Lance Armstrong

[NewEra]

Any idea what type he may be? I'm leaning toward Ixxx.

 

[A Schnitzel]

I usually see him typed as INTJ. I see no reason to dispute this.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Yeah I'd go for INTJ.

 

[Speed Gavroche]

He's often typed as ISTP too, that's seems more accurate.

 

[the state i am in]

i always thought he was an istj.

he handled himself in the performance enhancers discussions ok. didn't break down or fuck up in interviews.

i could see istp too. but he seems like such an istj role model. my dad always talks about how he is a very strategic rider, in addition to his incredible work ethic. he is one of those super-competitive types, i can't tell if it's Ti dom or Te aux tho.

 

[Nonsensical]

He gives off an ISFJ vibe to me. Don't ask why. But I don't know anything about the guy other than his miracle with cancer.

 

[NewEra]

He's been typed as INTJ, ISTJ, and ISTP.

 

[FDG]

Definitely ESTJ

 

[Jaguar]

"Armstrong's legendary temper also flared as he got into a testy exchange with reporters,
telling one writer from a British newspaper that he "was not worth the chair" he was sitting on
when he asked why Armstrong had welcomed back unrepentant cyclists who had served doping suspensions."


“I'm thinking about it, ... I'm thinking it's the best way to piss [the French] off.”
--Lance Armstrong

 

[Stanton Moore]

"Armstrong's legendary temper also flared as he got into a testy exchange with reporters,
telling one writer from a British newspaper that he "was not worth the chair" he was sitting on
when he asked why Armstrong had welcomed back unrepentant cyclists who had served doping suspensions."


“I'm thinking about it, ... I'm thinking it's the best way to piss [the French] off.”
--Lance Armstrong

So how does that relate to type? I'd wager that is does not.

I will say that cycling as a profession is probably pretty tedious for anyone who is very intellectual or deep-thinking. I think one must love the physical sensations of riding and training, and be very long-term goal oriented. To me this means that most pro's are primarily sensing.
Also, most pros I have met are pretty soft-spoken. I've never met a TdF GC contender though; they may be a different breed than domestic pros in CA.

So ISxx?

 

[NewEra]

"Armstrong's legendary temper also flared as he got into a testy exchange with reporters,
telling one writer from a British newspaper that he "was not worth the chair" he was sitting on
when he asked why Armstrong had welcomed back unrepentant cyclists who had served doping suspensions."


“I'm thinking about it, ... I'm thinking it's the best way to piss [the French] off.”
--Lance Armstrong

Does that mean he's a Feeler (because he's emotional) ?

 

[Requeim]

there's no way in hell that he's a feeler

xSTJ seems pretty spot on


edit: my guess would be ISTJ, like my father

i don't like him though, he seems like a bit of an arrogant asshole to me

 

[Jaguar]

Does that mean he's a Feeler (because he's emotional) ?

No.

What Lance said to that reporter is what I say when I'm pissed.
Lance is no more an F than I am.

 

[FlamingMask]

I will say that cycling as a profession is probably pretty tedious for anyone who is very intellectual or deep-thinking. I think one must love the physical sensations of riding and training, and be very long-term goal oriented. To me this means that most pro's are primarily sensing.

I am pretty confident about I, T, and J, and you have a good point about the riding and training being characteristic of S and J. On the flipside, however, is the argument that riding itself under such extreme conditions is probably quite painful due to how physically strenuous it is. Maybe someone who naturally ignores sensation would be good at an endurance feat like the Tour.

 

[FDG]

So how does that relate to type? I'd wager that is does not.

I will say that cycling as a profession is probably pretty tedious for anyone who is very intellectual or deep-thinking. I think one must love the physical sensations of riding and training, and be very long-term goal oriented. To me this means that most pro's are primarily sensing.

Wrong. I know way too many intuitive types that are, or have been, high-level cyclists. However, I know very very few perceiving types that like cycling (usually ISTPs). You could equally argue that the repetitive nature of the sport (which isn't even that repetitive if you are on hilly terrain) favors the possibility of thinking about something else while riding.

 

[SilkRoad]

I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be any discussion about the Lance Armstrong doping revelations so I thought I'd bump this thread.

I'm not a big sports or cycling fan so in a way it's not a big deal for me, but I'm always impressed by people who manage "men of iron" type accomplishments and this is, to say the least, rather disappointing. I think if I were a major cycling/Tour de France fan I would find this rather shattering as, well, it obviously wasn't just Lance Armstrong. It sounds as though in the 90s/00s virtually everyone was doping, or everyone who won races, and the fallout from this may involve rewriting a lot of record books or basically expunging at least some of the TDF years etc.

I am quite fascinated by the psychology of this guy. On one hand, the whole fight against cancer thing and his philanthrophy, which is impressive (although I don't know much about it - who knows, maybe it was more for personal profit than anything, though that's not the impression I've had.) On the other hand, as the news sources are saying he's now been revealed as a "serial cheat" and a "bully" etc on a grand scale.

Is there a sort of moral split in the personality of someone like that? Did he convince himself that all the cheating and coercion was fine because it was for some kind of "greater good" goal? Is he so determined to win and succeed at all costs that morality isn't even a consideration along the way? I just wonder if he really think he's ok/clean/right/honest, as he seems to be continuing to claim - if he has really convinced himself of that somehow - or if he just doesn't care. People are saying that the sport had lost its whole "moral compass" or that it had become hopelessly skewed and that seems quite apposite.

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm surprised there doesn't seem to be any discussion about the Lance Armstrong doping revelations so I thought I'd bump this thread.

I've been reading about it but am not really knowledgeable on the sport or the people involved, so I've refrained from commenting on it.

I'm not a big sports or cycling fan so in a way it's not a big deal for me, but I'm always impressed by people who manage "men of iron" type accomplishments and this is, to say the least, rather disappointing. I think if I were a major cycling/Tour de France fan I would find this rather shattering as, well, it obviously wasn't just Lance Armstrong. It sounds as though in the 90s/00s virtually everyone was doping, or everyone who won races, and the fallout from this may involve rewriting a lot of record books or basically expunging at least some of the TDF years etc.

That seems to be the narrative -- that anyone who is accomplishing anything is doping, so it would seem like professional suicide to not do so (at least in using the less obvious methods of doping). I've heard people comment on the same thing about baseball stars starting in the 1990's, where the records that were being accomplished obviously were a result of using prohibited substances.

I am quite fascinated by the psychology of this guy. On one hand, the whole fight against cancer thing and his philanthrophy, which is impressive (although I don't know much about it - who knows, maybe it was more for personal profit than anything, though that's not the impression I've had.) On the other hand, as the news sources are saying he's now been revealed as a "serial cheat" and a "bully" etc on a grand scale.

I have no idea. I also have no idea why his whole team would turn on him if it's a lie (aside from being threatened with expulsion as well), so one is led to assume the core allegations are true. But he hasn't commented on it either at this point. There definitely seems to be a contradiction there in the way he has presented himself vs how he being perceived now and what the allegations are, and I don't know how to reconcile that at this time.

 

[SilkRoad]

The weight of evidence seems to be such that it would be surprising at this point if the allegations aren't true. Other riders are coming forward and saying that they were cheats themselves, after all. He and his lawyers have insisted that this is all some sort of farcical framing exercise but there is nothing to suggest doing that would be in anyone's interests. The whole exercise does seem to be in the interests of attempting to clean up the sport. Although admittedly if all this is true there must be lots of people who are happy to see him fall hard. But if it wasn't all true that seems less likely.

It just seems like this would be the moment for him to graciously step forward and say "I was wrong." A huge and humiliating admission but he might save a little face! Who knows, he might do that yet, but the face he's presenting to the world suggests that he's totally convinced of his own rightness, or he's great at bluff.


EDIT: Oh and for the record, my guess at his type would be ENTJ or ESTJ.

 

[Totenkindly]

The weight of evidence seems to be such that it would be surprising at this point if the allegations aren't true. Other riders are coming forward and saying that they were cheats themselves, after all. He and his lawyers have insisted that this is all some sort of farcical framing exercise but there is nothing to suggest doing that would be in anyone's interests. The whole exercise does seem to be in the interests of attempting to clean up the sport. Although admittedly if all this is true there must be lots of people who are happy to see him fall hard. But if it wasn't all true that seems less likely.

It just seems like this would be the moment for him to graciously step forward and say "I was wrong." A huge and humiliating admission but he might save a little face! Who knows, he might do that yet, but the face he's presenting to the world suggests that he's totally convinced of his own rightness, or he's great at bluff.

That's what confuses me as well. Either he's a bigger louse/opportunist than I ever would have expected or he's not lying as much as people assume he is, and neither makes sense.

I know he had made some enemies, but I can't imagine why things would go to this length if it was just about professional jealousy with no substance, nor does it make sense why his teammates would testify as they did and lie about everything aside from trying to save their own skins.

Considering his immune system was compromised by cancer/treatment, it seems plausible that the only way even for a man in the top tier of his support to win (at that level of competition where every edge matters) would be to dope in some way.

 

[FDG]

He´s (was) a very talented cyclist, with an extremely strong will.

However, he was also an extreme "choleric" type - a true asshole to whoever tried to oppose him. Thus, he made a lot of enemies, which now are ready to testify against him. Example: in cycling, you oftentimes see relatively young and unknown cyclist breaking away from the group during "Grand Tours" like the Tour the France or the Giro d´Italia. They have no chance to finish first in the final ranking - they are just trying to win one specific etape. Now, someone like Armostrong would easily manage to "push" all the big group towards annihiliating the breakaway, if the young riders were not "aligned" to his views of cycling i.e. they ever contradicted him. From my point of view, that´s complely unacceptable and shows megalomaniac dictatorial tendecies (which I have honestly often observed in ESTJs when operating in work-related settings).

Personally, I´ve never liked him - too bossy, controlling, assholish, confident. I´m glad he´s now getting some shit back, after he managed to stop the career of whoever was a little big not "aligned" to his views.

(I am (was) a cyclist who almost reached professional level, so I think I have a general knowledge of how the environment works...I would enjoy writing a more detailed post, however ATM I´m on the train).