Lance Armstrong

[MT Wallet]

I don't follow bicycling so I was a little taken aback when it was announced that USADA was going to strip Lance Armstrong of his 7 Tour de France wins. I'd like to ask those on this board who are knowledgeable, Who the hell is USADA? They aren't any division within the U.S. government, they have no legal authority do they? The justice department investigated Armstrong for 2 years and found no illegal activity on his part so why do we need self appointed boards jerking athletes around? I haven't seen any hard evidence to prove wrong doing, only hearsay and sour grapes from ex-girlfriends and rivals. Now the media smear machine is destroying the guy's reputation. Can someone explain this?

[Bud]

I don't blame him.

 

" In February, the U.S. Justice Department closed a criminal investigation after reviewing allegations against Armstrong, apparently for lack of evidence that he used performance-enhancing drugs. "

 

In addition:

 

U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks acknowledged "the appearance of a conflict on the part of both organizations creates doubt the charges against Armstrong would receive fair consideration in either forum." But that doesn't mean federal courts should intervene, the judge said, adding that "these matters should be resolved internally, by the parties most affected."

 

When a US District Judge says you can not get a fair shake, why continue to fight with the deck stacked against you?

 

It seems to me like someone is out to get him.

 

PS I know nothing about bicycle racing.

[philbytx]

HERE is a very well balanced and written piece on the LA situation.

 

[chrisolson]

And yet another interesting read ...

 

http://redkiteprayer.com/tag/travis-tygart/

 

Once the procedure this announcement sets in motion has run its full course, here’s what the Tour de France results will look like:

 

1999: 1. Alex Zulle 2. Fernando Escartin 3. Laurent Dufaux

2000: 1. Jan Ullrich 2. Joseba Beloki 3. Christophe Moreau

2001: 1. Jan Ullrich 2. Joseba Beloki 3. Andrei Kivilev

2002: 1. Joseba Beloki 2. Raimondas Rumsas 3. Santiago Botero

2003: 1. Jan Ullrich 2. Alexandre Vinokourov 3. Tyler Hamilton

2004: 1. Andreas Klöden 2. Ivan Basso 3. Jan Ullrich

2005: 1. Ivan Basso 2. Jan Ullrich Francisco Mancebo 3. Alexandre Vinokourov

 

Take a moment to consider the names that were elevated in Armstrong’s absence. With the exception of Andrei Kivilev, during their careers each of those riders tested positive for doping, confessed to doping in the Festina scandal or were strongly implicated in Operacion Puerto. Be not confused: This is not a fix for one simple reason: It does nothing to solve the doping occurring today.

 

 

[Quinn]

Wonder how much money (of his own) he spent fighting the deep pockets of a gorernment agency before he gave up.

 

------

 

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Wonder how much money (of his own) he spent fighting the deep pockets of a gorernment agency before he gave up.

 

USADA isn't a government agency; they're a non-profit organization.

[George S.]

Please. I'm not crying for him having to spend $$. He probably didn't even have to spend much, if any, for the next step, which was simply the anti doping agency laying out it's evidence that they have on him in front of an arbitrator. He's made zillions of bucks in endorsements from Nike, Budweiser, Radio Shack, vitamins, supplements, drinks etc, then left his wife and three young children for Sheryl Crow, and cheated with illegal PEDs on top of everything else. Just my opinion, but he can get lost for all I care.

[12R12RT]

I've followed pro cycling for nearly 40 years, and have been a cyclist at least that long.

 

Doping has been a part of pro cycling for as long as there has been pro cycling and doping may be more prevalent in pro cycling than any other sport. Heck, Tom Simpson blew himself up in 1967, loaded on amphetamines.

 

Lance's progress is something I followed through his bout with cancer and his rebuilding of himself wherein he basically started as an emaciated 97 pound weakling.

 

If he doped, he was awfully good at it. He was tested day in and out, in season and off. I think that if USADA had more than hearsay evidence to present it would have been presented long ago.

 

If UCI agrees that his wins should be taken back, how deep into the peloton will they have to go to find a "clean" rider, and how will we know that rider is truly clean? And when will we know? Or will there simply be seven footnotes in TDF history that here was 'no winner' for those seven Tours? Will they find that the fan dressed in the red devil costume is the real winner?

 

I'm all for the mission to clean up sports of doping, but the past can't be cleaned, as such efforts are going to be nothing more than witch hunts.

 

My opinion of USADA and its leader is that it is an organization that doesn't understand its/his mission and is engaged in grandstanding activities that simply add more entropy to the universe, but does not make the universe a better place.

 

I think I'll take the man at his word, in all he says, and believe he doped when he says "I doped".

 

Tom

 

[12R12RT]

... gorernment agency before he gave up...

 

Typo or deliberate? In either case, accurate. If the latter, well done.

 

Tom

[Danny caddyshack Noonan]

Time may tell whether or not he's better off walking away with his middle finger in the air. Sometimes you don't have to fight to win a fight.

[skinny_tom (aka boney)]

I've followed pro cycling for nearly 40 years, and have been a cyclist at least that long.

 

Doping has been a part of pro cycling for as long as there has been pro cycling and doping may be more prevalent in pro cycling than any other sport. Heck, Tom Simpson blew himself up in 1967, loaded on amphetamines.

 

Lance's progress is something I followed through his bout with cancer and his rebuilding of himself wherein he basically started as an emaciated 97 pound weakling.

 

If he doped, he was awfully good at it. He was tested day in and out, in season and off. I think that if USADA had more than hearsay evidence to present it would have been presented long ago.

 

If UCI agrees that his wins should be taken back, how deep into the peloton will they have to go to find a "clean" rider, and how will we know that rider is truly clean? And when will we know? Or will there simply be seven footnotes in TDF history that here was 'no winner' for those seven Tours? Will they find that the fan dressed in the red devil costume is the real winner?

 

I'm all for the mission to clean up sports of doping, but the past can't be cleaned, as such efforts are going to be nothing more than witch hunts.

 

My opinion of USADA and its leader is that it is an organization that doesn't understand its/his mission and is engaged in grandstanding activities that simply add more entropy to the universe, but does not make the universe a better place.

 

I think I'll take the man at his word, in all he says, and believe he doped when he says "I doped".

 

Tom

 

Well said!

 

IIRC Lance Armstrong is The Most Tested Athlete in Sports. He never came up dirty. Ever.

 

What the USADA has done is damaged it's ability to portray itself as a fair and objective agency. There is so much in question over it's tactics and now it's sanctions that I can't help but wonder if this is a personal vendetta gone awry.

 

So, who's next?

[Bud]

Wonder how much money (of his own) he spent fighting the deep pockets of a gorernment agency before he gave up.

 

USADA isn't a government agency; they're a non-profit organization.

 

A non-profit that gets millions from the US government.

[Rinkydink]

IIRC Lance Armstrong is The Most Tested Athlete in Sports. He never came up dirty. Ever.

 

If true, this pretty says it for me.

[chrisd]

I've followed pro cycling for nearly 40 years, and have been a cyclist at least that long.

 

Doping has been a part of pro cycling for as long as there has been pro cycling and doping may be more prevalent in pro cycling than any other sport. Heck, Tom Simpson blew himself up in 1967, loaded on amphetamines.

 

I think I'll take the man at his word, in all he says, and believe he doped when he says "I doped".

 

Tom

 

Doping has been a part of the sport forever, and it may be more prevalent that in any other sport. Armstrong won seven (7) Tour de France titles, and you don't think he doped?

 

That doesn't make sense.

[barryd]

I am also an long time avid cyclist, and have been following pro cycling for a long time. That cycling has a long history with doping is well known and well documented. It's also true that cycling has paid much more attention to doping and combating it than any other sport. Guess what, years later, when they decided to start looking for doping in baseball, for example, they found it. Then if a player is found to have used PEDs, he gets what, suspended for a couple of games? In cycling a rider receives a 2 year suspension, it's career ending for many.

 

I think it's not unlikely that Lance has doped, OTH, as has been stated quite a lot, he never failed a test. Long before U.S. Justice even knew who Lance Armstrong was, the French authority's investigated Lance and the U.S. Postal team for 2+ years and couldn't find anything. And it wasn't because they were't trying.

In Lance's history a lot of really determined people did a lot of looking for a long time for evidence and couldn't find it. No matter what, his accomplishments are truly extraordinary.

 

IMHO, the big problem with regard to doping in cycling is that there is big money that benefits when riders do well whatever it takes. The anti-doping agencies have put all the responsibility on the athlete while ignoring all other factors. I expect that no rider, even L.A. has the resources to dope and get away with it without a really sophisticated backing organization, but the teams are all but exempt from any risk. And when a rider tests positive they get to make a show of shaking their heads in disbelief, while eliminating a few million salary dollars off their payroll.

 

That the USADA can come along and and find "adverse results" in Lance's last two years of compitition then call for his entire career be eliminated is beyond the pale.

 

 

[Lmar]

+1

[tallman]

And let us not forget the 1984

Olympic gold medal winning USA

cycling team used blood packing

as a tool to win.

 

are they next?

 

If he did dope, how did he beat every test?

[philbytx]

Typical QUANGO B.S.

[12R12RT]

[

 

Doping has been a part of the sport forever, and it may be more prevalent that in any other sport. Armstrong won seven (7) Tour de France titles, and you don't think he doped?

 

That doesn't make sense.

 

That's guilt by association, a logical fallacy.

 

There's no hard evidence that he doped during his later career. Did he dope prior to his bout with cancer? Hell yes; he's admitted it.

 

When a guy is accused of something and there is no hard evidence to back it up, do you presume guilt by association? I don't, and I don't expect an individual to prove a negative.

 

The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. If USADA has hard evidence, why are they not forthcoming with it? This is not an issue that will be resolved in a court of law - it is neither a criminal nor civil matter. There is no reason for them to hold back the evidence until introducing it in trial as one might expect in a civil/criminal proceeding.

 

Further, since the USADA is, legally, the equivalent of the PTA, the rules of order and evidence that one would expect in a court of law are not present. As far as I know, the USADA has no real oversight and I'm not sure if they have much accountability.

 

If USADA is a well-led organization that is cognizant of its vision and mission, it is a good thing for all sport.

 

If it is an ill-led organization, it's a kangaroo court.

 

Tom

 

[DaveTheAffable]

The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. If USADA has hard evidence, why are they not forthcoming with it? This is not an issue that will be resolved in a court of law - it is neither a criminal nor civil matter. There is no reason for them to hold back the evidence until introducing it in trial as one might expect in a civil/criminal proceeding.

 

Sadly, it seems that Lance knew exactly what the evidence was, who was going to testify against him, including members of his own team that he alledgedly assisted in their own doping ancluding administering and supplying. He has spent his whole life "fighting". Why did he choose not to fight this time? He knew he was going to lose.

[Gregori]

It would seem that Lance has realized that no matter how much scientific proof there is to the contrary, he was bound to 'lose' in the kangaroo court.

 

Had he agreed to participate, he would be allowing them to 'win' in what is essentially a fixed outcome. The labs have cleared him time and time again, but the USADA has decided that, for whatever reason, the hearsay and he-said/she-said testimony will be allowed to trump the objective testing - supposedly the backbone of their enforcement.

 

By declining to allow them the kangaroo court, he has spared himself the headaches, and deprived them of their dog and pony show, without any effective difference in the final outcome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[chrisolson]

The USADA can declare its rulings, but it can't officially take away the Tour de France titles. The UCI which has final control of the rocord books has yet to rule. It has declined to comment until it "learns of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's reasons for stripping Armstrong" ... whatever that may mean outside of a bid for time.

 

To whom will the Tour de France wins be awared ?

[David13]

It ceased to be an investigation long ago.

It has now become nothing but a witch hunt.

dc

[12R12RT]

The USADA can declare its rulings, but it can't officially take away the Tour de France titles. The UCI which has final control of the rocord books has yet to rule. It has declined to comment until it "learns of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's reasons for stripping Armstrong" ... whatever that may mean outside of a bid for time.

 

To whom will the Tour de France wins be awared ?

 

This is what is so odd about USADA and Tygart. They have no standing outside of the USA; no purview beyond US athletes. They license nothing, sanction nothing, have no legislative power, no enforcement power, nada, zilch.

 

The UCI could very well could, having conducted their own investigation and gotten nothing, say

"Cest ne fait rien" and walk away.

 

Turn on your heel and walk away - it's what we all should do with USADA.

 

Tom

[flars]

"..Why did he choose not to fight this time? He knew he was going to lose..."

 

I believe you are quoting from the McCarthy bible, are you not?

I thought we were beyond this kind of thinking.

[DaveTheAffable]

"..Why did he choose not to fight this time? He knew he was going to lose..."

 

I believe you are quoting from the McCarthy bible, are you not?

I thought we were beyond this kind of thinking.

Ouch. The reference to a McCarthy Bible was quite unnecessary.

 

 

I am of the opinion that he believes the cards are stacked against him, and there were people from his own team who are prepared to testify against him. That is what I meant when I said he knew he was going to lose. I dont know if he is guilty or not. What I do know is that I admire him as an athlete and for his fight against cancer.

[tallman]

Dave, that is basically how I felt, but recent news show that a number of former team mates are purportedly willing to testify wrt illegal actions on the bus, in hotel rooms, etc including the use of PED's and blood doping.

 

That may be the real reason.

Sad way to have the curtain thrown back and reveal the great and powerful OZ...

 

I'm as guilty as anyone of admiring athletic accomplishments

and praising those efforts.

The last decade or so, baseball, football, track & field, swimming, cycling, etc are slowly taking the rose tint off

my spectacles.

[pbharvey]

So is the real story about drug test fraud? Was Lance so smart he beat the tests or were the tests rigged?

 

 

 

 

[SageRider]

 

Does he or is he just plain tired of fighting the accusations? For a person that has been tested as much as he has, why is there not a single positive result? If he has the "magic potion", why aren't all the athletes using his way to pass?

 

Yep, I agree he knew he was going to lose, but not on scientific evidence or conclusive proof, but he was going to lose on the testimony of "witnesses", and everyone knows how good witnesses are :rolleyes:

 

Amen!

Who needs objective proof anymore...

[Kathy R]

 

Does he or is he just plain tired of fighting the accusations? For a person that has been tested as much as he has, why is there not a single positive result? If he has the "magic potion", why aren't all the athletes using his way to pass?

 

Yep, I agree he knew he was going to lose, but not on scientific evidence or conclusive proof, but he was going to lose on the testimony of "witnesses", and everyone knows how good witnesses are :rolleyes:

 

Amen!

Who needs objective proof anymore...

 

After everything I've yet read and heard on this subject....

+2

[tallman]

Actually, in 1999 (?) relying on memory

he did test +

but got a reprieve/do over on a

technicality(?)

 

don't have time to googley

 

but, in general, yes seems a flawed system is being indicted and

if it is true he used PED's

I feel cheated

shame is just his overcoming the personal health issues to compete made him a champion...

[donbmw]

Don't know what kind of test he has had to do (blood or Pee test). But from a personal side of this. I work where I amy tested randomly. One of the times came back because one of the sample bottles did not match in color as the other bottle. They bad it as if I had done something to the sample and need to have someone watch on the retest. The testing company would not admit to them being the one who screwed up.

 

Don

[barryd]

I find it kind of puzzling that the USADA has this group of people who will supply negative testimony, when many of the same people have provided testimony to U.S. Justice Dept, and the conclusion of that was that there was insufficient evidence.

Of course USADA doesn't require legal evidence, just "evidence", apparently.

 

As to whether he did or didn't, he has passed many tests, but there have been some irregularities which couldn't be used against him (previously, at least). These are well known.

 

In the years that USADA would like to erase from the record books, several of the runners-up have since had PED suspensions or are now in lifetime suspensions. So either Lance was competing clean against rivals who weren't, or he was completing on an "equal" footing with other PED users.

He passed the tests that were administered at the time of the compitition and IMHO, those results should stand.

 

 

[Paul Mihalka]

"He passed the tests that were administered at the time of the compitition and IMHO, those results should stand"

If not, what are the tests good for? Looks like they are good enough to condemn somebody, but not good enough to clear somebody.

 

[beemerman2k]

Say what you will about his doping and bicycling, but his music was second to none. "Hello Dolly" is a classic!

 

 

 

 

Gee, I picked a bad day to quit doping!

[chrisd]

All her passed drug tests cleared Marion Jones. She never failed a drug test either.

[Natche]

Say what you will about his doping and bicycling, but his music was second to none. "Hello Dolly" is a classic!

 

That's funny! I actually laughed out loud - at my desk - at that one. Hope no one heard me.

[DiggerJim]

Say what you will about his doping and bicycling, but his music was second to none. "Hello Dolly" is a classic!

I have "It's a Wonderful World" on my moto playlist as I ride

[beemerman2k]

Exactly! See how talented he was?

 

And we all know that jazz musicians never doped

[decorbin]

Anybody remember the "fake" press release someone published when he was going for one of his last wins?

 

It looked very official and reported that the French authorities searched his hotel room and found a number of banned substances....deodorate and toothpaste among them!

 

 

[mickeym3]

What amazes me is that over the course of the toughest race in the world spread over three weeks that people doubt anyone can actually gain a spread of 5 minutes over the course of ~90 hours in the saddle. When someone's performance seems amazing there are always those who would say impossible....it's a shame people can't just appreciate greatness.

[chrisd]

Actually, it's more likely the seven straight Tour de France titles that lead people to suspect that there's something more than greatness going on.

[chrisd]

This is some of the evidence against Armstrong. Doesn't seem like the workings of a kangaroo court.

 

NY Times article.

[subvet]

Say what you will about his doping and bicycling, but his music was second to none. "Hello Dolly" is a classic!

 

 

 

 

Gee, I picked a bad day to quit doping!

 

 

but it ruined his voice.

 

 

but seriously, I dont really follow cycling but the whole matter seems like a witch hunt to me. It's known that to to compete at the highest levels in that sport, you have to be doing something just to stay in the game. At worst, Armstrong beat a bunch of other cheaters at their own game.

[RT66Rider]

but seriously, I dont really follow cycling but the whole matter seems like a witch hunt to me. It's known that to to compete at the highest levels in that sport, you have to be doing something just to stay in the game. At worst, Armstrong beat a bunch of other cheaters at their own game.

That makes him the worst of the cheaters. But still Guilty.

How is that a Witch Hunt ?

[Patallaire]

SO, does anyone believe that they could keep up with any of those guys even given the drugs and blood transfusions they enjoyed. Probably not, it is the "If everyones doing it I have to excuse." The reality is that is ~ no doubt a true statemnet, as big of a disappointment as it was to learn. Everyone doing drugs etc. somewhat leveled the playing field. As an example, when everyone who is playing golf, switched to the large head clubs, the first adapters had the advantage, once it became common, the playing field was leveled. It was the same in cycling, when the aero bars first came out, the early adapters were setting time trial records, after they became widely accepted, not to many. WHile that comparison only compares legal activity, the outcomes were the same, it stepped everyone up a notch. IT was all good, until it was not good, in Lance Armstrongs case.

Lance Armstrong deceived many many people along the way. There is some argument to be made that he was also a target, deservidly so, and the punishment is confusing. Banning him going forward is understandable, stripping his titles, confusing. Most of the second and third place finishers were also suspended along the way for illegal drugs or blood transfusions. They also stated they don't want a tainted unearned title. Everyone knows who was first up the mountains and in the time trials. I assure you, no amount of drugs or blood transfusions would ever get me up those mountains at the front of the pack. They were superior athletes, just enhanced.

I am, as most everyone is, disappointed that a hero has fallen, I think that the report was extremely damning, and I also believe that Lance Armstrong should do more than stonewall. I also believe that he is a tremendous athlete, was a great spokesman for LiveStrong, and could turn this around to his advantage, with a proper apology, at some point in his lifetime. Until that time, he is tainted.

[DiggerJim]

I think that the report was extremely damning

I read a bunch of it but have not gotten thru all 1000 pages. What I saw (including in the appendixes) was a lot of hearsay & testimony but I didn't see the smoking gun - emails looked pretty benign (except perhaps they proved the parties were in communication at the time?), no positive test results were included....lots of supposition. One has to believe 2 things to believe the conclusion - 1) testing is not reliable even with thousands taken over a decade, except 2) when they show doping for the accusers/witnesses. It strains credulity that tests are bad except when they're good and the only one who never tested positive in the group presented was the accused. If he was so good at manipulating the tests then they prove nothing and his team mates (and now accusers) shouldn't have tested positive either. What happened there? McCarthy, Salem, Council of Castille, Tribunal of Toledo, etc, etc. all used similar unsubstantiated (except thru testimony of tainted witnesses) to convict people. Science and reason and the law was given short-shrift. Seems like deja vu all over again.

[chrisd]

The McCarthy hearings, the Salem Witch Trials and the Spanish Inquisition. That's a unique variation of Godwin's Law.

[g_frey]

After 63 years I believe that most $$$$ teams cheat. Anytime the money comes in the cheating starts. I remember living in a dorm with football athletes from the U of MO team and listening to the "priviledges" and perks certain members of the team enjoyed. It was also interesting to note that some team members never seemed to study or attend class but graduated 4 years later??? Oh well business as usual.

[DiggerJim]

That's a unique variation of Godwin's Law.

Nope. By definition it doesn't apply to totalitarian regimes or ideologies. Seems like the definition of USADA to me