|
el stovey
13,602 posts
133 months
|
IroningMan said: Regrave is a better comparison, but the point is that neither Armstrong nor anyone else in a similar position can 'clear his name', because of the impossibility of proving a negative. Why are no friends or ex team mates accusing Regrave of cheating. Is Regrave friends with a Dr famous for being involved in doping. Have any of Regraves team mates been caught cheating?
|
|
|
The Stiglet
1,278 posts
64 months
|
el stovey said: IroningMan said: Regrave is a better comparison, but the point is that neither Armstrong nor anyone else in a similar position can 'clear his name', because of the impossibility of proving a negative. Why are no friends or ex team mates accusing Regrave of cheating. Is Regrave friends with a Dr famous for being involved in doping. Have any of Regraves team mates been caught cheating? Not enough money involved...
|
|
|
el stovey
13,602 posts
133 months
|
The Stiglet said: el stovey said: IroningMan said: Regrave is a better comparison, but the point is that neither Armstrong nor anyone else in a similar position can 'clear his name', because of the impossibility of proving a negative. Why are no friends or ex team mates accusing Regrave of cheating. Is Regrave friends with a Dr famous for being involved in doping. Have any of Regraves team mates been caught cheating? Not enough money involved... Or more likely Regrave was doing it clean and LA wasn't.
|
|
|
The Stiglet
1,278 posts
64 months
|
el stovey said: Or more likely Regrave was doing it clean and LA wasn't. Innuendo. There are lots of reasons to dislike Lance. Everyone else seems to get caught - Merckx, Indurain (not banned), (Riis), Pantani, Virenque, Ullrich, Landis, (Basso), Contador. How the hell did he avoid it for so long? Really, how is that possible? He never got caught? I just don't buy it.
|
|
|
el stovey
13,602 posts
133 months
|
The Stiglet said: el stovey said: Or more likely Regrave was doing it clean and LA wasn't. Innuendo. There are lots of reasons to dislike Lance. Everyone else seems to get caught - Merckx, Indurain (not banned), (Riis), Pantani, Virenque, Ullrich, Landis, (Basso), Contador. How the hell did he avoid it for so long? Really, how is that possible? He never got caught? I just don't buy it. I'm sure plenty of riders haven't been caught. Millar was only caught when his flat was raided and he'd kept the old syringes. He never tested positive once. The dopers are (or were) well ahead of the testers. Rumour was that LA tested positive for EPO and the UCI hushed it up. LA certainly made large donations to the UCI.There's no doubt about that.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
blade runner
115 posts
82 months
|
The Stiglet said: Innuendo. There are lots of reasons to dislike Lance.
Everyone else seems to get caught - Merckx, Indurain (not banned), (Riis), Pantani, Virenque, Ullrich, Landis, (Basso), Contador.
How the hell did he avoid it for so long? Really, how is that possible? He never got caught? I just don't buy it. Agree. LA was just the perfect combination of genetics and mind-set who happened to reach his peak at the right time to allow him to dominate the Tour. You also need to remember that, unlike many of his peers, he concentrated 'exclusively' on winning the tour every year and geared his training, team and equipment selection with this one aim in mind. As others have said, it's impossible for LA to prove a negative and so the rumours continue and most people just assume he was a cheat no matter what. He had plenty of chances to get caught and many powerful people were/still are desperate to find something on him. They never have.
|
|
|
IroningMan
5,943 posts
116 months
|
Indeed. It's very easy to overlook the step-change in training, technology and TdF focus that the team he lead brought to the party - the whole package was unprecedented.
|
|
|
rhinochopig
16,135 posts
68 months
|
el stovey said: IroningMan said: Regrave is a better comparison, but the point is that neither Armstrong nor anyone else in a similar position can 'clear his name', because of the impossibility of proving a negative. Why are no friends or ex team mates accusing Regrave of cheating. Is Regrave friends with a Dr famous for being involved in doping. Have any of Regraves team mates been caught cheating? No but the nat coach is an East German, who let's face it, weren't unknown to dabble with the old horse pills.  He was also injecting himself regularly in his later career For the record I'm not for one minute suggesting he ever took drugs, but you can spin most things. I'd love to believe that LA didn't, but sadly my BIL, who was a sponsored rider in the 90s, is of the firm opinion that he did and he's in a much better position to speculate than I am.
|
|
|
Rouleur
4,461 posts
59 months
|
Here we go again... http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/lance-armstro..."The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency brought formal doping charges against former cyclist Lance Armstrong in an action that could cost him his seven Tour de France titles, according to a letter sent to Armstrong and several others Tuesday. "As a result of the charges, Armstrong has been immediately banned from competition in triathlons, a sport he took up after his retirement from cycling in 2011."...
|
|
|
Jimbo.
2,147 posts
59 months
|
Cycling dragged through the mud AGAIN. Not what it needs in the build up to the TdF 
|
|
|
pablo
10,400 posts
143 months
|
Its clear the USADA dont have a case and Travis Tygart is simply desperate to be the man who "took down Armstrong".
|
|
|
joe58
680 posts
21 months
|
Here we go again. If it's to do with the blood samples in 2009-10 why did they not bring it up then. Why has it taken this time?
|
|
|
odyssey2200
17,645 posts
79 months
|
Reardy Mister said: Its a witch-hnt now, not due process for protecting the sport.
If someone passes the drug test, you dont just keep testing or changing the test until you catch them. thye either pass the test or they dont. If youre unhappy with the testing process' capacity to uncover cheating, design a better test for next year.
Its like measuring 2003 F1 cars using today's regulation book and then stripping them of their 2003 results.
Stupid. He won. He passed all the testing appicable at the time. That should be end of. This^^^ He won They tested He passed end of.
|
|
|
daz3210
5,000 posts
110 months
|
The report I heard was that charges are being brought
|
|
|
summit7
423 posts
99 months
|
|
|
Gizmoish
15,878 posts
79 months
|
odyssey2200 said: Reardy Mister said: Its a witch-hnt now, not due process for protecting the sport.
If someone passes the drug test, you dont just keep testing or changing the test until you catch them. thye either pass the test or they dont. If youre unhappy with the testing process' capacity to uncover cheating, design a better test for next year.
Its like measuring 2003 F1 cars using today's regulation book and then stripping them of their 2003 results.
Stupid. He won. He passed all the testing appicable at the time. That should be end of. This^^^ He won They tested He passed end of. Agreed. If I were Wiggo I'd be livid about this. Andy S pulls out and the biggest news is Armstrong? I might complain to someone.
|
|
|
Rocksteadyeddie
6,696 posts
97 months
|
summit7 said: It matters for cycling to clean up and move forward and stop new people doping. I agree, but I also think that there needs to be retrospective action in some cases. If cyclists have in the back of their mind that they need to get through current and future drugs testing regimes then they may think differently about taking them.
|
|
|
el stovey
13,602 posts
133 months
|
odyssey2200 said: Reardy Mister said: Its a witch-hnt now, not due process for protecting the sport.
If someone passes the drug test, you dont just keep testing or changing the test until you catch them. thye either pass the test or they dont. If youre unhappy with the testing process' capacity to uncover cheating, design a better test for next year.
Its like measuring 2003 F1 cars using today's regulation book and then stripping them of their 2003 results.
Stupid. He won. He passed all the testing appicable at the time. That should be end of. This^^^ He won They tested He passed end of. He won They tested He failed UCI covered up the results Armstrong donates money to the UCI Ex team mates/friends say he cheated His doctor was famous for doping It's absolutely worth continuing with this to stop others doping.
|
|
|
Hackney
1,772 posts
78 months
|
Rocksteadyeddie said: summit7 said: It matters for cycling to clean up and move forward and stop new people doping. I agree, but I also think that there needs to be retrospective action in some cases. If cyclists have in the back of their mind that they need to get through current and future drugs testing regimes then they may think differently about taking them. But this just won't work. Going back to the F1 analogy....I won't use this spoiler today because in 5 years time they might change the rules to ban this type of spoiler.
|
|
|
el stovey
13,602 posts
133 months
|
Hackney said: Rocksteadyeddie said: summit7 said: It matters for cycling to clean up and move forward and stop new people doping. I agree, but I also think that there needs to be retrospective action in some cases. If cyclists have in the back of their mind that they need to get through current and future drugs testing regimes then they may think differently about taking them. But this just won't work. Going back to the F1 analogy....I won't use this spoiler today because in 5 years time they might change the rules to ban this type of spoiler. Spoilers on cars aren't doping everyone can see the spoiler and it passed current regulations, it can't be made illegal retrospectively. Nobody is looking back and banning old F1 cars. You can ban a cyclist retrospectively for cheating because what he is doing is illegal at the time and all you are doing is banning him after new testing/information/evidence/etc arrises just as you can convict someone of a crime as new evidence/DNA testing/whatever improves.
|
|
