Pretty overwhelming evidence Lance doped.

[Hacp]

It's the UCI, not the ICU, and USADA, not USDA.
I was a fan of Lance's during his TdFs, and other things being equal would rather USADA had simply left him alone, but to me there can be no credible argument that he did not dope, and I don't know anyone who knows anything about cycling who would claim that he did not. This is essentially an open and shut case.

I am not one to trust the USADA. I know that they are out to get Armstrong. They don't want to be fair. They want to crucify him.

If you look at how the whole thing proceeded, the USADA delivered Armstrong a letter vaguely describing to him what he was being charged for. They then refused to provide to him the evidence they had against him until a court force them to. To me, it smells funny.

 

[Hacp]

LMAO

"While Armstrong has long protested his innocence, retroactive testing found EPO in six of Armstrong’s urine samples from the 1999 race, according to the report."

Oh yeah, drug testing that showed lance is a cheat doesn't mean anything.

LMAO LMAO LMAO

You conservatives are so batshit fucking stupid this is incredible.

You need to understand that there are two sides to a story.

 

[Phokus]

You need to understand that there are two sides to a story.

I'm pretty sure there's only one side to drug test results you idiot.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Toure de France is going to declare no winner for the races the Armstrong won if Armstrong is stripped of his wins

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I am not one to trust the USADA. I know that they are out to get Armstrong. They don't want to be fair. They want to crucify him.

If you look at how the whole thing proceeded, the USADA delivered Armstrong a letter vaguely describing to him what he was being charged for. They then refused to provide to him the evidence they had against him until a court force them to. To me, it smells funny.

You continue to take the view that USADA somehow wronged Lance by following its own established procedures rather than indulging requests outside of these procedures. That's not the case.

The discovery process is governed by rules which would have given Lance full access to all information in the possession of the USADA. He chose not to engage in that process because, I am certain, he knew he would lose. You prefer to believe he chose not to because he felt the process would not give him a fair shake. In either case, he chose not to participate and had no right to discovery materials.

I don't know what you're talking about when you say that a court compelled USADA to disclose discovery materials. I would ask that you provide a cite for that because it does not track with my understanding of what occurred and I don't think it makes any sense. The only court proceeding I am aware of brought by Lance was his hail-mary effort to ask a federal court to enjoin USADA from conducting an arbitration. The court dismissed that case twice: once without prejudice, because his counsel had not complied with the rules of pleading, and once with prejudice, for lack of jurisdiction (actually this same lack of jurisdiction was what I was alluding to earlier in my post about your suggestion that Lance should have had a jury trial).

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Toure de France is going to declare no winner for the raced if Armstrong is stripped of his wins

The director of the race has said he is "against" re-attributing those races to a different winner - http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...-victories-should-not-be-re-attributed_260748

Tour de France director Christian Prudhomme said Friday he was against re-attributing Lance Armstrong’s seven victories in the world’s most prestigious cycling race.

* * *

“We cannot be indifferent to what USADA has unmasked this week, it’s a damning picture that’s been drawn,” Prudhomme said.

“What we want is that there is no winner,” Prudhomme said of the seven years between 1999 and 2005 when Armstrong rang off a record total of wins.

Evoking what he described as a “lost decade”, the Tour organizer quoted the 19th century French poet, novelist and dramatist Victor Hugo: “Those who live are those who fight.”

I don't know whether this decision falls within his discretion or under the UCI's - I would suspect the latter.

 

[Hacp]

I don't know what you're talking about when you say that a court compelled USADA to disclose discovery materials.

I'll be glad to get you up to speed.

"the deficiency of USADA's charging document is of serious constitutional concern"

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrong.pdf

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I'll be glad to get you up to speed.

"the deficiency of USADA's charging document is of serious constitutional concern"

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrong.pdf

That order just confirms everything I said and disproves what you said. As I stated, it provides that Armstrong would get all required discovery as part of the arbitration process, and holds that arbitration is the appropriate forum for hearing the dispute, because that is what Lance agreed to by participating in a WADA-regulated sport. It does not order USADA to disclose anything.

 

[Hacp]

That order just confirms everything I said and disproves what you said. As I stated, it provides that Armstrong would get all required discovery as part of the arbitration process, and holds that arbitration is the appropriate forum for hearing the dispute, because that is what Lance agreed to by participating in a WADA-regulated sport. It does not order USADA to disclose anything.

Read the quote. I'll spell it out. "the deficiency of USADA's charging document is of serious constitutional concern".

Now that we have that established, I'll address what you are trying to say, which is that the USADA's ruling means something. It doesn't. I'll reiterate that the USADA can not take away Armstrong's titles.

So what is the motive? It certainly isn't to give Armstrong a fair hearing. As projected by the USADA's strong-arming of Armstrong's attempts to defend itself, it is trying to wage a publicity battle. Again, it is out to destroy Armstrong's reputation, and the tactics they are using are questionable.

 

[OrByte]

one piece of "evidence" in the story;

a witness saw Lance close the door to the doctors office and reappeared 45 minutes later reinvigorated and super energized.

I guess 45 minutes is how long it takes to do a blood transfusion.

So....this is just one example of the evidence against Lance Armstrong.

This qualifies as "evidence" ?

I dunno....

 

[Hacp]

As someone looking from the outside in, I am not going to believe anything the USADA says. To me, it doesn't looks like the USADA is being sincere in figuring out the truth. The organization has an agenda, which is to attack Lance Armstrong and his reputation and it will do anything in its power to make people blindly believe what its saying. The arbitration hearing, the releasing of the documents it means squat and they know it. Why are they doing this? To ruin his reputation.

 

[lotus503]

As someone looking from the outside in, I am not going to believe anything the USADA says. To me, it doesn't looks like the USADA is being sincere in figuring out the truth. The organization has an agenda, which is to attack Lance Armstrong and his reputation and it will do anything in its power to make people blindly believe what its saying. The arbitration hearing, the releasing of the documents it means squat and they know it. Why are they doing this? To ruin his reputation.

As an active cat 5 racer, and a person who made an attempt at being a domestic pro, it's obvious the agenda of the USADA. They want doping removed from the sport, and they will investigate it no matter who what why or when.

Read big George's affidavit, then tell me how innocent lance is. Anyone who has more than a news cycle understanding of the sport and the people in it knows this was the single biggest arrow through the heart of lance's denial.

Fuck all the 100s if not thousands of racers who never got a decent shot because they wouldn't dope?

 

[Hacp]

As an active cat 5 racer, and a person who made an attempt at being a domestic pro, it's obvious the agenda of the USADA. They want doping removed from the sport, and they will investigate it no matter who what why or when.

Read big George's affidavit, then tell me how innocent lance is. Anyone who has more than a news cycle understanding of the sport and the people in it knows this was the single biggest arrow through the heart of lance's denial.

Fuck all the 100s if not thousands of racers who never got a decent shot because they wouldn't dope?

I appreciate that you're responding as someone with inside knowledge of the sport. However, absent any actionable drug results, people are not going to believe that Lance Armstrong cheated. An arbitration hearing from the USADA doesn't hold any muster in people's opinion, especially since Lance offered to defend himself against all accusations in court, where the process is less one sided.

 

[woolfe9999]

It's the UCI, not the ICU, and USADA, not USDA.

The USADA would be insane to give Lance a jury trial when he has no entitlement to one and when there are not even any established procedures for what that process would entail. I am unaware of any precedent for a USADA jury trial, and if they gave Lance that right, it would entitle everyone else to a jury trial, despite the fact that USADA has a well-established arbitration process and no history of jury trials. It is not even clear to me how any court could conduct such a trial because none has jurisdiction to entertain USADA claims - arbitration is the exclusive venue for USADA disputes.

USADA has made it plain that they released this information because WADA wants to eliminate doping in cycling, period. I consider that a laudable goal, and do not take issue with their releasing such well-sourced evidence. I have no idea what UCI will do, and other things being equal I would just as soon they left Lance's palmares intact, though I doubt they will do so in light of the abundant evidence of his doping.

I was a fan of Lance's during his TdFs, and other things being equal would rather USADA had simply left him alone, but to me there can be no credible argument that he did not dope, and I don't know anyone who knows anything about cycling who would claim that he did not. This is essentially an open and shut case.

Out of curiosity, why would you rather they have left him alone even though you acknowledge that he is guilty? They went after, and took down, numerous others before Armstrong. If anything, the case against Armstrong was the strongest of the bunch. Leaving him alone would have been akin to selective prosecution. I think if you have a set of rules, you either make a good faith effort to enforce them on everyone, or no one (meaning the rule should probably be ditched). Even if you think the doping should generally be allowed, which IMO is not an unreasonable opinion, I don't think they can make an exception while it remains prohibited just because he is the most popular person in the sport.

I would also point out that his behavior in terms of trying to suppress evidence, and his general treatment of people who spoke out against doping in the sport has been pretty reprehensible. After reading the bulk of the linked report, my opinion of him has taken a sharp nosedive.

 

[woolfe9999]

I appreciate that you're responding as someone with inside knowledge of the sport. However, absent any actionable drug results, people are not going to believe that Lance Armstrong cheated. An arbitration hearing from the USADA doesn't hold any muster in people's opinion, especially since Lance offered to defend himself against all accusations in court, where the process is less one sided.

It would really be a shame if people didn't think he cheated. There are some 16 witnesses to his doping who have offered sworn testimony. It's exceedingly unlikely that they're all lying and he's telling the truth.

 

[freegeeks]

the funny part is that there are still "believers" as evidenced in this thread. You must be extremely naive and have actual zero knowledge of the sport to believe that he was clean

Wave that bracelet proudly

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Out of curiosity, why would you rather they have left him alone even though you acknowledge that he is guilty? They went after, and took down, numerous others before Armstrong. If anything, the case against Armstrong was the strongest of the bunch. Leaving him alone would have been akin to selective prosecution. I think if you have a set of rules, you either make a good faith effort to enforce them on everyone, or no one (meaning the rule should probably be ditched). Even if you think the doping should generally be allowed, which IMO is not an unreasonable opinion, I don't think they can make an exception while it remains prohibited just because he is the most popular person in the sport.

I would also point out that his behavior in terms of trying to suppress evidence, and his general treatment of people who spoke out against doping in the sport has been pretty reprehensible. After reading the bulk of the linked report, my opinion of him has taken a sharp nosedive.

Well, to be clear, that opinion (that I'd rather they left him alone) is tempered somewhat by the sheer quantity of evidence in the USADA report and his clear involvement in such a deliberate pattern of doping and obstruction of justice.

The reason I said that is that frankly we are talking about things that happened many years ago, and in an era in which everybody was doping. From my standpoint Lance probably deserves to keep his victories since he was the greatest rider in an era of universal doping. I think bringing him down just gratuitously harms the sport (though I certainly understand and acknowledge the countervailing view that bringing him down is necessary if there's any hope of the sport actually being run in a clean way). I have felt for at least the last few years that it was all but certain Lance had doped, but that it wouldn't really serve the sport to see him prosecuted.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

the funny part is that there are still "believers" as evidenced in this thread. You must be extremely naive and have actual zero knowledge of the sport to believe that he was clean

Wave that bracelet proudly

Indeed. I find it very difficult to understand (much less respect) that opinion. Lance is 100% guilty. I don't see any rational way around drawing that conclusion.

 

[momeNt]

Indeed. I find it very difficult to understand (much less respect) that opinion. Lance is 100% guilty. I don't see any rational way around drawing that conclusion.

It's like saying Jesus used a knockout drug for those 3 days, and that the nails and spears were magic props. Lance is a beacon of light to a lot of people, it can be hard to come to terms with that.

 

[freegeeks]

It's like saying Jesus used a knockout drug for those 3 days, and that the nails and spears were magic props. Lance is a beacon of light to a lot of people, it can be hard to come to terms with that.

Im an avid cycling fan just like most Belgians. I have lots of admiration for his athletism and his dedication to the sport. I saw him a couple times in the flesh in the Tour De France, the guy was a machine. There is not some kind of weird Euro led conspiracy to bring him down. In the last 15 years, 99,9% of professional cyclist that were busted were European. They were sometimes suspended with far less evidence then what is found in this Lance rapport. I admire him as an athlete, I have zero respect for him as an arrogant prick who is in some kind of weird denial. He must believe his own bullshit. People would respect him much more if he just admitted the truth.

And for the record, his lawyer declared today that "Lance was fighting with the same weapons just like anybody else". I don't think he was implying bananas and French bread

edit: Bruyneel just announced that the will leave Radioshack so he can prepare his defense. Belgian cycling authorities have officially opened an investigation for his role. He faces lifetime ban from cycling

 

[marincounty]

It's obvious to me that the sport of cycling has been corrupt for a long time. All of the top riders have been doping. It's also true that some Euros have had a hard on for lance for a long time, since he beat them at "their" sport. The anti doping forces are way out of control-why are we still investigating and testing samples that are years old?
There should be a time limitation on this testing. You have a six months to finalize the results of some event, after that it is over.
Do you want to open a can of worms about every sports event? You know Hank Aaron used greenies-let's scrap all of his records, so did Willie Mays.
We could even dig up Babe Ruth and use modern techniques to see if he was doing anything illegal.
This whole thing is BS, everyone knows cyclists are dopers, stop with the vendettas.

 

[woolfe9999]

Well, to be clear, that opinion (that I'd rather they left him alone) is tempered somewhat by the sheer quantity of evidence in the USADA report and his clear involvement in such a deliberate pattern of doping and obstruction of justice.

The reason I said that is that frankly we are talking about things that happened many years ago, and in an era in which everybody was doping. From my standpoint Lance probably deserves to keep his victories since he was the greatest rider in an era of universal doping. I think bringing him down just gratuitously harms the sport (though I certainly understand and acknowledge the countervailing view that bringing him down is necessary if there's any hope of the sport actually being run in a clean way). I have felt for at least the last few years that it was all but certain Lance had doped, but that it wouldn't really serve the sport to see him prosecuted.

These are fair points.

I do have a comment on Armstrong being the greatest in the sport during an era of "universal doping." It appears from the evidence that Armstrong was employing an extremely sophisticated doping regimen. What doping regimens were the others using? Are all doping regimens equally effective? This is really the problem with doping to begin with. The results aren't tracking just the innate ability plus training rigor of these athletes, but also the relative effectiveness of their drug cocktails (or lack thereof in some cases.)

Perhaps had doping been allowed, this would have tended to create a more level playing field, where we could presume that the various regimens were at least similar, as based on state of the art knowledge at the time. Much the way the quality of the gear tends to be similar: it's all pretty much the best available. However, disallowing it forced it under ground, meaning that some probably didn't dope, while others may have curtailed their doping to avoid detection, while still others were more aggressive with it.

I think the sport was damaged here because the UCI should have either a) policed it more effectively, or b) realizing that they were unable or unwilling to police it effectively, allowed it. Instead, they choose option c, to continue policing it ineffectively. Now we'll never know how reliable the race results have been. That's the argument for erasing them, and it's why this has turned into such a mess for the sport.

 

[Hacp]

Well, to be clear, that opinion (that I'd rather they left him alone) is tempered somewhat by the sheer quantity of evidence in the USADA report and his clear involvement in such a deliberate pattern of doping and obstruction of justice.

I read the "evidence". I can not see a smoking gun in it. Alot of the evidence is circumstantial or if there was a "positive" test, the sample was taken so far back that it may have been contaminated with other rider's urine.

There is nothing in there that makes me think, ok, no matter what Lance Armstrong has to say to defend himself, he is guilty.

 

[bononos]

Oh I know, I was being facetious. Lance has managed to create a self-serving empire on the plight of cancer stricken people and families. It's a shame that so many better charities have had money taken from them because of Lance's "story" and the livestrong brand.

Yeah I know, my comment wasn't directed at you, it was to a number of posters who still demand 'hard evidence' that Armstrong cheated. And his livestrong/cheatstrong? brand is just as big of a scandal.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I couldn't help but revive this thread to see what Hacp and EagleKeeper think of the fact that Lance apparently admitted today to Oprah that he doped.

I understand you were both saying not that Lance was necessarily innocent, but that there was not sufficient evidence to conclude his guilt. I take it, assuming the reports are accurate and he did confess, that you'd be comfortable believing him?