[Closed] Lance, latest have we done it yet.

some Major Misunderstanding moments are great, like alzheimer sufferers-- always making new friends

No they are repentant cheats which is better than an unrepenatant cheat or a cheat who still denies it but not better than someone who has never cheated.

You are right ^^^^^^^

That is still a straw man you are posting

I cannot do a straw man when I explain my own view I can only do it if I misrepresent someone else.

I speak nonsense-- its intoxicating
Same here.Though I think I am more of an irritant than an intoxicant.

Obvious troll is obvious
Enjoy your scribbling

Enjoy your scribbling

Same to you sir.

Shall we carry on with the Vuelta thread? Which doper will win today?

Which doper will win today?

Swift? 😀

I've been watching this thread with "interest" probably not the right word but it will do. This is my take:
Who on this forum can put their hand up and honestly say they did not enjoy watching Lance race?
I did.
He has helped raise the profile of cycling to another level, how many people in the street could name a TDF winner, or in some cases even know what the TDF is before he came onto the scene.
He probably is arrogant, pompous and full of himself-again a lot of top class atheletes are, thats how they get their will to win.
I did get to meet him in 2005, chance encounter, he was pleasant and signed his auotograph (new i should have put it on ebay a couple of years ago) but he had an aura about him, determination, intensity, a winner.
At the time he was an inspiration.
But know i love Brad and its all ok again.

alex222 - Member

Which doper will win today?

Swift?

Just checked www.dopeology.org and he is not there so he must be clean, also he is British.

[b]bigdawg[/b] - Member
...looks as though the USADA evidence could be released (made public) within the next week.

I thought there was only one case, Bruyneel. The other 3 didn't even respond so are already done.

Dr Celaya opted for arbitration.
Coach Marti was initially banned for life after not responding to USADA but subsequently asked for the case to be taked to arbitration. USADA agreed.

So, three arbitarion cases outstanding.

glitchety bump

glitchety bump bump

glitchety bump bump bump

thats a lot of bumping!

USADA said they would release the evidence at the same time as sending it to UCI and other associated organisations, which I believe is being done wednesday.

I can understand them making it public at teh same time LA & co effectively get their hands on it so they, or their attorneys, don't have a chance to 'have a word' with the witnesses as has been done with previous witnesses.

Also with senators and other members of the higher US government breathing down their neck and looking into their funding it may be better to get it into the open before they're stopped from doing so.

thats a lot of bumping!

Innit.

So..... UCI won't appeal USADA's ruling on Armstrong.
(unless they want to)

And no cover up either, says Pat...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19527032

More detail [url= http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5igBSV8jfWNh2nqBN9v5tKz7Zx2pQ?docId=e6731d1ffd8c49ba8710839cb8cd5499 ]here[/url] including the idea of a UCI "[i]amnesty for riders and officials to confess to doping offenses[/i]" and the practicalities of removing LA from the TdF results.

I get the impression that McQuaid really, really wants to see the USADA evidence and is trying to up the ante.

First one is just the UCI syaing they want to see the evidence - IIRC they have to ratify the decision though - they cannot challenge the evidence as LA has not. Imagine the UCI taking it To CAS when LA did not even defend it.
probably reluctant to give it to them as they are named in it and their are rumours of collusion with LA

Asked if he believes Hamilton's evidence is now tainted, McQuaid added: "I think so... when people time the arrival of books to meet certain situations I question what their real motivations are. Is it to make money?"

For sure Hamilton is publishing now to make money but that does not mean he is lying - for example if LA admitted the offences would he loose money as a result? The motive applies to both but proves nothing.

Bump. How we doing? Lance was denied entry to a race the other day. Got to be some more fallout from hamiltons book?

Yep, banned from a race he hadn't entered:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-09-07/sports/chi-armstrong-banned-from-chicago-marathon-20120907_1_world-triathlon-corporation-usada-usatf

He is doing the 'SuperFrog' Triathlon (as it's not affiliated to 'USA Tri').
[b]@Hora[/b] - there were places left at the weekend if you fancy a once-in-a-lifetime chance to race against him.

Tomorrow we will be having the last club 10 of wibbly wobbly wheelers, Lance Armstrong has been baned from riding.

This is not because of any drugs offence he may have commited, we just don't like flashy types with all there fancy gear and midcalf socks.

I have a team replica madonne but it cost me £650 second hand so I feel that I must take drugs at least on a recreational level to feel like I am doing the machine some justice.

Tomorrow we will be having the last club 10 of wibbly wobbly wheelers, Lance Armstrong has been baned from riding

He has been told, I'm am lead to believe that he reads the leading bike forum so he'll now know. Did try the Daily Mail but told me that they would not write anything about lycra louts who go about steeling old ladies hand bags after running them down.

USADA said they would release the evidence at the same time as sending it to UCI and other associated organisations, which [b]I believe is being done [u]wednesday[/b][/u].

they will release but noit sure when

It will change very liitle as people will say his mates are lying and only LA tells the truth etc.

It will change very liitle as people will say his mates are lying and only LA tells the truth etc.

[b][i]If[/i][/b], as [u]rumoured[/u] though, USADA's evidence contains more than just testimony, some of his more rational supporters will surely change their minds.

Personally I don't think any evidence will be released today or until the last three arbitration cases are resolved as thay are all obviously interconnected. But some say it will come out today.

Wait and see....

Not sure tbh

It is nice to have heros
It is nice to have superheros and LA was/is surely one of them for what he did on the bike and off the bike.
It is hard to give that up when he still denies - that is not a dig we all once thought LA was clean [and Bertie].
I could break the swear filter saying what i really thought about them now especially the denials/hype

Unless LA confesses or the biological passport is conclusive and easy to understand then some will still believe.
I just cannot see him confessing now tbh and therefore ever

Bit of a thread bump but this is worth a read:
http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/athletes/lance-armstrong/Why-Lance-Armstrong-Will-Never-Give-In.html?page=1

and much more entertainingly, Paul Kimmage is being taken to court by the UCI for defamation:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage-receives-uci-subpoena

I've come to my own conclusion on Armstrong. He's a scum bag. Not so much for cheating as a cyclist (we all know pro cycling is a joke). More for cheating on the trust and faith cancer patients and their families have placed in him. He's really let these people down.

Add to that, If I was Trek, Giro, Nike etc I'd be distancing myself from LA pretty sharpish. My Livestrong trainers are in the bin.

I'm curious to see what happens to Armstrong and his attempts to not open up and tell the truth. It would eat away at most people. He seems like such an accomplished liar, maybe he'll take it to his grave.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/athletes/lance-armstrong/Why-Lance-Armstrong-Will-Never-Give-In.html?page=1

STOP POSTING SITES THAT NEED TO SELL/ILLICIT RESPONSE TO KEEP UP CIRCULATION AND ONLY POST OFFICIAL NEWS NOT CONJECTURE WITH AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE?

Anyone else reading the Hamilton / Coyle book?

I'm finding it a very compelling narrative...

.. OK, most of the stuff has been "out there" before, but the book presents it all in a logical timeframe - gives all the revelations context etc

[quote=chipsngravy ] My Livestrong trainers are in the bin.
He'll be gutted 🙄

STOP POSTING SITES THAT NEED TO SELL/ILLICIT RESPONSE TO KEEP UP CIRCULATION

AND ONLY POST OFFICIAL NEWS NOT CONJECTURE WITH AN ULTERIOR MOTIVE?

They are clear it is all a conjecture because it is based on LA or others doing things they have not done. it seems fairly balanced tbh abou what this would mean/result in.

it is clear they think LA has nothing to gain from "admitting" it or changing his story and they dont comment directly on whether he is guilty or not.

My issue is quoting/linking sites that are essentially the writers opinions. A bit like using wiki in a dissertation creditted as a "source".

Just read the Tyler Hamilton book this week. A good read, and puts a lot of bits and bobs of information into a proper story, explains the system of how systematic doping has been working.

Hora: I posted it cos it's an interesting read. Whether you want to believe it or not is up to you. At no point did I say that it was gospel truth. Like most stuff on LA, it's a mix of opinion, fact & rumour.

My issue is quoting/linking sites that are essentially the writers opinions

My issue is quoting/linking sites that are essentially the writers opinions.

Everything else is an opinion on this fact.

A bit like using wiki in a dissertation creditted as a "source".

In June 2012, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) charged Armstrong with having used illicit performance enhancing drugs,[7] based on blood samples from 2009 and 2010 as well as the testimony of other cyclists. Armstrong challenged this in federal court, claiming that his right to due process was violated and that USADA did not have jurisdiction over the case; Armstrong's lawsuit was dismissed on August 20, 2012.[8] On August 23, 2012, Armstrong announced that he would not be fighting the USADA's charges.[9][10][11] Later that day the USADA confirmed in a statement[12] that Armstrong was banned for life and would be disqualified from any and all competitive results obtained on and subsequent to August 1, 1998, including forfeiture of any medals, titles, winnings, finishes, points and prizes. Armstrong has questioned whether USADA has the legal authority to enforce its ruling. The UCI have not yet enforced any ban, but have requested that USADA provide a reasoned decision explaining the action taken

Those who've read the book, did you get the US version or the edited UK version? Wondering what they had to change.

I suppose when your 'superman' image is built on cheating, its a bit more difficult to admit, the 'domestiques feel that they can relieve themselves of the burden, LA reminds me of some cult leader-- just keep shouting louder

The LA saga is still giving, Sunday times journalist Paul Kimmage is being sued by the UCI for his comments about UCI overlords Verbruggen and McQuaid. Found this from Ashenden on the NYvelocity site

"Dear Paul,

I was shocked to read today that you have received a subpoena related to defamation proceedings brought against you by Pat McQuaid, Hein Verbruggen and the UCI itself.

It is not clear to me what the basis for the proceeding is; to the best of my knowledge it has not been publicly disclosed. Regardless, I find it deeply disturbing that, amidst the current turmoil surrounding cycling, you have been singled out.

I do not believe that court is the appropriate remedy in the current circumstances. For example, I don’t expect that WADA will sue him after Pat McQuaid claimed that WADA had launched a ‘15-year long political campaign against cycling’. Although his comments certainly do not reflect well on WADA’s integrity, to their credit WADA have shown admirable restraint.

I sincerely hope that after a period of reflection the UCI will adopt a similar attitude regarding your comments too.

Nonetheless, today I have had a change of heart. Earlier this year one of the UCI’s Passport cases that I had worked on as a member of their expert panel had to be dropped after we had received the rider’s explanation and us group of three experts could not reach a consensus decision. At the time, I chose not to invoice the UCI for the hours and hours which I had spent working on that case since October 2011. However, your subpoena gave me pause to reflect, and I have decided to invoice the UCI a token amount of 260 Euro (two hours at our expert rate) for my contributions on that case. I have simultaneously deposited that amount into your defense fund.

I sincerely hope you are not required to pay a fine. However in case you are, I hope it is some solace that to some degree you would be merely handing the UCI’s own money back to them.

Please keep up your good work – The Times They Are a-Changin’.

Best wishes,

Mike Ashenden"

Ha! I like Ashenden but he does seem to have a big gob! Read the entire Hamilton book yesterday-i found it compelling. What an utterly ridiculous world pro cycling is.

Hamilton's book is indeed compelling.

It's just too joined up to be made up

glitchy

hello?

Reading the Hamilton book at the moment and finding it very interesting, it does fill in some of the blanks about how things are done and why.

[i]Anyone else reading the Hamilton / Coyle book?

[/i]

Would have been reading it now. Had it on pre-order, then discovered that the UK version has been re-written, so will wait until I can get my mitts on a US version.

I hope to be able to handle the way its written, given the abuse of our language the Americans seem so intent upon.

EDIT:
Oh !, just read this earlier post:
[i]Those who've read the book, did you get the US version or the edited UK version? Wondering what they had to change. [/i]

You can find me now standing in the corner, wearing the pointy hat with a 'D' written on it.
🙁

it does fill in some of the blanks about how things are done and why.

Indeed - and including explaining some of the "failures", as well as the succeses - the LA not enterring / pulling out of a race / TH bombing, after a previous demolition job win... (but unseen to the public / race world, also after a blood "donation")

ETA - I'm reading the UK version. TBH, not sure where the editiorial differences are... I believe it was down to the more stringent libel laws, so presumably some of the content referring to named individuals has been removed or anonymised...?

[i]down to the more stringent libel laws[/i]

Thats what I read, somewhere.

the differences between the two books are listed here:

http://www.veloveritas.co.uk/2012/09/18/the-differences-between-the-us-and-uk-versions-of-the-secret-race/

Really nothing that we already didnt know tbh and not enough to stop buying the UK book.

Not sure if this has been posted but Kimmage seems to be getting quite a bit of support:
[url= http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/lawsuit-against-journalist-turns-into-referendum-on-uci ]http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/lawsuit-against-journalist-turns-into-referendum-on-uci[/url]

[url= http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/usada-says-send-armstrong-file-uci-week-092624195--spt.html ]link[/url]

USADA file to UCI this week...?

Wonder if they'll publish at the same time?

Millar did a good interview yesterday after the World Road Race Championships.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/9559856/David-Millar-says-Lance-Armstrong-affair-the-best-thing-to-happen-to-modern-day-cycling.html

I've read the Hamilton/Coyle book (via Amazon Kindle), it's very good. Certainly all the cross-references add up.

Listened to the Hamilton audio book and kept the file on the pc its very good. Being rather new to it all I find the lengths they went to cheat amazing

In an interview the french sports minister has said that she thinks LA is guilty and there is no reason why the UCI should not agree with the usada .

Reading the Hamilton book now - so far it's credible enough to hush the cycnic in me.

In L'Equipe today Travis Tygart revealed that they never received the testimonies from the FBI.

That was the first time I'd heard that.

I guess they wanted the witnesses to think that they had access to it or at some point would be given it. Very interesting that they had to start again from scratch.

The puerto trial starts Jan next year, i presume that Hamilton and others will feature. Perhaps with a bit of luck Fuentes will name a few names and not just the cyclists.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/lancearmstrong/9562771/Travis-Tygart-received-three-death-threats-during-Lance-Armstrong-investigation.html ]Death Threats ? - WTF...![/url]

[url= http://www.sport24.co.za/OtherSport/USADA-boss-got-death-threats-20120924 ]and here[/url]

Tygart also says that LA's reputation will look 30x worse than it does with the revelations to date - FLIPPIN HECK 😯

ETA

Tygart said, adding that [b]he has valid documents from French Anti-Doping authorities that confirm Armstrong's six positive doping tests for the banned blood booster EPO on the 1999 Tour[/b], revealed by L'Equipe shortly after the 2005 Tour.

"Yes, absolutely. It's major proof, confirmation of his guilt," Tygart said. "But it's the ensemble of the proof and the testimonies that we have gathered which constitutes the proof of his cheating."

Shit - does that mean they've re-tested the 1999 samples...? The Ashenden interview weights the 1999 results as indicative, part of testing research... Tygarts statement sounds a lot more unequivocal

And LA may be called to testify under oath for the Bruyneel hearing

it was probably Hora.

I don't think the info supplied to UCI will be public for a while (after the bruyneel hearing).
But it will be interesting if UCI suddenly shuts up after getting it.

MrSmith, you made me laugh there 🙂

Looks like LA will be going to prison....

[url= http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12926/Armstrong-could-be-called-to-testify-under-oath-in-Bruyneel-hearing.aspx ]Tygart has used the "perjury" word...[/url]

it's all going to get much much worse for someone.

Yep, lots of reputations being set up for a fall be it USADA, UCI, LA, whoever.

Bruyneel and the others under extreme pressure not to proceed with a hearing...???

It seems to me like Tygart has got LA royally screwed with the perjury position... If LA is called to give evidence under oath her either has to :-

- Lie under oath, in order to persist with his previous line
- Admit that he previously lied under oath, and face the wrap for that
- Show that everyone else has been lying under oath, and that the lab data is wrong

I think the plan was that bruynell & the docs opted for arbitration, LA has a word with his friends in congress (again) the whole case gets closed and everyone walks away back to their jobs.. Only it didn't this time (unlike the novitsky case) and now theyve all actually got to face their accusers. Notice they havent been quick to cmment anywhere, and after hamilton's book they must be crapping themselves.

I was initially under the impression the LA papers would become public the same time they are released to the UCI but I can't find the damn link to that now...

I've only just noticed that the UCI are only suing Kimmage for 8,000 Swiss francs!
I think it's funny that they value their reputations at only that.

I've only just noticed that the UCI are only suing Kimmage for 8,000 Swiss francs!

That does seem a small amount, I wonder if that's somehow tied into the process of Swiss law, and the openness of evidence and proceedings.

I've only just noticed that the UCI are only suing Kimmage for 8,000 Swiss francs!
I think it's funny that they value their reputations at only that.

You regularly see law suits for 1p or similar, everything isn't always about money

8000 swiss francs EACH plus an insistence that he pays out for full page ads in a number of European newspapers (probably a lot more than 8000 francs?). And of course if costs get awarded against him, it gets much bigger.

I think they've underestimated people's feelings here, as evidenced by the success so far of the Kimmage defence fund:

http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/09/paul-kimmage-defense-fund/

USADA announces release date for the report
By the 15 october

UCI president Pat McQuaid admitted it was likely to be a case of rubberstamping Usada's decision though.
"Unless the Usada's decision and case file give serious reasons to do otherwise, the UCI has no intention to appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport or not to recognise the Usada's sanctions on Lance Armstrong," he said.
"The UCI assumes that the decision and file will also detail the sanction the USADA may wish to enforce upon the riders who have provided testimony in exchange for reduced sanctions."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19686432

Oct 15th: http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/09/news/usada-points-to-october-15-as-new-goal-to-submit-armstrong-case-file_240019

Oct 15th USADA hand the file over the UCI.
Oct 16th UCI selectively leak evidence to friendly journos
Oct 17th USADA respond by putting it all in the public domain
Oct 18th LA goes on Oprah and says he's so very, very sorry

Or.....

Oct 14th: USADA announce they are delaying providing the evidence to UCI until the three remaining cases are concluded.

Could the UCI stop doping? No. Could the UCI have done a huge amount more to reduce it? Yes, definitely and if some of the allegations turn out to be true, they actually helped perpetuate it.

Millar's accepted his own blame. What he's said is that many/most people are fallible and many they will succumb to doping if the culture around them says it's the norm and necessary to win.

So your saying the culture of cheats could have been stopped by the UCI.

Sometimes you really do say some silly and ill conceived stuff like an upset ranting teenager.
i dont know why as you are actually quite bright.

Not to mention that DM never said "the culture of cheats could have been stopped by the UCI"