Lance Armstrong vs. USADA
Discussion
but does it really matter? that he could drop the drug fuelled Pantani as and when he wanted to was always a little suspect wasnt it?!.... So Lance lied and cheated and the only difference between him and the rest is he still denies it.... its sad for the sport that we will have to defend the likes of Cav and Wiggo in the face of more scrutiny but i couldnt care less about Armstrong, as i said, we all suspected it if we are honest, as far as this farce goes, we just wanted a smoking gun but at best we have nothing more than a spent cartridge...
I think he's guilty as sin but unless they are going to release the Ferrari - Armstrong emails and they refer directly to doping it is still just a smoking gun and all the current evidence is just other cyclists testimony, now there's plenty of weight and a body of evidence but it's not proof positive and he'll continue to argue the toss.
Plus the whole basis of the initial investigation into USPS was on information provided by Floyd Landis?! who is completely discredited.
The USDA are stating that much more evidence would have been brought forward "IF" Armstrong had not accepted their judgement. why not just publish it all and be done with it.
This just raises more questions than it answers.
Like if their doping was so wide spread in and out of competition from 98 to 2010 as much as the testimony suggests, how the hell did they get away with it.
And, how can the UCI make a judgement on this given it squarely blames them for part of the coverup?!?
Plus the whole basis of the initial investigation into USPS was on information provided by Floyd Landis?! who is completely discredited.
The USDA are stating that much more evidence would have been brought forward "IF" Armstrong had not accepted their judgement. why not just publish it all and be done with it.
This just raises more questions than it answers.
Like if their doping was so wide spread in and out of competition from 98 to 2010 as much as the testimony suggests, how the hell did they get away with it.
And, how can the UCI make a judgement on this given it squarely blames them for part of the coverup?!?
Edited by OneDs on Wednesday 10th October 21:47
Hincapie's affadavit http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/Hincapie%2c+G...
aspender said:
I've had a skim through that and it all sounds very damning (as expected). However, I still struggle to get past the fact that it is based on nothing but testimony from other people - no concrete test evidence.USADA claim that it provides evidence beyond reasonably doubt, but I still have reasonably doubt about how someone who doped as extensively as is claimed could avoid testing positive during a long, high-profile career - much of it under a suspicion of doping.
I'm sure there is no smoke without fire, but this document just doesn't conclude anything IMO.
Haven't read the report yet...
But how the hell did USPS avoid being caught carrying out transfusions in the doctor's hotel room on nights of the tour, whilst other teams were being thrown off the tour for similar?
How did Armstrong avoid being caught, when other riders, including teams mates, were caught?
Why, if indeed there was a failed test in 2001, was Armstrong not tested so much that it would have been impossible to ever pass another test, had he continued to dope? Do I need to read the report to understand this? I don't get how or why he would continue to cheat, having been caught...almost.
It kind of seems like it was allowed to continue, and only USADA objected.
But how the hell did USPS avoid being caught carrying out transfusions in the doctor's hotel room on nights of the tour, whilst other teams were being thrown off the tour for similar?
How did Armstrong avoid being caught, when other riders, including teams mates, were caught?
Why, if indeed there was a failed test in 2001, was Armstrong not tested so much that it would have been impossible to ever pass another test, had he continued to dope? Do I need to read the report to understand this? I don't get how or why he would continue to cheat, having been caught...almost.
It kind of seems like it was allowed to continue, and only USADA objected.
pablo said:
but does it really matter? that he could drop the drug fuelled Pantani as and when he wanted to was always a little suspect wasnt it?!.... So Lance lied and cheated and the only difference between him and the rest is he still denies it.... its sad for the sport that we will have to defend the likes of Cav and Wiggo in the face of more scrutiny but i couldnt care less about Armstrong, as i said, we all suspected it if we are honest, as far as this farce goes, we just wanted a smoking gun but at best we have nothing more than a spent cartridge...
If the USDA are correct he didn't just cheat - he forced others to. Way more serious. A bully and a cheat forcing others to risk health and career to suit his own purpose.If it is right he should be tried and sentenced to jail time, not just a ban. He's as bad as those East German coaches who doped their athletes and left many with long standing health issues. Seems like he's a complete *^$%
That's my point no one comes out of this clean including the USADA. All they have put forward is (compelling) witness testimony when if they'd put actual proof out which they say they have it would have resolved many issues. Hincapiees statement is cringeworthy especially the last bit.
OneDs said:
I think he's guilty as sin but unless they are going to release the Ferrari - Armstrong emails and they refer directly to doping it is still just a smoking gun and all the current evidence is just other cyclists testimony, now there's plenty of weight and a body of evidence but it's not proof positive and he'll continue to argue the toss.
Plus the whole basis of the initial investigation into USPS was on information provided by Floyd Landis?! who is completely discredited.
The USDA are stating that much more evidence would have been brought forward "IF" Armstrong had not accepted their judgement. why not just publish it all and be done with it.
This just raises more questions than it answers.
Like if their doping was so wide spread in and out of competition from 98 to 2010 as much as the testimony suggests, how the hell did they get away with it.
And, how can the UCI make a judgement on this given it squarely blames them for part of the coverup?!?
Interviews on radio and TV tonight and quotes from the USDA documentation suggest regular tip offs by doping/cycling organisers.Plus the whole basis of the initial investigation into USPS was on information provided by Floyd Landis?! who is completely discredited.
The USDA are stating that much more evidence would have been brought forward "IF" Armstrong had not accepted their judgement. why not just publish it all and be done with it.
This just raises more questions than it answers.
Like if their doping was so wide spread in and out of competition from 98 to 2010 as much as the testimony suggests, how the hell did they get away with it.
And, how can the UCI make a judgement on this given it squarely blames them for part of the coverup?!?
Edited by OneDs on Wednesday 10th October 21:47
groomi said:
, I still struggle to get past the fact that it is based on nothing but testimony from other people - no concrete test
None of his team mates who admitted to doping tested positive either. David Millar was caught with syringes, he never tested positive. It was easy for dopers to not test positive.
Have you read the report? It's based on loads more than testimony.
Millars book is a great insight into this activity at the time.
The notion that he never tested positive so there's doubt, is eradicated when you consider the depth of the cover ups effected by all parties involved in the sport and the frankly pathetic and cursory testing regime that existed once EPO was initially used in cycling.
Millar as highlighted earlier in thread was caught with a syringe ina Police search of his house due to the implication of doping in his team, not a positive test. In fact most of the big headline doping revelations were from doping materials being found in team cars and in hotel rooms etc at the time, not from positive tests.
The basis for guilt was your haemocrat level (sorry, probably spelt wrong) and riders knew well to manage these levels to acceptable limits, variances could be explained and bans were feable at best in the early stages.
Armstrongs claim he never failed a test is rather a confirmation of the poor testing regime that existed, far far away from the testing carried out today, than a confirmation of doubt or his innocence.
I'm not sure Landis is any more discredited than the rest, he was more public etc, but all of them are now discredited equally. However if Armstrong is the ring leader, master and general as made out by the report. He should face the consequences of his actions. Stripping titles is a joke in a sport/race where all of the podium winners at the time have been since discredited .....
The notion that he never tested positive so there's doubt, is eradicated when you consider the depth of the cover ups effected by all parties involved in the sport and the frankly pathetic and cursory testing regime that existed once EPO was initially used in cycling.
Millar as highlighted earlier in thread was caught with a syringe ina Police search of his house due to the implication of doping in his team, not a positive test. In fact most of the big headline doping revelations were from doping materials being found in team cars and in hotel rooms etc at the time, not from positive tests.
The basis for guilt was your haemocrat level (sorry, probably spelt wrong) and riders knew well to manage these levels to acceptable limits, variances could be explained and bans were feable at best in the early stages.
Armstrongs claim he never failed a test is rather a confirmation of the poor testing regime that existed, far far away from the testing carried out today, than a confirmation of doubt or his innocence.
I'm not sure Landis is any more discredited than the rest, he was more public etc, but all of them are now discredited equally. However if Armstrong is the ring leader, master and general as made out by the report. He should face the consequences of his actions. Stripping titles is a joke in a sport/race where all of the podium winners at the time have been since discredited .....
Edited by Johno on Thursday 11th October 06:58
pablo said:
but does it really matter? that he could drop the drug fuelled Pantani as and when he wanted to was always a little suspect wasnt it?!.... So Lance lied and cheated and the only difference between him and the rest is he still denies it....
His team-mate is on the news now saying what they all took. Seems Lance didn't just take the stuff but instigated and urged others to take it.anonymous said:
[redacted]
this is the big unknown... it could have played a part but as i said, the testimony of people whom I trust now stating that they saw Lance engaged in transfusions etc seems to suggest that what ever body altering effects the treatment had, the argument is pretty redundant. interestingly, Millar tweeted a few weeks back something like "yes i do have an opinion on the armstrong affar but its not the time..." Given Zabriske is still a team mate, I suspect Millar, like the rest of the peloton, kept quiet and decided to let it call come out in due course.
I've been following the sport since 2001, right in the middle of the Lance domination era. I always thought Lance had something special. Sometimes I did wonder if he was using something special to help. However, due to his background (surviving cancer), I thought his pain threshold and ability to suffer was greater as a direct result of this.
I've had a little read of the evidence and I'm a little surprised. Not too surprised (as I know the sport and its history of chemical help), but maybe more ashamed. I think the scale of the corruption is the thing that has taken me aback a little.
I remember Tyler Hamilton being slammed to pieces by the sport and the media years ago. I remember the same happening to Floyd Landis (although I never really liked him
). I also wondered what was happening when so many other professionals who were on the numerous TDF podiums (Jan, Joseba etc) were being caught. Lance (apart from the Switzerland incident) wasn't being caught out. I guess I thought that maybe he was clean as so many others were proved to be doping. The links to Michele Ferrari did niggle though.
The whole culture of the USPS team was based around doping. What is interesting is how this team were so good at it. They carried on doing what they did for years without fail. This allowed Lance to win his record amount of TDF victories, and ironically, make the sport more noticeable to the general public. How many people became interested in the TDF because of what Lance did. It was a fairy tale which has now been smashed to pieces.
As said above, I'm very disappointed. I love the sport and will still watch it. The past is the past and I feel that years of watching the TDF have effectively been tainted. It's a damn shame.
It's also damning of the UCI. But that is another story. I always knew that something wasn't right with that organisation.
All I can do now is hope the current and future participants in the sport are not pressured into a doping culture. I hope it cleans itself up. Will we every be able to trust pro cyclists? I'm not sure. I guess we need to concentrate on the science of doping and make the testing and detection process better.
I took my yellow wrist band off on Saturday. It feels odd as it is the first time in around 8 years that I haven't worn yellow on my wrist. I believed in the LiveStrong foundation and all that Lance has done in relation to cancer awareness. It's difficult to try and sort out how I feel about this too.
I'm tempted to bin my TDF and Lance books and the rest of my yellow bands. I may hold on to them and tell people who ask about them that they are related to cancer awareness. I don't think I'll mention Lance's achievements anymore though.
I've had a little read of the evidence and I'm a little surprised. Not too surprised (as I know the sport and its history of chemical help), but maybe more ashamed. I think the scale of the corruption is the thing that has taken me aback a little.
I remember Tyler Hamilton being slammed to pieces by the sport and the media years ago. I remember the same happening to Floyd Landis (although I never really liked him
). I also wondered what was happening when so many other professionals who were on the numerous TDF podiums (Jan, Joseba etc) were being caught. Lance (apart from the Switzerland incident) wasn't being caught out. I guess I thought that maybe he was clean as so many others were proved to be doping. The links to Michele Ferrari did niggle though.The whole culture of the USPS team was based around doping. What is interesting is how this team were so good at it. They carried on doing what they did for years without fail. This allowed Lance to win his record amount of TDF victories, and ironically, make the sport more noticeable to the general public. How many people became interested in the TDF because of what Lance did. It was a fairy tale which has now been smashed to pieces.
As said above, I'm very disappointed. I love the sport and will still watch it. The past is the past and I feel that years of watching the TDF have effectively been tainted. It's a damn shame.
It's also damning of the UCI. But that is another story. I always knew that something wasn't right with that organisation.
All I can do now is hope the current and future participants in the sport are not pressured into a doping culture. I hope it cleans itself up. Will we every be able to trust pro cyclists? I'm not sure. I guess we need to concentrate on the science of doping and make the testing and detection process better.
I took my yellow wrist band off on Saturday. It feels odd as it is the first time in around 8 years that I haven't worn yellow on my wrist. I believed in the LiveStrong foundation and all that Lance has done in relation to cancer awareness. It's difficult to try and sort out how I feel about this too.
I'm tempted to bin my TDF and Lance books and the rest of my yellow bands. I may hold on to them and tell people who ask about them that they are related to cancer awareness. I don't think I'll mention Lance's achievements anymore though.
Lost_BMW said:
OneDs said:
I think he's guilty as sin but unless they are going to release the Ferrari - Armstrong emails and they refer directly to doping it is still just a smoking gun and all the current evidence is just other cyclists testimony, now there's plenty of weight and a body of evidence but it's not proof positive and he'll continue to argue the toss.
Plus the whole basis of the initial investigation into USPS was on information provided by Floyd Landis?! who is completely discredited.
The USDA are stating that much more evidence would have been brought forward "IF" Armstrong had not accepted their judgement. why not just publish it all and be done with it.
This just raises more questions than it answers.
Like if their doping was so wide spread in and out of competition from 98 to 2010 as much as the testimony suggests, how the hell did they get away with it.
And, how can the UCI make a judgement on this given it squarely blames them for part of the coverup?!?
Interviews on radio and TV tonight and quotes from the USDA documentation suggest regular tip offs by doping/cycling organisers.Plus the whole basis of the initial investigation into USPS was on information provided by Floyd Landis?! who is completely discredited.
The USDA are stating that much more evidence would have been brought forward "IF" Armstrong had not accepted their judgement. why not just publish it all and be done with it.
This just raises more questions than it answers.
Like if their doping was so wide spread in and out of competition from 98 to 2010 as much as the testimony suggests, how the hell did they get away with it.
And, how can the UCI make a judgement on this given it squarely blames them for part of the coverup?!?
Edited by OneDs on Wednesday 10th October 21:47
Basically for this to actually stand up to scrutiny, the USADA have to prove one massive conspiracy theory across the whole of cycling from every team and every organisation with a role to play in the proceedings including themselves.
London424 said:
What I also find frustrating is that all of the testimony being used is by riders that didn't have the balls at the time to do or say anything about it, but are happy to have helped in recent weeks now they are approaching retirement. Very cowardly!
You can see why though, LA had massive influence in cycling. Anyone who spoke up against him ended up getting sued, journalists were vilified, Lance was like Jesus, especially after he survived cancer. Armstrong was untouchable. Anyone thinking about breaking the Omerta looked at black sheep Floyd Landis and decided to keep quiet. OneDs said:
Basically for this to actually stand up to scrutiny, the USADA have to prove one massive conspiracy theory across the whole of cycling from every team and every organisation with a role to play in the proceedings including themselves.
To stand up to YOUR scrutiny perhaps. It's more than enough for me and most other people apparently. It's good enough for USADA it's good enough for WADA, we're waiting to see what the (LA donation accepting) UCI make of it but they're unlikely to dispute much of it despite the fact that it paints them in a very poor light.
Apart from die hard LA fans, who else needs convincing?
Edited by el stovey on Thursday 11th October 09:51
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff