You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Nice final paragraph from Mr McQurook.
Glitchy Lance bump
Glitchy Tyler bump
Glitchy Floyd bump
"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."
What do you think McQuaid means by this?
It's a dig at the USADA. Still trying to paint them as the bad boys.
So your saying the culture of cheats could have been stopped by the UCI. Do you think you were 'bullied' into cheating/taking drugs Mr Millar? If you were principled you could have QUIT the team that you were in or changed careers.
hora I don't think dave is on STW?
I would like to hear his response to your naive question though.
So do you think what DM has since done to eradicate drugs from cycling (working with WADA sitting on the athletes panel, publiclly speaking out against doping while others brush it under the carpet, starting a 'no drugs' cycling team etc) shows that he lacks "principles" ? Maybe your right and he should have become just another ex cyclist.
yes he is still [un subtly]hinting that they testified [ lied about LA] just to get reduced sentences
I bet McQuaid/UCI are desperate to get the evidence now.
And I reckon USADA want it delayed to make sure that they've crossed absolutely every t/dot every i to avoid some legal challenge on a technicality.
So your saying the culture of cheats could have been stopped by the UCI. Do you think you were 'bullied' into cheating/taking drugs Mr Millar? If you were principled you could have QUIT the team that you were in or changed careers.
I'm not sure what your point is. As loads have said, Millar never said the UCI could have killed off doping but they could have done more. It's arrogant for McQuaid to have said that they couldn't have done more. As time passes Millar impresses me more with his willingness to speak plainly in ways that other cyclists would STILL be scared to. I suppose that's what being one of the leaders of the peloton, having already had your dirty linen aired in public, and approaching the end of your career will do for you.
For me, Millar's actually doing more than that. He's saying "You can win clean and here's the proof" and more to the point "People who tell you that you have to dope to win are lying" - because he's got credibility (not with everyone but with many) it's effective and it means that riders coming up through the junior/neo categories are taking on that message. That's what'll really make the difference IMO.
So Greg LeMond is the only American to win the TDF. I bet lance is pissed at that. 😆
you are right you can win clean these days [ if bertie is not there ]
Junkyard - Member
you are right you can win clean these days [ if bertie is not there ]
Well, there's the question... Either he really is clean and he's been very much mistreated or (as I can't help but believe) he's just doing it in a well managed, minor way (in comparison to the past) on top of being a very good rider anyway. The change in his VAM figures over the years makes it hard for me not to believe he cheated in the past.
has anyone heard any LA comment regards to tyler's book?? Anyone in the past who's even thought about printing a bad word about LA has had the full force ofthe best lawyers in the US thrown at them, but I haven't heard so much as a whisper about what is alleged in the book..
I bet McQuaid/UCI are desperate to get the evidence now.
I am not so sure, Mcqaid's comments are coming across as the last desperate spluttering words of a condemned man. I think they are now more worried about any revelations concerning themselves than about lance.
So, anybody apologised to Greg Lemond then?
[url= http://road.cc/content/news/67319-say-sorry-greg-lemond-facebook ]Facebook page[/url]
The change in his VAM figures over the years makes it hard for me not to believe he cheated in the past.
the conviction for cheating is what convinced me 😉
IIRC hushenden???? wanted to argue his biological passport was consistent with blood doping at CAS but they would not let him and that is part of the reason he left
I seem to recall reading an article on this
Damn shame f you ask me and more of a surprise than LA.
This is the case that just keeps on giving. 🙂
http://road.cc/content/news/67375-usadas-lance-armstrong-report-be-delivered-uci-mid-october
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19749763
So, anybody apologised to Greg Lemond then?
I see, so LA was doped up to the gills but good old Greg won all his Tours clean as a whistle? Really...? Greg is one of those desperate-for-fame people who can't resist sticking his oar in, he's pissed that he won three Tours before most Americans even knew what the Tour was. Armstrong brought the Tour to the consciousness of millions and became a global superstar, Greg is just jealous that he didn't get any attention or money out of it. Their spat with Trek (which Greg lost) didn't help so now he's bitter. Greg will have doped as much as any rider in that era (ie all of them) but hey, let's gloss over that and just snipe at LA from the sidelines.
I think your interpretation of Greg Lemonds history is somewhat at odds with the reality of the situation...
I have to agree that it's likely that Lemond was far from as clean as he claims.
One is tempted, perhaps in an LA fanboy way to ask for evidence to support any accusation regarding Lemond.
Woah there, don't go bashing Lemond!
Why not?....he competed in the era of Carl Lewis, Ben Johnson, Flo-Jo etc who were all doping, of massive eastern european doping etc etc, is it unreasonable to suspect athletes in other sports of this era were using PEDs?
No, its not unreasonable, despite your rather strained attempt to link track and field athletes with cycling. But it would seem only fair to ask for some evidence with which to support your claims.
McQuaid, in the BBC piece "UCI hits out at Usada evidence delay"
"It is at very least unusual that Usada would still be gathering evidence against a person after it has found that person guilty.
Well, Mr McQuaid - perhaps they are gathering evidence about you!
Actually, the consensus among those who have really done a lot of digging into Lemond, his team mates, doctors, etc, is that he was clean.
At the time, I didn't really like his victories because It somehow made the tour feel less exotic, but looking back, they were phenomenal.
The thing is, a lot of us knew there was something fishy with LA quite early on. But with Lemond, there simply isn't a shred of evidence or even a pointer to something suspicious.
The closest people get is to point out that he has the fastest TdF TT record which must point to something except:
1) It's not true - Dave Zabriskie holds that record
2) The TT in question was short (12 miles), downhill, with a tailwind.
3) Other riders have come very close to the record over courses twice as long with small climbs
He's also been pretty outspoken - including very very early on in LA's winning streak:
'When Lance won the prologue to the 1999 Tour I was close to tears, but when I heard he was working with Michele Ferrari I was devastated. In the light of Lance's relationship with Ferrari, I just don't want to comment on this year's Tour. This is not sour grapes. I'm disappointed in Lance, that's all it is'
I don't know - I just can't really see it. Even LA in response to the quote above tried to get people to 'out' Lemond and offered money to anyone willing to say Lemond doped. It didn't work.
I'm all for getting stuck into dopers, but I have a problem with sweeping generalisations like "everyone doped", or "he must have done what everyone else was doing" because we just don't have any evidence to support this.
Fignon (RIP) said that even though he doped, he thought it was possible to win any race clean at that time (this is pre EPO).
Greg will have doped as much as any rider in that era (ie all of them) but hey, let's gloss over that and just snipe at LA from the sidelines.
They did not all dope there are examples of people known to be clean.
To claim they all cheated is an attempt to exonerate LA as he was just doing what everyone was doing. He was not but he was clearly NOT the only cheat but that does mean they were all cheats.
is it unreasonable to suspect athletes in other sports of this era were using PEDs?
In the 60's lots of people took drugs and were into free love so pick anyone from that era and say they were a drug taking free lover- is that unreasonable? Of course it is , because some folk doped it is illogical to then assume anyone/everyone of the era did.
Re lemond it is reasonable to ask for evidence as , to my knowledge there is not even an actual claim he did dope - can you even give a tentative link rather than state he participated in a different sport from some other folk who doped at the same time which, I am sure you can accept,is some way short of evidence. TBH it is just flung mud
Greg LeMond was one of first professional cyclists of note to openly discuss the sport's extensive and troubled relationship with performance-enhancing substances. This stance has brought him into conflict with some of the most famous names in the sport.Lance Armstrong
In July 2001, LeMond criticized Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong for associating with Michele Ferrari, an Italian physician and sports trainer who has at various times admitted to practicing blood doping, advocated controlled use of the banned substance erythropoietin by athletes, and accused by professional cyclists of providing banned substances.[40][41][42][43]Italian appeals court absolved Ferrari of guilt on both the charges of sporting fraud and the charges relating to abuse of his medical license to write prescriptions "because the facts do not exist" to support these charges.[44]
When Lance won the prologue to the 1999 Tour I was close to tears, but when I heard he was working with Michele Ferrari I was devastated. In the light of Lance's relationship with Ferrari, I just don't want to comment on this year's Tour. This is not sour grapes. I'm disappointed in Lance, that's all it is.[45]
A month later, LeMond issued an apology for this comment, calling Armstrong "a great champion and I do not believe, in any way, that he has ever used any performance-enhancing substances. I believe his performances are the result of the same hard work, dedication and focus that were mine 10 years ago."[46]
LeMond spoke out again three years later, after additional Tour de France wins by Armstrong. "If Armstrong's clean, it's the greatest comeback. And if he's not, then it's the greatest fraud." He also described the fallout of his 2001 statement, alleging that Armstrong had threatened to defame him, and that his business interests had also been threatened:
[Armstrong] basically said 'I could find 10 people that will say you took EPO'... The week after, I got multiple people that were on Lance ... Lance's camp, basically saying 'you better be quiet,' and I was quiet for three years. I have a business ... I have bikes that are sold ... and I was told that my sales might not be doing too well if ... just the publicity, the negative publicity.[47]
The same month, LeMond also stated to French newspaper Le Monde: "Lance is ready to do anything to keep his secret. I don't know how he can continue to convince everybody of his innocence."[48]
In a 2007 interview, LeMond accused Armstrong of trying to sabotage his relationship with Trek bicycles, and described him by saying "I just think he's not a good person and that's all I can say. I mean, he's a facade, if you knew the real Lance Armstrong that I know. I think he fronts himself as a guy who is loving and caring. From my experience, he's not a nice guy and I've had some very difficult periods with him. And I don't believe he'll finish up having any friends in cycling."[49]
For his part, Armstrong points the finger back at LeMond, suggesting an iron injection that LeMond states he received during the 1989 Giro d'Italia[50] was in reality an injection of EPO or some other performance-enhancing agent. “We will have the opportunity to tell the truth to the authorities, and Greg LeMond will tell the truth about 1989 I hope, because he, too, needs to tell the truth. I have nothing to hide.” [51]
Wiki
he's not a nice guy and I've had some very difficult periods with him. And I don't believe he'll finish up having any friends in cycling.
Whether he doped or not, he certainly had a pretty clear picture of the future.
LA really is a nasty piece of work.
The more I have looked in to this, the more striking this is. and yes, everyone who reaches the top has to have that "killer edge" in terms of competitive determination, but LA is way above and beyond
There are many many tales of him doing similar to those who broke the Omerta
Simeoni
More famous is Simeoni's argument with Lance Armstrong. Simeoni was treated by doctor Michele Ferrari, who was also Armstrong's doctor. Simeoni testified in court that he began doping in 1993, that Dr. Ferrari had prescribed him doping products such as EPO and Human Growth Hormone in 1996 and 1997, and that Ferrari also gave him instructions on how to use these products.[3] In 2001 and 2002 Simeoni was suspended for several months for doping use. Armstrong reportedly called Simeoni a "liar" in an interview with the French newspaper Le Monde in July 2003. Simeoni lodged a charge of defamation against Armstrong and demanded €100,000. Simeoni announced that he would give any money awarded to him to charity.
On the 18th stage of the 2004 edition of the Tour de France, Simeoni gapped up to a breakaway of six riders that posed no threat to Armstrong's leading position. Nevertheless, Armstrong followed Simeoni, which prompted Armstrong's rival T-Mobile Team to try to catch the breakaway. This would not only catch Armstrong but also eliminate the stage winning chances of the six riders in the original breakaway. The six riders implored Armstrong to drop back to the peloton, but Armstrong would not go unless Simeoni went with him and the two riders dropped back to the peloton.[4] When Simeoni dropped back, he was abused by other riders, including Andrea Peron, Filippo Pozzato and Giuseppe Guerini. In a later interview, he told of how Daniele Nardello also abused him, calling him "a disgrace".[5] Afterwards, Armstrong made a "zip-the-lips" gesture but later said that Simeoni "did not deserve" to win a stage. Two days later was the final stage, which is usually a slow stage in which the Tour winner (in 2004 it was Armstrong) already celebrates his victory. But in this stage Simeoni continuously attacked, to take revenge for what Armstrong did three days before, but was reeled in every time by Armstrong's team.[6] Simeoni was again insulted and spat at by other riders after this.
Because Simeoni was a prosecution witness in legal proceedings against Ferrari at the time of Armstrong's move against him in the 2004 Tour, Italian authorities threatened to bring charges of witness intimidation against Armstrong. In March 2005 Armstrong was interviewed by the authorities, apparently without resolution. Armstrong had been indicted by Italian authorities in December 2005 and ordered to stand trial for defaming Simeoni on March 7, 2006. In April 2006, the defamation charges were dropped
For those who see the story as being about someone cheating in a bike race:
http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/06/lance-armstrongs-business-links-a-flowchart-by-dimspace/
Having now read Hamilton and Millars book, must admit that in the situations they found themselves in, I'd probably have done the same thing, be "professional" and "healthy" and just get on with what needs to be done, i.e. dope.
A good insight into the Armstrong doping mentality in the TH book: I need to crush my opponents but suspect those other f*#kers are getting an advantage over me by doping, so I'm going to dope and be better at it than they are, hire the best doctors, get the best drugs, etc. That's the "professional" thing to do as the team requires you to be competitive, and anyone who doesn't comply is a waste of space on the team. That's not "cheating", it's being realistic and "professional".
His clarity is almost admirable! 😕
Edit: Looking at the Armstrong business interests thing, I hadn't realised that Amgen who sponsor the Tour of California are big producers of EPO. Most amusing.
Lance is still a hero to many guillable cretins and always will be despite the [s]Facts[/s] non believers, he beat cancer with one ball and singlehandedly beat France at tour cycling 7 times and he's American.
Ladies and gentlemen I give you the next presidential candidate.
Ladies and gentlemen I give you the next presidential candidate.
He's got the ambition - but would need a Damascene moment to be electable in the US... 🙄
Anyway - the way USADA have positioned their case, he still has to dodge a looming perjury trial IMO
this thread has got more glitchy than a fridge full of EPO and a dodgy fuse
Lance is still a hero to many guillable cretins and always will be despite the Facts non believers, he beat cancer with one ball and singlehandedly beat France at tour cycling 7 times and he's American.
Well he did crush the best in the world in the biggest race seven times in a row. Whatever was going on at the time, and whatever means were being used, there's no doubting he (and his team) was better at it by far than anyone else.
Ladies and gentlemen I give you the next presidential candidate.
Well if they're happy to vote an average B movie actor president.
bang
Well he did crush the best in the world in the biggest race seven times in a row. Whatever was going on at the time, and whatever means were being used, there's no doubting he (and his team) was better at it by far than anyone else.
THAT'S IT....!
EUREKA - Why couldn't I see it, his success, denials, popularity...
... his future political masterplan...
[b]GOD DID IT[/b]
If he "converts" from aetheism and says that God won those Tours for him - he'll be in the WH quicker than you can say "stupid white men"!!!
He's already on his way as he has claimed that his TdF wins are "a miracle"!
More likely to claim himself the second coming, or setup his own religion. I can't see him converting to someone else's religion, one that he can't control.
[url= http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12926/Armstrong-could-be-called-to-testify-under-oath-in-Bruyneel-hearing.aspx ]Interesting.....[/url]
The question is whether USADA can make him appear.
The question is whether USADA can make him appear.
If he's subpoenaed then I don't think he'll have much choice.
If he's subpoenaed then I don't think he'll have much choice.
Correct but I don't know if they have that authority.
Well he did crush the best in the world in the biggest race seven times in a row. Whatever was going on at the time, and whatever means were being used, there's no doubting he (and his team) was better at it by far than anyone else.
Yes he was the best cheat and his team the best cheating team. This does not mean he/they would be the best clean.
Well he did crush the best in the world in the biggest race seven times in a row. Whatever was going on at the time, and whatever means were being used, there's no doubting he (and his team) was better at it by far than anyone else.
That's really why I watch sports.....to find out who the best cheat is.... 😯
Well he did crush the best in the world in the biggest race seven times in a row. Whatever was going on at the time, and whatever means were being used, there's no doubting he (and his team) was better at it by far than anyone else.
Good grief, hard to believe you typed this. What where you thinking?
Not a fan of Lance, and i hope the truth comes out and he's put to account for it. Just stating it like it is though.
Well he did crush the best in the world in the biggest race seven times in a row. Whatever was going on at the time, and whatever means were being used, there's no doubting he (and his team) was better at it by far than anyone else.
Chuffin nonsense. Utter tosh. What it means is...
"best bankrolled, most determined, cheat"
ETA - have a read around, plenty in the public domain. Hamilton / Coyle's book paints a particular picture of Armstrong.....
"best bankrolled, most determined, cheat"
Yup, that's exactly what i meant!
To clarify I mean he had access to more funds, had better connections, was better supported, made sure he had the best doctors, and was determined to do whatever was needed better than his opponents. He (and his team) were undoubtedly the best at this.
[url= http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/09/news/journalist-david-walsh-says-usada-report-will-make-uncomfortable-reading-for-uci_240383 ]I can see the Verbruggan McQuaid vs Kimmage case getting quietly dropped... self defamation?[/url]
Hardly the latest, but worth a watch, you'll need 60 minutes though as it's err..
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lance-armstrong-my-conscience-is-clear
So apparently we should be moving on, despite the sport being stuffed to the gills with cheats, despite convicted and unrepentant dopers winning the Olympics and the Giro, despite all the old faces of doping being in charge of teams, despite the UCI trying to silence Kimmage, despite whistleblowers still being hounded out...
"Yeah, others won't move on. It's sad. I'm aware that it's out there. It's like, why are you continuing? You got what you wanted; Lance Armstrong never did anything in his life. Great. For some, it's like, shouldn't you be out training and focusing on what you're doing? ****ing move on. So strange."
Horrible man.
He's got a point though. None of what is happening is "helping to clean up the sport". It's looking back, at an era where doping was rife and basically saying "you know what, we failed to catch you there through our own incompetence and the failure of the UCI and WADA and USADA to do their jobs but we're going to catch you now".
None of that affects what happens in next years TdF or the 2016 Olympics, none of it changes the fact that ex dopers still work within cycling as Team Managers etc. Where are the new procedures, the support network for riders/team managers, the extra money for anti-doping?
What is happening here is already so bogged down in legal wrangles, myth, rumour and allegation that if anything, it's tied the UCI up in legal cases for the next few years, cost hundred of millions of dollars and all so a few people can go "yes, we got Lance!" while the rest of the cycling world sighs, shrugs it's shoulders and doesn't really care.
Was going to cut and paste and go through those points but it's easier to just say that I disagree with everything you say and I guess that a lot of people in this saga like Millar, Vaughters, Kimmage, Landis etc would also disagree 🙄
Lance probably wouldn't though but then he ran the biggest doping operation in cycling for nearly 10 years.
He's got a point though. None of what is happening is "helping to clean up the sport".
Unless it sends the message that if you dope now and get away with it now, you can still be done for it in the the future.
None of that affects what happens in next years TdF or the 2016 Olympics, none of it changes the fact that ex dopers still work within cycling as Team Managers etc.
Except that two doctors are already, through this investigation, banned from any future involvement in the sport and a doctor, 'coach' and team director still have to have their cases heard and could well end up being banned for a period of time, through to indefinitely.
Except that two doctors are already, through this investigation, banned from any future involvement in the sport and a doctor, 'coach' and team director still have to have their cases heard and could well end up being banned for a period of time, through to indefinitely.
Tip of the iceberg. Last time I checked, Bjarne Riis was still running teams. Sky still haven't announced the outcome of their promised "investgation" into Leinders. Contador remains totally unrepentant.
And anyway, Ferrari still seems to be up and running: http://www.53x12.com
Tip of the iceberg.
Gotta start somewhere.
His words in that interview say it all. That's the nearest to an admission of guilt you're ever likely to get.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-never-contacted-to-defend-against-uci-defamation-suit
http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/2012/paul-kimmage-defense-fund
This is essential reading;
http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/10/exclusive-interview-with-floyd-landis/
This is probably the most eye opening;
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12997/Richard-Pound-Interview-The-Kimmage-case-Armstrong-the-governance-of-cycling-and-more.aspx#ixzz28Qc67Vmf
Yet he stills stands up claiming he has won 7 Tours.
You know what Lance, that was all in the past and I don't know why you keep banging on about. Jeez, you need to put all that behind you and move, move on...
Here is a photo of Lance recently on a bicycle somewhere, as you can see he has moved on from his '7' TdF's. The race number is probably a total coincidence.
[img] 
[/img]
Oh no wait, it appears he chose the race number on purpose.
http://lavamagazine.com/features/armstrong-to-detractors-its-their-drama-not-mine/#axzz28XElzcjD
Lucky number , innit ?
35 minute interview with Greg Lemond on attached link
[url= http://www.newstalk.ie/2012/sport/237288/ ]Lemond interview[/url]
This thread is doing me in!!!
Every time I see my name(Lance) I think I been rumbled.... 😀
It's just a bit disconcerting,couldn't you call him Armstrong?
Different topic Stretch Armstrong was one of the toys I always wanted for Christmas but never got 🙁
[i]“There are two damning features present in Armstrong's blood values during the 2009 Tour de France,” he said, referring to the published figures. “First, his haemoglobin values did not decline by the 10 percent or so that is typically found during three week stage races. In the Pellizotti case, the publicly available CAS decision shows that the CAS found that this characteristic demonstrated the use of blood doping practices.
“Second, his reticulocyte levels were below the average of the rest of his reported results. Both of those are consistent with the use of blood transfusions.”
[/i]
And interesting stuff about how the UCI effectively decides who gets passport data analysed.
Lance's lawyers flexing their muscles again. Or at least getting in with their version of events before USADA sends its file to the UCI.
And there was me, thinking he'd moved on.
KABOOM!
http://www.usada.org/default.asp?uid=4032
[i]Today, we are sending the ‘Reasoned Decision’ in the Lance Armstrong case and supporting information to the Union Cycliste International (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), and the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC). The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.
The evidence of the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team-run scheme is overwhelming and is in excess of 1000 pages, and includes sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal Service Team (USPS Team) and its participants’ doping activities. The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence including financial payments, emails, scientific data and laboratory test results that further prove the use, possession and distribution of performance enhancing drugs by Lance Armstrong and confirm the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars in funding.
Together these different categories of eyewitness, documentary, first-hand, scientific, direct and circumstantial evidence reveal conclusive and undeniable proof that brings to the light of day for the first time this systemic, sustained and highly professionalized team-run doping conspiracy. All of the material will be made available later this afternoon on the USADA website at www.usada.org.[/i]
The statement also confirms Hincapie, among others, as a witness.
Boom
Hincapie confesses: http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/george-hincapie-admits-doping?page=0,1
USADA statement: http://www.usada.org/cyclinginvestigationstatement.html
Evidence to be released in full this afternoon US time
here we go fireworks before 5th november...
and the rocket...
http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/george-hincapie-admits-doping
oops double post!
"The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen"
Well I object to the word professionalized it just doesn't sound right, what's wrong with just saying professional? And should that also say "that we've ever found out about" rather than the definative statement of "that the sport has ever seen?
Picky I know but it bugs me. Given the serious nature I do wish they would word things a little better.
Oh yes, he's probably guilty.
😉
KABOOOM! Michael Barry statement: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/cycling/story/2012/10/10/sp-uci-cycling-usada-doping-lance-armstrong.html
Amercians believe in supersizing - especially words
Lancey, I believe you are shafted
I wonder how Johans defence is looking now?
Lancey, I believe you are shafted
I wonder how he finds those apples.
I wonder how he finds those apples.
Considering where he's had 26 of them just shoved, I doubt he's very happy.