8 Things On Lance Armstrong From The "Other Side Of The Grass"

[Race Radio]

So I take it that you don't believe the person who writes up the site simply made a typo and changed it. The UCI have the numbers and it could have leaked out if were wrong, so I think it's unlikely that it was changed after the fact to a false number. And why change it? Surely it would be better to give the false number to begin with?

The test was performed in California durinng training camp. More likely USADA and not the UCI.

If it was indeed a mistake then it would be easy to clear up, Armstrong would just authorize WADA to release the actual number. This would be in line with his promise of "complete transparency".

This issue has been discussed for months. Multiple requests for clarification have been submitted.....nothing. In fact quite the opposite, the numbers were taken off the site. Comments asking about it were deleted. When questions about his numbers started being asked what did Armstrong do? Simple, he stopped talking to reporters.

I think we can all agree the likelihood that this was a mistake is low. If it is then it would be very simple for Armstrong to correct this perception....instead he has just reinforced it by trying to cover it up.

 

[red_flanders]

I don't think you can compare this to one of those cases. This is different to a promise that is not kept. It's a black and white chart.

It's two black and white charts with SEVERAL discrepancies in blood values. All curiously favoring a cleaner-looking rider in the second set. A second set which appeared after people started questioning the first.

Believe what you want, but the fact remains that there is no explanation for this set of errors being put forth by the UCI or Armstrong. None.

 

[Race Radio]

It's two black and white charts with SEVERAL discrepancies in blood values. All curiously favoring a cleaner-looking rider in the second set. A second set which appeared after people started questioning the first.

Believe what you want, but the fact remains that there is no explanation for this set of errors being put forth by the UCI or Armstrong. None.

True, it was more then just that one Hct number. Others were changed as well.

Livestrong needs to stop hiring homeless drunks with "The Shakes" for those data entry positions.

 

[Anonymous]

The test was performed in California durinng training camp. More likely USADA and not the UCI.

If it was indeed a mistake then it would be easy to clear up, Armstrong would just authorize WADA to release the actual number. This would be in line with his promise of "complete transparency".

This issue has been discussed for months. Multiple requests for clarification have been submitted.....nothing. In fact quite the opposite, the numbers were taken off the site. When questions about his number started being asked what did Armstrong do? Simple, he stopped talking to reporters.

I think we can all agree the likelihood that this was a mistake is low. If it is then it would be very simple for Armstrong to correct this perception....instead he has just reinforced it by trying to cover it up.

You're saying there is no chance USADA or WADA would leak the number or take stronger action if Armstrong's people were changing numbers on his blood charts? I think that is very unlikely that Armstrong would take the risk. On this issue at least, you have to give Armstrong the benefit of the doubt. It makes no sense. Why didn't he change other numbers that were unsual? Why just this one number? If you think it through you can see it is not very likely.

 

[Anonymous]

It's two black and white charts with SEVERAL discrepancies in blood values. All curiously favoring a cleaner-looking rider in the second set. A second set which appeared after people started questioning the first.

Believe what you want, but the fact remains that there is no explanation for this set of errors being put forth by the UCI or Armstrong. None.

Do you have any evidence that lots of numbers were changed? This is a new allegation.

I don't see the logic in changing charts AFTER they have been put up. It would be a direct challenge to the doping authorities, and people would be able to see them changing the numbers. Go after Armstrong on other matters, but this doesn't smell right on any level.

 

[ChrisE]

Thanks Huge I found that also. She says that “to my knowledge” and “there is speculation” that is hardly comments that state 100% without a doubt he paid that amount or that there was any other amount paid. If these comments were so credible then why not bring her over or go over to her for a deposition. They could have tried to get Lance on perjury or something like that. They did not so I am not at all surprised you “Hater’s” would hang your hats on those loose statements.

This has been rehashed many times, and I once got a bunch of posts deleted with a warning for bucking the company line here.

Repeat after me, hombre: German UCI chick says $500k, sworn depostion by LA and the guy Kathy Lemond "overheard" says much less. They cannot be trusted, thus it is $500k, in a time machine no less. It buys retroactive TUE's, etc.

There is even a powerpoint floating around that proves everything.

Now, straighten up or off to the ban bin with rhitaliano and logical cranium!

 

[red_flanders]

Do you have any evidence that lots of numbers were changed? This is a new allegation.

I don't see the logic in changing charts AFTER they have been put up. It would be a direct challenge to the doping authorities, and people would be able to see them changing the numbers. Go after Armstrong on other matters, but this doesn't smell right on any level.

The doping authorities you say. Okay. See Armstrong's relationship with said authorities over time. Get back to me.

If you want evidence of the different values in the charts, just look at the two links I already posted in this thread and compare the values. This is not a new allegation, it's an old fact, discussed ad nauseum on several cycling boards. Nothing new here, you just need to catch up.

If you're genuinely interested in what's happening, I think you'll find out that your questions are well-worn ground which I'm happy to talk to you about. If you've already decided that Lance is not worth "going after" in this case, then the conversation is going to be rather pointless.

 

[red_flanders]

This has been rehashed many times, and I once got a bunch of posts deleted with a warning for bucking the company line here.

Repeat after me, hombre: German UCI chick says $500k, sworn depostion by LA and the guy Kathy Lemond "overheard" says much less. They cannot be trusted, thus it is $500k, in a time machine no less. It buys retroactive TUE's, etc.

There is even a powerpoint floating around that proves everything.

Now, straighten up or off to the ban bin with rhitaliano and logical cranium!

Well, if you can't find the Schenk quote, you're not trying very hard.

Also see Stapleton with "repeated" donations and a lot of "i can't remember" from Armstrong. Compelling, credible stuff.

 

[red_flanders]

Interestingly VeloNews has removed their article on the matter. Don't recall running into that for any other out-of-date stories, but it may in fact just be an artifact of restructuring the site architecture. Maybe not. Either way, it's too bad those dastardly french/cancer-loving trolls at Google actually cache pages for later viewing. Darn!

The former president of the German Cycling Federation (BDR), Sylvia Schenk, has hit out at the UCI for what she claims is the organization’s willingness to “brush aside” the Lance Armstrong affair.

Schenk, who has been at loggerheads with UCI president Hein Verbruggen for the past few months, said cycling's world ruling body is only interested in finding out who leaked information about the alleged positive doping tests of the seven-time Tour de France winner, and not in the case itself.

The German official told reporters that Verbruggen is more intent up finding the source of leaks than dealing with the allegations raised three weeks ago by the newspaper L’Equipe

"The UCI and its president Hein Verbruggen are more interested in finding the leak than clearing up the Armstrong doping case."

The French sports daily L'Equipe claimed Armstrong's 1999 urine samples tested positive for the banned blood booster EPO (erythropoietin).

Interestingly, in conference call with reporters on Thursday, World Anti-Doping Agency head **** Pound said he was convinced that the information L’Equipe used to link numbered-but-anonymous laboratory results to riders’ names actually came from Verbruggen himself.

Pound said he had a letter from Verbruggen that left him with the impression that it was the UCI president who provided the critical link to L’Equipe.

Since the fall-out from the allegations, Verbruggen - who is hoping his hand-chosen successor, Ireland’s Pat McQuaid, will be voted the new boss of world cycling next week - has refused to point the finger at the American.

Instead, in a recent interview with Le Figaro newspaper the Dutchman appeared more interested in slamming WADA’s Pound, who said following the Armstrong affair that it looked likely the American had been doping.


"We're going to be looking further into this affair,” Verbruggen said last week. “It's another heavy blow to cycling so we have to take it all the way. And I also want to know who exactly it was who gave out this information."

Schenk believes the UCI are burying their heads, and simply wanted to restrict their investigation to finding out who leaked the information to L'Equipe.

"Verbruggen is making slower progress than expected because it was thought that it was someone in the French Ministry," explained Schenk. "However, it could be that the informer is a UCI employee. The only thing the UCI are concerned with is finding out the identity of the informants who brought this case to light."

A UCI statement recently said they would take no action against Armstrong over the doping accusations and Schenk feels the American cycling icon has received special treatment.

"Since 1998 the UCI has done a lot to combat doping but everything is different where Armstrong is concerned," added Schenk, who stoked the flames a few months ago when she filed an official complaint with the UCI claiming that, against UCI rules, McQuaid was benefiting from UCI payments and an apartment in Switzerland.

Schenk also pointed to the fact that Armstrong, shortly after a damaging book – David Walsh’s “LA Confidential” - was published claiming he had regularly used doping products, handed Verbruggen a hefty check to be used in the fight against doping.

At the time, Verbruggen made no secret of the American's gift.

"There is obviously a strong relationship with Armstrong," Schenk added. "The UCI took a lot of money from Armstrong - to my knowledge 500,000 dollars - and now there is speculation that there are financial connections to Armstrong, as well as the American market. I do not know what sort of connections Verbruggen has."

Armstrong, who turns 34 on Sunday, has protested his innocence and said he is considering returning to the Tour next July as a result of the latest accusations.

The Germans love cancer as well, apparently.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Do you have any evidence that lots of numbers were changed? This is a new allegation.

I don't see the logic in changing charts AFTER they have been put up. It would be a direct challenge to the doping authorities, and people would be able to see them changing the numbers. Go after Armstrong on other matters, but this doesn't smell right on any level.

I count 13 mistakes! Unlucky for some.

http://www.livestrong.com/lance-arm...sting-results-to-be-posted-at-livestrong-com/

http://cdn-community2.livestrong.co...0a7caf5c-0435-4e4f-acb0-05e2a39f17d2.Full.jpg

 

[Race Radio]

Do you have any evidence that lots of numbers were changed? This is a new allegation.

I don't see the logic in changing charts AFTER they have been put up. It would be a direct challenge to the doping authorities, and people would be able to see them changing the numbers. Go after Armstrong on other matters, but this doesn't smell right on any level.

There is a search function on this board, I suggest you use it prior to embarrassing yourself. This has been covered multiple times before. He changed his numbers.

I don't see the logic in announcing a "Anytime, Anywhere" Testing program run by Don Catlin at a big press conference, when you never had any intention of running said program. Armstrong knows his groupie followers will believe whatever he tells them, why would this time be any different?

 

[ScienceIsCool]

This has been rehashed many times, and I once got a bunch of posts deleted with a warning for bucking the company line here.

Repeat after me, hombre: German UCI chick says $500k, sworn depostion by LA and the guy Kathy Lemond "overheard" says much less. They cannot be trusted, thus it is $500k, in a time machine no less. It buys retroactive TUE's, etc.
-snip-

Well, Sysmex says that Lance paid for an XE-2100 that they produce. Street price on one of those is $107,000. So he obviously contributed at least this much.

http://www.sysmex.co.jp/en/news/press/2005/050729.html

Which, unless he paid for only $20,000 of that makes him a liar according to his own sworn testimony (deposition from November 1, 2005).

"Q. Okay. Do you know what UCI did with the money?
A. I don't know.
Q. Okay. Like they didn't buy some specific equipment
or something with it that you're aware of? It wasn't
earmarked --
A. Which part of I don't know do you not understand?
Q. You have no idea who you called, and just -- you just
sent a check for $25,000 to the UCI. You can't
remember why you did it, or who you talked to, or
what it was for.
A. You asked me again what have they done with the
money, and I said I don't know."

He even goes on to say that he has no idea who he paid the money to, or what the money paid for. It's impossible to believe that in three months (purchased end July) that he completely forgot that be bought a $107,000 piece of equipment. Sysmex was clear on it though!

I don't care what line of work you're in, that's as clear a case of corruption, undue influence, and breach of ethics as you're ever going to find. The exchange of large sums of cash behind closed doors with silence and denials that it ever took place is perhaps even criminal.

John Swanson

 

[Anonymous]

There is a search function on this board, I suggest you use it prior to embarrassing yourself. This has been covered multiple times before. He changed his numbers.

I don't see the logic in announcing a "Anytime, Anywhere" Testing program run by Don Catlin at a big press conference, when you never had any intention of running said program. Armstrong knows his groupie followers will believe whatever he tells them, why would this time be any different?

I can't find any proof that Armstrong changed his numbers to mislead people. That's your assertion, it's not a fact. For all you know he may have changed the charts to the right number. Again I ask the question: why didn't he change the number before it was put on the website? Do you really think Armstrong is that stupid?

There is no evidence he never had any intention of doing this Catlin program. It may have been the case that to organize and pay for someone to follow him all over the world was not practical and would have no credibility anyway so it wasn't worth it, and it wasn't needed given there are several other agencies already doing it. Again it's just speculation to claim this was all calculated.

 

[red_flanders]

I can't find any proof that Armstrong changed his numbers to mislead people. That's your assertion, it's not a fact. For all you know he may have changed the charts to the right number. Again I ask the question: why didn't he change the number before it was put on the website? Do you really think Armstrong is that stupid?

You have to believe he's either stupid enough to release erroneous data on his blood values--a core piece of evidence in his asserted "transparency and cleanliness" or he's stupid enough to change them. There are no two ways about it. Any change in those numbers points at either glaring stupidity (best case for Armstrong) or fraud.

So yes, he's that stupid. Only question is are we stupid enough to believe that the numbers were all erroneous such that when "fixed" they made Armstrong look like less of a doper. Mind you, they STILL indicate a pattern of doping, despite about a quarter of the numbers being modified to mitigate that effect.

Arrogant, powerful, influential. All can equal stupid if you start to believe what you're selling the faithful.

 

[Ripper]

Well, Sysmex says that Lance paid for an XE-2100 that they produce. Street price on one of those is $107,000. So he obviously contributed at least this much.

http://www.sysmex.co.jp/en/news/press/2005/050729.html

Which, unless he paid for only $20,000 of that makes him a liar according to his own sworn testimony (deposition from November 1, 2005).

"Q. Okay. Do you know what UCI did with the money?
A. I don't know.
Q. Okay. Like they didn't buy some specific equipment
or something with it that you're aware of? It wasn't
earmarked --
A. Which part of I don't know do you not understand?
Q. You have no idea who you called, and just -- you just
sent a check for $25,000 to the UCI. You can't
remember why you did it, or who you talked to, or
what it was for.
A. You asked me again what have they done with the
money, and I said I don't know."

He even goes on to say that he has no idea who he paid the money to, or what the money paid for. It's impossible to believe that in three months (purchased end July) that he completely forgot that be bought a $107,000 piece of equipment. Sysmex was clear on it though!

I don't care what line of work you're in, that's as clear a case of corruption, undue influence, and breach of ethics as you're ever going to find. The exchange of large sums of cash behind closed doors with silence and denials that it ever took place is perhaps even criminal.

John Swanson

+1
Good detective work.

 

[Race Radio]

I can't find any proof that Armstrong changed his numbers to mislead people. That's your assertion, it's not a fact. For all you know he may have changed the charts to the right number. Again I ask the question: why didn't he change the number before it was put on the website? Do you really think Armstrong is that stupid?

There is no evidence he never had any intention of doing this Catlin program. It may have been the case that to organize and pay for someone to follow him all over the world was not practical and would have no credibility anyway so it wasn't worth it, and it wasn't needed given there are several other agencies already doing it. Again it's just speculation to claim this was all calculated.

Of course there is no proof that the space aliens changed the numbers, and you are welcome to believe that if you like, but most rational people will continue to believe that Armstrong changed multiple numbers because they made him look dirty.....funny how that works, wonder why he did not change the 39 Hct?

Armstrong promised "Any time, Any where"...."complete transparency" I think we can all agree these claims were lies. Catlin administers the program for, amongst others, Team Columbia. 36 riders, 18 countries, 40 tests per rider per year. That he could not do the same for one rider is absurd.

 

[Race Radio]

Well, Sysmex says that Lance paid for an XE-2100 that they produce. Street price on one of those is $107,000. So he obviously contributed at least this much.

http://www.sysmex.co.jp/en/news/press/2005/050729.html

Which, unless he paid for only $20,000 of that makes him a liar according to his own sworn testimony (deposition from November 1, 2005).

"Q. Okay. Do you know what UCI did with the money?
A. I don't know.
Q. Okay. Like they didn't buy some specific equipment
or something with it that you're aware of? It wasn't
earmarked --
A. Which part of I don't know do you not understand?
Q. You have no idea who you called, and just -- you just
sent a check for $25,000 to the UCI. You can't
remember why you did it, or who you talked to, or
what it was for.
A. You asked me again what have they done with the
money, and I said I don't know."

He even goes on to say that he has no idea who he paid the money to, or what the money paid for. It's impossible to believe that in three months (purchased end July) that he completely forgot that be bought a $107,000 piece of equipment. Sysmex was clear on it though!

I don't care what line of work you're in, that's as clear a case of corruption, undue influence, and breach of ethics as you're ever going to find. The exchange of large sums of cash behind closed doors with silence and denials that it ever took place is perhaps even criminal.

John Swanson

Interesting how that machine was not even available when Armstrong made the donation in October 1999.

 

[Cozy Beehive]

And In Other News...

Apparently, Livestrong."com", the for-profit version of the brand, is censoring or deleting Lance doping related threads on their forum. Interesting reply above to the first poster, from someone who appears to be a Livestrong forum rat...observe how she tells the other woman "this isn't a democracy here"

 

[Anonymous]

"Apparently, Livestrong."com", the for-profit version of the brand, is censoring or deleting Lance doping related threads on their forum."

Wow.

 

[red_flanders]

Apparently, Livestrong."com", the for-profit version of the brand, is censoring or deleting Lance doping related threads on their forum. Interesting reply above to the first poster, from someone who appears to be a Livestrong forum rat...observe how she tells the other woman "this isn't a democracy here"

My favorite part is the sneering reference to the word transparent. Like it's become a curse word...

 

[red_flanders]

"Apparently, Livestrong."com", the for-profit version of the brand, is censoring or deleting Lance doping related threads on their forum."

Wow.

"Anytime, anywhere, complete transparency."

Or were we just supposed to know that was said with a wink and it's okay if it's a lie?

 

[Anonymous]

"Anytime, anywhere, complete transparency."

Or were we just supposed to know that was said with a wink and it's okay if it's a lie?

What are you talking about? That had nothing to do with people smearing him on his own message forum.

 

[red_flanders]

What are you talking about? That had nothing to do with people smearing him on his own message forum.

What part of "anytime, anywhere" is confusing you?

 

[Hugh Januss]

What part of "anytime, anywhere" is confusing you?

I bet he is confused by the fact that anybody can say anything mean about King Lance, let alone lots of different people.

 

[Anonymous]

I think red_flanders believes people from the internet should be able to randomnly blood test Armstrong as they please.