You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Mr Armstrong has been formally charged with doping by the us anti doping agency. They must have some good evidence or is it a witch hunt ... discuss
Who gives a shit anymore? Are they going to award all his TDFs to the second place rider? Are they going to be witch hunted as well?
You have to go a long way further than 2nd place......
Been done to death you either hate him or you don't like turning your bike upside down
Thats my point exactly! Where does the medal stop? We all know the top ten are doping so who gives a shit.
i don't really care anymore, not that i see it as a witch hunt though just that there's never going to be a satisfactory resolution. The two outcomes:
1. Armstrong is convicted and stripped of all titles. He still goes to the grave shouting about it being a witch hunt and protesting his innocence.
2. Armstrong is acquitted. There's a nasty taste in everyone's mouth as the mud as been slung and the trial never got far enough for a conviction as he got some high powered friends involved.
You forgot to add 3. A brave (but sometimes abrasive) mans achievements are tarnished.
Didn't we do this several weeks ago?
I know.
What? He didn't go to the moon? ?
I would have thought that the Armstrong defence is quite obvious, there are two options.
1) Ignore the authority, bang on about whether the prosecution have any experience of riding bikes or riding the Tour. If they don't label their comments "piffle" and simply ignore it, demanding evidence of their experience. If they bang on about this long enough the prosecution team is likely to give up out of boredom or someone will close the case.
2) If found guilty, simply claim that he was doing it to highlight the problems and that it was all a bit of a joke from the start.
It might convince someone, if only himself. 😀
He likes guns.
He definitely has access to a time machine.
JFK didn't shoot himself, now did he?
Just saying like....
Elvis.
From the grassy knoll.
Obvious when you think about it.
If he's [i]found[/i] guilty, 50% of people will think it's a set up; if he's aquitted, 50% of people will think it's a cop out. Win/win? Lose/lose?? Accusations, new evidence, conspiracy theories, excuses... they'll be around for the rest of his life now.
Has it been specifically timed to coincide with the start of the tour?
I've always been an Armstrong fan, his achievements with or without the prior cancer were amazing. I'd be disappointed if he is subsequently found to have doped, but they'd still be amazing achievements. You could dope me to the stars and I'd never be able to do what he did. And if true it's not as if everyone else was clean and he's stolen the titles as a result.
That said, equally I'm not too young to be cynical enough to think that there's no smoke without fire.
I'm just disappointed that this seems to have been timed politically to coincide with when there will be a lot of interest in road racing. Maybe to bring attention to the fact it's prtobably still going on; but to me I don't think it adds to the expectation that he will get a fair hearing free of media pronouncements before the case is even heard.
Armstrong probably doped as a) there is a lot of circumstantial evidence, and b) it's hard to believe he was riding clean when most of his close rivals and teammates were on the sauce. I think he's not helped himself by having a 'difficult' personality.
I honestly don't see what will be gained by stripping him of any of his wins if there's enough evidence to convict - presenting the yellow jersey to Schleck for the 2010 TdF was a bad joke, as it didn't remove Contador's presence (and the tactical decisions that resulted) from the race. I would leave the results as they are but star them.
3. A brave (but sometimes abrasive) mans achievements are tarnished.
They're already pretty tarnished. FWIW I'm not honestly sure what dragging Armstrong (and undoubtedly former team-mates incl. Hincapie/Zabriskie etc. etc.) through the mud will achieve, but banning that odious man Bruyneel from the sport would seem a worthwhile outcome if the allegations are true.
Andy
They all dope. Whether they get caught depends on how good their doctor is.
what samurai said...hopefully sai dint he past tense though
you either hate him or you don't
I think his achievements were amazing and he is without doubt the best cyclist of the recent era by some distance
he is still IMHO a doper - no way did could he/anyone beat those athletes who were doped whilst clean no one is that good.
The tour was better when they had no team radios, no dope tests, 300km+ stages, there wasn't a lot of tarmac on the road and cheating was wacky-races moves like jumping on a train or thin tow-lines attached to cars, held in the rider's teeth. Drinking copious amounts of wine and brandy was normal and 'tashes weren't seen to be an aerodynamic disadvantage. Good single-speeders did ok in the mountains too.
It's all got a bit sporty since then. Bring back the Real Tour! Like the TDR but in France. That would be awesome.
edit, Oh yes. Armstrong. Who cares. He wasn't as cool as big Jan and Vino used his dope for much more exciting moves - that champs elysees break was utterly brilliant.
Volvo for sale
What gets me is Armstrong always says "i never failed a dope test" which is very different to "i never doped".
Didn't we do this several weeks ago?
Haven't we done this every few weeks for about the last 10 years?
It's the start of the Tour. It's [i]de rigeur[/i] for there to be a doping story in the press about now. Usually on the Thursday preceding the Tour start.
They were all doing it and he never got caught so why the witch hunt? It doesn't really matter, he was the best of the doped rider era - end of.
never failed a dope test, thats what Bjarne always said as well.
It's the start of the Tour. It's de rigeur for there to be a doping story in the press about now. Usually on the Thursday preceding the Tour start.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/18633958 ]You mean like this one? [/url]
No proof, no facts, just rumour. Well **** off then. Newspapers and media ruin peoples lives -.-
I thought the USDA statement included allegations that blood samples taken were consistent with doping, seems a bit stronger than the usual hearsay that gets levelled against him.
"They argue their client is unable to mount a legitimate defence until he is able to see the evidence against him, though USADA has said it is withholding witness identities to protect them from intimidation"
And two annoucement to co inside with the tour getting under way. So no agenda then.
The evidence so far point at test samples from the 2009 tour where is
blood levels peaked on test days, odd yes. But not unheard off.
But those levels do not exceed the limits, so no rule broken. No phyiscal evidence found, so no rule broken.
If he is guilty do him proper don't piss about. If they have got something really good on him why hold back?
Hi all as a former road rider this problem has been a round for a long time,Drugs in cycling has aways been about its just that we are getting better at catchin these cheats now. There have been times that i was tested and some at random at certain races in the mid 80s and im sure some of the samples never reach the labs. Then the use of masking agents came a long then the rumours that the US team were doing blood doping at the LA olympics. We just have to look at some of the names who have had 2 year dopeing bans and are now back in the peloton.Have a look at former Irish pro Paul Kimmage now working for the sunday times interviewing Armstrong at the TOC on youtube or Greg Lemond with Armstrong i think at the TOC as well.And see what you think
I'm annoyed about the timing of it, if Usada want any credibility in the way they go about investigating such charges then theyd be better off making their decisions public when they've reached the conclusion to prosecute, not when the tour is about to start......be the bigger party and leave politics out of it.
Ostrichtrackworld....
Ostrichtrackworld....
😀
Just to absolutely clear here, I've never failed a dope test.
Lance is a Hero, He's single handedly beaten France 7 times and is it's tour race most winningest cycle ride champion in history, he beat cancer 7 times which really shows some balls, he's going to beat the charlatans who think he doped, the only dope he took is 'Lance' because he's stronger than any drug.
god bless America.
...but its quite clear he hasn't got a sense of humour.
I'm going to wait and see what happens then make up my mind about what I think of Armstrong, strange how they keep going after him though so no smoke without fire. He's pi$$ed some people off at the top for the us anti doping agency to go after an American sporting hero. Are the mighty really that mighty 😕
I'm going to wait and see what happens then make up my mind about what I think of Armstrong, strange how they keep going after him though so no smoke without fire.
there's plenty of info in books and on the web that would go some way to explain why a lot of people in cycling are 100% convinced he doped. everything from test results being hushed up, intimidation of riders/journalists/people in authority, and the known dopers/suppliers/doctors he associated with etc.
not to mention the shady business/legal/funding/donation goings on that are part of the LA self promotion machine.
if you follow the saga right from the beginning (inc the lance/landis/LeMond story + Ashenden) the evidence is compelling.
the man in the street just see's a cancer beating hero, those in the know see something else.
From the last discussion, here's USADA's statement:
USADA only initiates matters supported by the evidence. We do not choose whether or not we do our job based on outside pressures, intimidation or for any reason other than the evidence. Our duty on behalf of clean athletes and those that value the integrity of sport is to fairly and thoroughly evaluate all the evidence available and when there is credible evidence of doping, take action under the established rules.
As in every USADA case, all named individuals are presumed innocent of the allegations unless and until proven otherwise through the established legal process. If a hearing is ultimately held then it is an independent panel of arbitrators, not USADA that determines whether or not these individuals have committed anti-doping rule violations as alleged.
Very straightforward. No agenda, no conspiracy, just due process for a case of alleged doping. USADA are doing their job and we just have to wait for the outcome.
Didnt the FBI do "their job" before them ?
Or does the agency rely on justifyung theid existance to the funding bodies and a "high profile case" shows they are " worth it"???
Hora, here's something for you to clutch at.
[img] 
[/img]
This is perhaps the most convincing reason why it is important to go after Armstrong...
[img] 
[/img]
Thats ok. There will be another agency lining up with tainted smackhead witnesses and blood produced from unsecure and unknown storage.
I think the current acussers are deluded themselves. Like Lance said. He gave numerous samples on demandat anytime and never failed. Sooo....jog on
[i]and never failed.[/i]
Hmmm... Apart from the back dated cortisone sample, the alleged Tour de Suisse sample, the samples tested by Michael Ashenden.
Might be related to the money he 'donated' to the UCI, might not.
Every time this comes up, I think about the effect it might have on Livestrong funding. Armstrong moves amongst very powerful and rich people and Livestrong benefits enormously from this in funding and profile. If he was found guilty of doping, the effect on cash flow for labs in the US and elsewhere, searching for cancer suppression and cure, has got to suffer badly.
The effects of this research ultimately trickle through to cancer treatment centres for you and yours here in the UK. For that reason alone, whether he doped or not, I hope this case goes the way of the others and fails to convict him.
[i]the effect on cash flow for labs in the US and elsewhere[/i]
You might want to spend a few minutes looking into the activities of Livestrong as a charity, the amount of money raised, the amount of money spent, the amount of money donated to helping folk and so on.
[i]If Lance Armstrong went to jail and Livestrong went away, that would be a huge setback in our war against cancer, right? Not exactly, because the famous nonprofit donates almost nothing to scientific research. Bill Gifford looks at where the money goes and finds a mix of fine ideas, millions of dollars aimed at “awareness,” and a few very blurry lines.[/i]
From http://fraudbytes.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/lance-armstrong-investigation.html
One might say that it's starting to get a bit farcical now
Lance Armstrong ?@lancearmstrongWow. @usantidoping can pick em. Here's ([url= http://tinyurl.com/cgxmzwq ]http://tinyurl.com/cgxmzwq[/url] ) 1 of 3 Review Board members studying my case. ?
😀
Didnt the FBI do "their job" before them ?
proof that you know nothing about the case against or for LA.
proof that you you are not aware of fiscal reasons not competative reasons of the previous investigation (and as a side note why that was suddenly dropped)
proof that you are not aware of the wish for LA to take a 'legal' angle and have his day in court where his legal team and $$$$'s can come into play instead of the USADA panel ratified by the cycling and olympic authorities (of which he is/was willing subject to their laws)
isn't there a second hand car thread where you can share your insights?
hora - I think it's clear you think Lance is clean. But can you at least PRETEND not to believe the "never failed a test" line? Everyone knows he failed tests, you just have to work out whether you believe the excuses or not.
Personally I don't care about him doping in some respects as a lot of riders did it, a lot of riders failed to blow the whistle and are all complicit and that was the era. However he seems like a spectacularly unpleasant man (never met him, could be wrong) and not worthy of the adulation heaped on him considering some of the things he's done.
Every time this comes up, I think about the effect it might have on Livestrong funding.
don't worry Livestrong doesn't have that much to do with front line cancer research. Livestrong will play an important part in his post conviction perception/contrite admission and retribution though 🙄
I'm pretty convinced that he doped, too much of the evidence is too damning....as for the 'never failed a test line' he was positive in the Tour de Suisse but donated rather a lot of money to the UCI around the time and it all got sorted out for him! As for the 'everyone else was doping' line, well not really......lots were, most of the top 10, but there were riders of the time who were pretty consistent ie Cadel Evans and Carlos Sastre whom imo got cheated out of numerous titles.
As people have said though, its all in the past now and you look at the top 10 in a couple of the years and its pretty tough to find a winner if Lance is DQ'ed....just put an asterix next to each of his wins to confirm that they are 'cheated wins' al la Riis' and lets try and move on....If Cadel wins again this year then I for one would be pretty confident that we've had two years of a clean winner-that hasn't happened for a while!
he is without doubt the best [b]Tour De France[/b] cyclist of the recent era by some distance
FTFY
Thats ok. There will be another agency lining up with tainted smackhead witnesses and blood produced from unsecure and unknown storage.I think the current acussers are deluded themselves. Like Lance said. He gave numerous samples on demandat anytime and never failed. Sooo....jog on
I've worked it out, finally! Hora, you're Lance Armstrong aren't you? Sneaky little Texan!
Did he dope before his cancer battle? I beleive he did.
Did he after? A cancer survivor putting god knows what into his blood? No. Plus he past numerous tests posr first TDF win.
A cancer survivor putting god knows what into his blood?
Stuff like EPO, that's used in cancer recovery?
I wasn't aware he's believed to have doped or tested positive before cancer / tour wins tho. True?
Hora, you have nothing.
You have no sensible commentary to offer on this, just a belief. You seem to be either ignorant of many of the accusations leveled at Armstrong or wilfully naive regarding them.
I've been following Armstrong from before his WC win, through his cancer and his return. I thought it was the best story ever, until I started to realise that all was not what it seems.
I suggest you have a look at the Doping forum thread on roadbikereview, or the Clinic thread on the Cycling News forum.
Sorry fella, but he's had you on for many, many years.
A cancer survivor putting god knows what into his blood? No
Are you honestly saying that no cancer survivor takes drugs? Are you? If that is what you are saying you are an idiot
Plus he past numerous tests posr first TDF win.
So what, means nothing. There was no test for synthetic EPO in 1999. there was in 2004. They tested his blood from 1999 in 2004 and it was riddled with synthetic EPO, but you know all this, so I may as well bang my head against a wall.
I suggest you have a look at the Doping forum thread on roadbikereview, or the Clinic thread on the Cycling News forum.
Because, everyone knows that interwebular fora are all full of absolute, better than a proper legal process FACTS don't they?
😐
If that is what you are saying you are an idiot
he is, even if he isn't. ❓
One might say that it's starting to get a bit farcical now
Lance Armstrong ?@lancearmstrong
Wow. @usantidoping can pick em. Here's ( http://tinyurl.com/cgxmzwq ) 1 of 3 Review Board members studying my case. ?
Interesting that LA witters on about due process in his case, but refers to someone who has had no charges bought against him as a 'perv'. probably wants to disable his twitter account if he's sensible
Can I take a guess that you're in the hang, draw and quarter him camp, warton? 😀
I think he doped, and I think he should be bought to justice, mainly because of the man he is.
He's ruined the lives of a lot of people who quite simply didn't deserve it.
the Livestrong foundation is dubious at best. any 'charitable' organisation that pays it's founder 200k to turn up to an event, and spends more on legal fees for it's founder than anything else needs to take a good look at itself. IMO 🙂
EDIT: For context, i was a 'believer', i had the wristband etc, but the more I read around cycling the more I realised that he wasn't the man he made himself out to be.
CFH, I'm not suggesting that internet fora are the fountain of wisdom, but there is a large amount of information contained therein.
Anyone who thinks LA is innocent of all charges has a good deal of explaining to do, so you may as well be as fully informed as you can be.
Or simply stick your head in the sand and pretend that everything will be ok.
[img] 
[/img]
Ignoring the rather obvious homo-eroticism, I see even Armstrong doesn't slam-that-stem...
Yeah, but I'm prepared to let that slide on account of how low he can go.
It's a photo shoot for a magazine, not a wind tunnel test! 🙂
I've just done a bit of googling, and as far as I can tell, Lance never actually slammed a bike. Surely if we're going to persecute him for something, it should be for that.
This knowledge is quite saddening, I'm gonna go somewhere quiet and think about it for a while.
It's because the early Trek OCLV bikes had small headtubes, in all sizes of frame. LA always rode with a few spacers, so I did too... 😥
This sucks.
Hes not been found guilty.
However for amateur sleuths that doesn't compute
[i]Hes not been found guilty.[/i]
You keep clinging to that thought, but the longer you do, the more uncomfortable it will be when you begin to realise that all is not as you thought it was.
You keep clinging to that thought, but the longer you do, the more uncomfortable it will be when you begin to realise that all is not as you thought it was.
Not really.
I'm perfectly content that he hasn't been found guilty and will accept what happens, when it happens. I'm not the one who's losing anything. How can I? I'm being neutral.
Hes not been found guilty.
Not strictly true.
Theres never actually been a case against him. The first case, involving the blood from 1999 was never actually a proper case, and the latest one was mysteriously dropped, even though the investigators were more than happy they had enough to proceed. Their boss told them there was no case to answer, and refused to tell them why.
There's a case against him now, with 'more than 10' witnesses, all of them ex team mates and team staff prepared to testify.
Don simon is hora? That would explain why I've never seen you together...
Are you now anti-neutral? 🙄
Strange. Funny how all the Tour cheats are caught within a couple of years huh.
I was replying specifically to hora, hence my use of his words and my quoting of them to ensure that it was obvious.
..to most.
Now on this subject I have a thought
There was a quote from a multi Tour winner who said " you cannot win the Tour on Evian"
just for the record I have a clean CRB check
Is it because I have never done anything wrong ????
No its because I have never been caught 😆
If you know what I mean 😉
[i]Strange. Funny how all the Tour cheats are caught within a couple of years huh[/i]
Mmmm. Makes you wonder if there was some kind of special relationship between people who didn't get caught and the UCI. Maybe some kind of donation related issue, perhaps.
..to most.
You seem to be misunderstanding something, not being found guilty is not the same as being innocent.
My apologies if you were just having a pop at hora though.
Warton 'more than 10'.
So in a years time he'll have been found guilty then?
What was the official outcome of the fbi investigation?
Oh look a UFO heading towards Area...
Good night haters of achievement.