Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Lance Armstrong: a bully proves that power beats reputation
I used to like bicycle racing as a kid.
Also had my racing bike and used to "kid-level train" and cycle/compete with friends and locals.
Back then Armstrong was going strong.
I didn't know anything about him and PED, but I never forgot what he did against another cyclist called Simeoni.
Armstrong starts hating Simeoni for confessing
Simeoni had confessed to purchasing PED from the same pusher/doctor that followed Armstrong.
Notice:
Simeoni never said "Armstrong takes PED".
But Armstrong didn't want anyone to say anything PED-related.
Especially nothing that may hit close to him.
So he immediately went on a PR campaign against Simeoni.
For his PED use, Simeone was banned for 2 years.
2 years later, Armstrong had not forgotten.
Armstrong makes Simeoni pay
When Simeoni attacked to join a front group, Armstrong went right behind him.
It's a bit complex to explain the dynamics, but to keep it short: Armstrong joining that group was meaningless for him.
If anything, just harmful.
And Armstrong in the leading group would mean that they had no chance to win.
So now Simeoni joins the leading group with Armstrong ominously right behind him.
Armstrong says to the others in the leading group:
Armstrong (to the leading group): As long as Simeoni is here, I'll stay with you (and make you lose).
That put Simeoni in a bad spot:
Make everyone lose, including himself, or abandon the leading group.
Simeoni quit the group just to avoid being the one who condemned it to a loss.
As the 2 dropped back, Armstrong patted Simeoni on the back, as if to say "that's what you get (for talking)":
Armstrong: (pats Simeoni in the back after he actively ostracized him and made him lose)
Notice this was 2 years later Simeoni confessed.
Ahole behavior by a mafioso-level bully-type
Armstrong was destroying a much lower-level cyclist who was no match and competition to him.
There was nothing in it for Armstrong -besides vendetta-.
But vendetta... For what?
Armstrong, besides being a vindicative SOB, also wanted to send a message to everyone else: you don't talk about PEDs.
And even more if it involves anyone close to me.
Or I'll make sure you pay for it.
Incredibily, Armstrong even gestures so explicitly on camera (:S):
Armstrong: (zip ties his lips)
Like a true mafioso.
Lost respect for BOTH
Notice that, as a kid -and even today-, I had lost respect for both.
I hated Armstrong for being a SOB.
And Simeoni... He let himself be bullied like that.
WTF.
I'd rather have him shoved Armstrong on the ground and then face the storm like a man.
With time, the truth starts emerging
Some more resources from his former colleagues:
- Floyd Landis: for lance it was a war. And sometimes it wasn't a war to win, but to inflict suffering
- Tyler Hamilton: Armstrong threatened me (goes on to describe physical approach power move and verbal aggression)
But notice that the truth only started surfacing YEARS later.
And it took a herculean efforts and Armstrong trying to ruin everyone who dared speak up.
Many today defend Armstrong saying that "everyone did PEDs".
That may be true.
That's not the point though.
The point is that Armstrong was a bully SOB.
I remember when Pantani beat Armstrong on a climb.
To me it felt like the good winning against evil.
And I kept that cover of the sports magazine attached in my room for years -still remember the title-.
Power beats reputation-enhancing behavior
What was even more shocking to me was how Lance Armstrong could act the way he did, and still get sponsors, wins, and the best team around him.
I was a kid and I could see he was a f*cking asshole deserving the worst coming to him.
How were all these other people admiring such an obvious asshole?
To me it showed that reputation-damaging behavior has little effect as long you have power.
Only when you start losing power your poor behavior become damaging.
If you're a low-power loser, and you cross others, they'll immediately make you pay for it.
But if you're high power... They'll still stick with you.
And maybe even pander to you and defend you.
Trump later showed the same.
Hi Lucio,
this is eye-opening.
The only viable strategy for life is becoming high-power and showing everybody that, if bullied, one will fight and create more problems.
IMO, Simeoni should have stuck to the course. Then the "obvious bully" would have become Armstrong.
And if Simeoni had been let go by his team for that, then so be it. It would have meant his team never had had his back.
Kneeling one's back never produces good long-term outcomes. Better to fight for one's rights.
While also maintaining straightness as much as possible, however. Because Simeoni was "tarnished" already due to his doping. It was easy to frame him as the issue.
If he had not been doing that, it would have been different.
EDIT (adding): it's not so simple as I wrote here, I realize.
Sometimes, it may pay to let oneself be "bullied" for a while to obtain a stronger future advantage. It's what dark triads sometimes do.
And in any case, the decision as to whether to fight or not is very personal. It depends on a host of things.
But the sure thing is that one must develop at least the capacity to fight.
Yeah, it's an extreme and interesting case, with underlying standard power dynamics (I think the "be straight" lesson talks about it, which I'm thinking of renaming "honorable man approach").
As for your solution:
Quote from Bel on January 21, 2024, 12:58 pmIMO, Simeoni should have stuck to the course. Then the "obvious bully" would have become Armstrong.
And if Simeoni had been let go by his team for that, then so be it. It would have meant his team never had had his back.
I think it's a great approach.
It turns into lose-lose, but it brings the issue forward instead of letting it die with your submission.
When you give in, you thread-cut while losing.
With that lose-lose of staying in the leading group, you thread expand the issue.
And since his ass-holishness is far bigger than yours, he will pay a bigger price.
Instead, he gave in as the loser.
Yeah, we can't make a general rule out of this.
But many times, and I prefer, better to escalate as a high-power man and do your best with whatever follows, then fold as a low-power, shall we say it... Loser.
When you fold like that, nobody stands with you.
Except, maybe, high-power, honorable men with a good samaritan streak -kudos to them, everyday heroes, there was one recent example here in the forum-.
But there's very few of them.
Very interesting (and complex) case.
Like a true mafioso.
Yep that's how it felt.
I remember when Pantani beat Armstrong on a climb.
To me it felt like the good winning against evil.
And I kept that cover of the sports magazine attached in my room for years -still remember the title-.
Love it.
But many times, and I prefer, better to escalate as a high-power man and do your best with whatever follows, then fold as a low-power, shall we say it... Loser.
That's how I feel like now (have to confront diplomatically 3 people for disrespect, in my pipeline). There is a condition to do that IMO: one needs a level of self-esteem high enough to think that one deserves better treatment. One also needs a level of self-confidence that allows him to take the risk to lose. To believe that the person will rise from the possible fall.
I feel that the original mistake was strategic. It started when he said that Armstrong was also doing it. So to me this was weak. It's the "if I fall I won't fall alone" mindset. It might seem virtuous on the surface but it is not. It was not up to him to say this. What he could have done is to say during the interview:
"Yes I bought it from this guy (accepts responsibility). However, since we started to talk openly about this topic I will do my best and my part (pro-social). It was a huge mistake from me (ownership, comes out clean) and now I think this behaviour must stop in our profession (flying higher). So I think it's important that I say that I'm not the only one using those products. This "doctor" (not a doctor to me, more of an educated drug dealer) sells these products to many other racers. (Including high profile ones (if he wants to hint at Armstrong, but optional)). I cannot say more and I hope you will understand that my livelihood and my security including my family's is at stake. So it was a mistake, I feel ashamed and I won't do it again. I will now work with the authorities to improve our sports so people can trust us again (pro-social, redemption, effort). I apologize to everyone involved, including my family (honest apology). Thank you.
Otherwise I agree that lose-lose was a better outcome for him during the following race.
Now generally speaking, I noticed the same: high-power people are less subjected to punishment for the same actions. There was a head surgeon at our hospital he was verbally dismissive with women for years. Then there was some sexual stuff (don't know the details). He got 6 months of (paid? unpaid?) leave.
When he came back he did the same sexual stuff again. Got fired.
It took years, just like Armstrong to have to face his actions. There are other cases like that in medicine, but the other ones I know are about demeaning and/or neglect that led to the death of a child and his mother (don't know the details, but probably true).
To be fired as an executive in a hospital, or in the public sector in CH for that matter, you must have done something really really bad and there must be proof of it and people must be willing to testify against you. So rare occurrences.
