain Project Logo

Lance Armstrong interviews Alex Honnold about Free Solo


Healyje · · PDX · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 456
Fehim Hasecic wrote:

So doping in cycling is bad, climbing not?

Free soloing Freerider isn't a performance sport, it's an extinction event with survival the only imperative.

If you get up a hard trad climb clean I couldn't give a fuck what you consumed to do it.

Climbing in the Olympics? It's such an obnoxiously bad idea to begin with I couldn't care less about the PEDs aspect.
Zack Robinson · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2018 · Points: 0
Fehim Hasecic wrote:

So doping in cycling is bad, climbing not?

One is participation in an organized sport with rules, the other is not.  

Long Ranger · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2014 · Points: 181
Zack Robinson wrote:

1. Defrauded the US government?  I think that's a bit silly.

Silly or not, the Federal Government was one of the entities that filed the lawsuit against him. You want to deny that?

2. Whatever bad thing you think about Lance, Livestrong did more good than he did harm.  The fact that he enjoyed advantages like a good reputation from it is irrelevant to the moral assessment of him on the whole.
It's a reality distrotion field brought upon by years upon years of expensive PR and damage control, orchestrated by a sociopath to feed a career of a professional sports super star. This isn't a selfless common man. He himself doesn't seem to (still!) understand this. He lives (still!) a life of extreme privilege.

Seriously, no amount of his cheating in cycling is bad enough to outdo the good done by Livestrong.  I understand not liking the guy because he is a jacka$$.  I understand disliking him as a cycling because of the drugs, although I disagree.  But I do not understand coming to this conclusion that the harm he did outweighs the good he did.

It was based on pathological lying, bad sportsmanship, bullying, cheating in sport... I can go on. Is that any sort of person to run a... well what is the Livestrong Foundation? Not cancer research. If he was so integral with what Livestrong is, why was Armstrong forced off? 

I'm sorry but first it's impossible to answer the question of, "did he do more harm than good", because we can't rewind history and play it back. And secondly, I find taking the stance of Utilitarianism (philisophically speaking) troubling - especially in this case, where what we're seeing is a blatant amount of Egoism. Remember when Armstrong thought he could like, just "come back" and win another TdF? This dude is not living in any reality, and anything he says is clearly not grounded in it.
Long Ranger · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2014 · Points: 181
Fat Dad wrote:

In addition, with respect to the cancer charity, the dude had cancer! He's probably done more for cancer awareness than anyone other individual in the past 20 yrs.  He visited sick kids in the hospital when cameras weren't around.  Sorry, but to say that he used all that as a shell to hide his doping is asinine.  To me, that claim is just representative of how some people go above and beyond to justify their dislike of someone they don't know and whose actions never affected them.  

I think of the people who are in hospital beds, dying of cancer who realized all that inspiration was all built on lies. This guy did what he did, first and foremost, to become rich and influential. 


And that kinda breaks my heart. 

Long Ranger · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2014 · Points: 181

Next, let's talk about those pink ribbons!

Fat Dad · · Los Angeles, CA · Joined Nov 2007 · Points: 60
Long Ranger wrote:
It's a reality distrotion field brought upon by years upon years of expensive PR and damage control, orchestrated by a sociopath to feed a career of a professional sports super star. This isn't a selfless common man. He himself doesn't seem to (still!) understand this. He lives (still!) a life of extreme privilege.

It was based on pathological lying, bad sportsmanship, bullying, cheating in sport... I can go on. 

Wow.  Your mask is slipping. Like I said, some people just have a hate on for Armstrong.  No one is saying he's an angel.  But it's just remarkable to me how people will make up their own facts and conclusions to try to justify their unhealthy hatred for the guy.  

Long Ranger · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2014 · Points: 181
Fat Dad wrote:

But it's just remarkable to me how people will make up their own facts and conclusions to try to justify their unhealthy hatred for the guy.  

If there's specifics you would like to contest, I'm happy to, but we can't just shout at each other that we're wrong.

Fehim Hasecic · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jun 2013 · Points: 130
Zack Robinson wrote:

One is participation in an organized sport with rules, the other is not.  

How about comps? That’s organized sport , doping ok there?

J Squared · · santa barbara, CA · Joined Nov 2017 · Points: 0
Fehim Hasecic wrote:

How about comps? That’s organized sport , doping ok there?

do you think janje garnbret is doping?

how does she win almost every time?

all the strength in the world doesn't mean anything if you can't work out the beta for your bodytype.

climbing is pretty unique in that it's not simply "how well can you operate this external mechanical apparatus"
Zack Robinson · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2018 · Points: 0
Long Ranger wrote: Silly or not, the Federal Government was one of the entities that filed the lawsuit against him. You want to deny that?

It's a reality distrotion field brought upon by years upon years of expensive PR and damage control, orchestrated by a sociopath to feed a career of a professional sports super star. This isn't a selfless common man. He himself doesn't seem to (still!) understand this. He lives (still!) a life of extreme privilege.

It was based on pathological lying, bad sportsmanship, bullying, cheating in sport... I can go on. Is that any sort of person to run a... well what is the Livestrong Foundation? Not cancer research. If he was so integral with what Livestrong is, why was Armstrong forced off? 

I'm sorry but first it's impossible to answer the question of, "did he do more harm than good", because we can't rewind history and play it back. And secondly, I find taking the stance of Utilitarianism (philisophically speaking) troubling - especially in this case, where what we're seeing is a blatant amount of Egoism. Remember when Armstrong thought he could like, just "come back" and win another TdF? This dude is not living in any reality, and anything he says is clearly not grounded in it.

Of course I'm not denying that the federal government was suing him.  I said that in my last post.  But saying he defrauded the government makes is sound far worse than it was, and the truthfulness of that was never actually settled at trial.  It's worth noting that the settlement was for $5 million when he was being sued for $100 million.


You and I disagree about utilitarianism.  I think we have a basic moral objective to maximize some form of happiness and minimize suffering or something similar.  If a person does a lot of good via suspect methods, so long as those suspect methods don't outweigh the good that was done, the situation as a whole was a good thing.  Pointing to his personality traits (which I have never defended -- I said he was a jackass) doesn't really have anything to do with whether he produced more good than harm.

Steve Jobs was fired from Apple once.  Does that mean Steve Jobs wasn't really that vital to Apple existing and becoming what it is?
brian burke · · santa monica, ca · Joined Nov 2013 · Points: 130
J Squared wrote:

do you think janje garnbret is doping?

my gf hypothothized she is.  something about watching a 30-for-30 where the doping runners all got braces and then watching a comp the next day with the competitor on top of the podium in bouldering and lead was wearing braces.  i suppose they test for the world cup podium athletes though eh?  i would imagine especially with the added scrutiny of the olympics testing would be going off for all of the top competitors.  

djh860 · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2014 · Points: 110

Lance Armstrong is a cheater  

Zack Robinson · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2018 · Points: 0
Fehim Hasecic wrote:

How about comps? That’s organized sport , doping ok there?

Are there rules against doping in the comp?  If so, no.

Benjamin Chapman · · Small Town, USA · Joined Jan 2007 · Points: 13,384

Hey Daniel...Thanks for the link. That interview was awesome. Much more in depth then at the Free Solo screening with Alex answering questions.
Didn't seem at all that Lance talks over Alex. The interview felt like a conversation between two elite athletes and offered some great insights.
Doping caused Lance's cancer....NOT!

Jim Titt · · Germany · Joined Nov 2009 · Points: 490
Healyje wrote:

I'm saying it's a poor choice for his media portfolio.

Precisely, tainted by association springs to mind.

Long Ranger · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2014 · Points: 181
BillS wrote:  but at the same time Lance is a 7 time world champion and aging veteran of an insane life in the limelight - and thus the greatest athlete I've seen interview Alex.  

Minor nitpick - they've been taken back, but Lance Armstrong won the overall leader's jersey of the Tour de France seven times. He did win the World Championships in Road Cycling once, which he kept, even after his doping allegations (the won preceded any doping allegations or investigation). They never re-awarded those yellow jerseys to anyone else, 'cause yup: doping was kind of a big problem, and it's sorta like - well who *really* gets this thing?

Wearing the rainbow colors as World Champion is pretty cool, but it's sort of funny to find out just how many of them are given away each year. Lots of different cycling disciplines, lots of age groups.  I bet in my age group with a little (more, and focused) training, I could be the WC in... I dunno: something.

The Tour de France is a bit more of a politicized race - it's got unwritten rules, and clearly isn't meant to be won by just anyone who enters it. It's not really about the greatest athlete - teams and sponsorship play an important role - more so during and post Armstrong-era. It's sort of a big turnoff, really, unless you're into spectacle (and nothing against spectacle). 

Agree with you about the insane life in the limelight: brushed elbows with Presidents, dated rock stars, a controversy here and there   
Eric Carlos · · depends · Joined Aug 2008 · Points: 40

Pretty solid interview for both parties.  Very entertaining.

JaredG · · Tucson, AZ · Joined Aug 2011 · Points: 0

He sizes down from 46.5 to 41? Yowzers

Tradiban · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2004 · Points: 11,460
JaredG wrote: He sizes down from 46.5 to 41? Yowzers

Proof that tight shoes work!

Ted Pinson · · Chicago, IL · Joined Jul 2014 · Points: 210

TBH this felt like a pretty standard AH interview.  I thought Rogan talked over Alex more than Lance did.  Kind of funny how afraid of heights he is, though.

Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

General Climbing
Post a Reply to "Lance Armstrong interviews Alex Honnold about F…"

Log In to Reply