Circ

[D-Queued]

Moving a conversation I started over in the Lance thread to here:

Skippy responded with this:

Yes, it is a shame we can't have the real conversation about Armstrong's debts/assets. I'd really love to have some clarity on Livestrong.org/Livestrong.com. Armstrong's actual "wages of sin" represent such a huge ongoing issue.

I don't know enough to oppose your view regarding Lance/circ, but even if Tim Herman composed every word of every question at $750/hour in consultation with his client, I speculate that Lance lied in his answers.

I'm going to speculate that Skippy is right.

The preamble was:

Lance apparently did testify

- How likely is it that the questions were edited/sanitized/created by his lawyers?
- How likely is it that he answered them truthfully even after the sanitization?
- How likely is it that CIRC will make a recommendation to reduce his ban?
- How likely is it that CIRC, like the arbitration board, will observe that Lance was untruthful?

Finally, I agree with DirtyWorks above. I don't think much new is going to come of this exercise. Which is too bad.

However, even if we only get all the old stories told - but told in one place - at least we will have an easy reference for a change.

Dave.

 

[mrhender]

And if they show up and tell old stories?

Old stories are what to expect:

I don't think there will be a lot of new revelations

But what can a full report of all those years show? I mean one thing is getting the facts unveiled over the years, another is a document covering the whole period and aspects of same..

More importantly:

Which -If any recommendations will the report suggest?
And what actions will be taken by the UCI upon it's content? (if any)

What guarantees do we have the final document is complete? None. Furthermore, the UCI is not trustworthy in any way.

But what is complete? Do you think the UCI will edit the report?
If so, can we then trust the commission has followed the published guidelines without inteference? As in we can trust the commission?
I don't see the point in ordering a report and risk getting your *** exposed only then to edit the outcome? That is just plain stupid..

Now I'am not a fan of the UCI and you never know what these people might do to protect their turf..
Cookson said that he instructed the Commission to hand him a report he could publish in full..
Is he lying? Or is it just easy for him to say so if he already knows their will be few new revelations...? Or maybe he is actually sincere in wanting transparency on a period of darkness (in which he was not calling the shots...)

We can speculate and the odds are stacked against a new clean era..
But the report might actually end up being a step in the right direction and basis for doing some good for anti-doping..
Will it happen? I'am not holding my breath...

 

[skippythepinhead]

I hope they don't redact details on how to avoid Biopassport violations.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I hope they don't redact details on how to avoid Biopassport violations.

If you had the patience and expertise, you would read through wada's meeting minutes. All the answers are there. They ratify new tests and such. You can then go backwards into bodybuilding forums for 'expert' opinions. Between the two you would never test positive.

Meh. It's even simpler than that. Be like Floyd and run your own tests.

The system is set up to permit doping.

 

[skippythepinhead]

If you had the patience and expertise, you would read through wada's meeting minutes. All the answers are there. They ratify new tests and such. You can then go backwards into bodybuilding forums for 'expert' opinions. Between the two you would never test positive.

Meh. It's even simpler than that. Be like Floyd and run your own tests.

The system is set up to permit doping.

Preaching to the choir!

 

[Benotti69]

If you had the patience and expertise, you would read through wada's meeting minutes. All the answers are there. They ratify new tests and such. You can then go backwards into bodybuilding forums for 'expert' opinions. Between the two you would never test positive.

Meh. It's even simpler than that. Be like GARMIN and run your own tests.

The system is set up to permit doping.

Fixed for 'up to dateness'..........

 

[DirtyWorks]

I'm not sure how easity UCI can control the narrative on this report.

The contents will be driven by who turned up to CIRC and what they said. CIRC can hardly ignore evidence they have been given. The only way to stop any info going public would be to stop people attending any hearings - and I can certainly imagine pressure having been put on people not to attend.

With the findings of CIRC imminent, Cookson doesn't expect many revelations ? "we know just about everything,"

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-calls-for-collective-responsibility-in-anti-doping

They are trying to wrap up the "dark period" and pretend it's all clean.

 

[skippythepinhead]

With the findings of CIRC imminent, Cookson doesn't expect many revelations ? "we know just about everything,"

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-calls-for-collective-responsibility-in-anti-doping

They are trying to wrap up the "dark period" and pretend it's all clean.

Yeah, it's so important to know where everyone "stands."

Cookson: Everyone in favor of doping over on this wall. No? No one? All right then, I con-fud-ently declare cycling absolutely 100% cleans.

 

[luckyboy]

He said he doesn't expect many revelations because everybody knows how widespread the problems have been, not because the report is going to say everything is clean and all the problems are in the past.

I think there will be a lot of uncomfortable reading in it and we should all prepare ourselves for that. That was always going to be part of what was going to happen. I don?t think there will be a lot of new revelations, because mostly we have a good idea of what was happening and how widespread the problems were.

 

[D-Queued]

He said he doesn't expect many revelations because everybody knows how widespread the problems have been, not because the report is going to say everything is clean and all the problems are in the past.

I like your interpretation.

I sure hope that we are pleasantly surprised with the breadth of what is covered being closely aligned with what we do actually know.

There is a concern with the 'revelations' statement, though.

Thus, if CIRC has been thorough then here is a measuring stick:

1. There should be substance where we currently have strong suspicions, and

2. There should be readily identifiable further insights on activities already known and well documented.

Finally, in the case of Lance, knowing what we already know about his attempts to manipulate what he reported,

3. Those who lied to the panel or otherwise sought to undermine the process should be clearly identified and their travesties and actions before the panel revealed.

Dave.

 

[Benotti69]

He said he doesn't expect many revelations because everybody knows how widespread the problems have been, not because the report is going to say everything is clean and all the problems are in the past.

So the problem was widespread then and is widespread now because nothing has prevented that from continuing.

 

[spetsa]

I like your interpretation.

I sure hope that we are pleasantly surprised with the breadth of what is covered being closely aligned with what we do actually know.
Dave.

We can only wish.

So the problem was widespread then and is widespread now because nothing has prevented that from continuing.

I expect that the CIRC will be a pre written press release for the likes of Walsh etc to continue to blow the same smoke up the same as$es.

 

[Morbius]

One thing I hope will come out is the story of when and how Armstrong started doping. I don't think that has been told yet (ofiicially anyway).

There could be more evidence about Riis. Hopefully also more about the enablers.

There won't be news about anyone not currently implicated unless someone has gone in to spill the beans (JTL?), and if that had happened, the target would have also been "invited" in for a chat and we would know about it by now.

This suggests that predictions that Sky / Garmin etc will come out with a clean bill of health are probably accurate. Obviously this will only mean that CIRC have not received evidence against them. If UCI / CIRC claim this proves that current teams are clean, then they will deserve all the abuse they will get.

 

[Nick C.]

So the problem was widespread then and is widespread now because nothing has prevented that from continuing.

If the problem is so widespread why have the catchees been so narrowly spread?

 

[Benotti69]

If the problem is so widespread why have the catchees been so narrowly spread?

Who exactly is trying to catch them? Most of the big catches have not been by the UCI.

Dont remember the UCI getting all the relevant information out of OP Fuentes when they could. CONI managed to bag Valverde's blood sample.

 

[skippythepinhead]

If the problem is so widespread why have the catchees been so narrowly spread?

Whut?

10 chars

 

[sniper]

If the problem is so widespread why have the catchees been so narrowly spread?

good point.
doping is probably limited to Astana.

 

[Nick C.]

good point.
doping is probably limited to Astana.

That's what I mean. How does he claim the problem is "widespread" but there will be no new revelations. The revelations to date are quite limited. So it would be business as usual.

 

[DirtyWorks]

One thing I hope will come out is the story of when and how Armstrong started doping. I don't think that has been told yet (ofiicially anyway).

A documented start date was as a teenager under Carmichael's USA Cycling mandatory junior doping program.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dope-and-glory-10-04-2001/

USA Cycling will never be honest about the numbers of dopers they have protected over the decades. And I don't believe they have ended their support of doping either as Thom Wiesel still runs the federation.

 

[Morbius]

A documented start date was as a teenager under Carmichael's USA Cycling mandatory junior doping program.

That is what everyone assumes. I hope CIRC asked Armstrong about it and got on the record one of confirmation / denial / refuse to answer

 

[mrhender]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ot...d-Lance-Armstrong-s-lifetime-ban-reduced.html

Froome spoke to CIRC

Only last week Chris Froome revealed to Sportsmail that he too has spoken to CIRC, having wanted to give a senior rider's perspective on the problems that continue to undermine the UCI's efforts to clean up the sport. Particularly at a time when the UCI are pushing for the racing licence of the Astana team that boasts current Tour de France champion Vicenzo Nibali to be revoked.

 

[Bronstein]

I hope Horner and Rebellin were invited.

 

[sniper]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ot...d-Lance-Armstrong-s-lifetime-ban-reduced.html

Froome spoke to CIRC

If people were still on the fence, i guess this seals it.
CIRC is a joke.

 

[wrinklyvet]

If people were still on the fence, i guess this seals it.
CIRC is a joke.

I sincerely don't think it seals it for anyone on the fence. Those who are not on the fence don't need to have it sealed, do they?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Is this a joke