• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Flandisgate different from baseballgate? how/what

Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
many like myself never followed american sports. we have only vague idea about the other novitzky cases, where he was credited with busting high profile athletes. so..having heard enough contradictory voices and getting thoroughly confused i decided to ask,:confused:

what’s common and what’s not between what armstrong will face and what the already busted athletes have faced ?

can any clear parallels be drawn ? what are they ?
is armstrong’s position more vulnerable because of the nature of pro cycling compared to baseball ?

here are my personal tentative observations

Common:

(I) same dogged investigator
(ii) seemingly unlimited federal resources
(iii) deeply ingrained doping culture
(iv) plenty of time to cover-up evidence

Different

(i) armstrong’s iconic figure transcended the sport and capable of political levers
(ii) prosecution’s pool of incriminating witnesses is very much deeper in cycling (due to team-organized doping) than in baseball or athletics - imho, this one is particularly damaging to texas
(iii) armstrong’s disagreeable nature created many mortal enemies ready to pay him back
(iv) (this is very speculative) armstrong’ vanity and arrogance may have created sloppy seconds for the prosecution (things like un-retirement pleas for transparency but ultimately failing all promises -catlin, disappearance of blood data etc)
(v) the sports overseeing body is accused (by almost a dozen different insiders) of covering up armstrong’s doping
…………

please agree, disagree, discuss, continue…..
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,263
1
0
Visit site
I am not that american sports guy (except NBA), too.
Can someone please tell me in short words, how this baseballgate initially started ?

Hope this isn´t offtopic, but I don´t think so.
 
python said:
many like myself never followed american sports. we have only vague idea about the other novitzky cases, where he was credited with busting high profile athletes. so..having heard enough contradictory voices and getting thoroughly confused i decided to ask,:confused:

what’s common and what’s not between what armstrong will face and what the already busted athletes have faced ?

can any clear parallels be drawn ? what are they ?
is armstrong’s position more vulnerable because of the nature of pro cycling compared to baseball ?

here are my personal tentative observations

Common:

(I) same dogged investigator
(ii) seemingly unlimited federal resources
(iii) deeply ingrained doping culture
(iv) plenty of time to cover-up evidence

Different

(i) armstrong’s iconic figure transcended the sport and capable of political levers
(ii) prosecution’s pool of incriminating witnesses is very much deeper in cycling (due to team-organized doping) than in baseball or athletics - imho, this one is particularly damaging to texas
(iii) armstrong’s disagreeable nature created many mortal enemies ready to pay him back
(iv) (this is very speculative) armstrong’ vanity and arrogance may have created sloppy seconds for the prosecution (things like un-retirement pleas for transparency but ultimately failing all promises -catlin, disappearance of blood data etc)
(v) the sports overseeing body is accused (by almost a dozen different insiders) of covering up armstrong’s doping
…………

please agree, disagree, discuss, continue…..



The biggest between the two is that in baseball the players visited a doctor, received training programs and purchased the drugs. This all occurred within the US. With Flandisgate Armstrong and co. set up vast drug importation networks and payment schemes. They also avoided paying tax on winnings within Europe. The latter is far far worse than what Bonds or Clemens ever got up to.
 
Jul 17, 2010
49
0
0
Visit site
A 1922 Supreme Ct. ruling granted major league baseball an exception from antitrust laws, holding that professional baseball was not commerce. As such, they gave Congress some added oversight. Congress was exercising that oversight re PEDs.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
thehog said:
The biggest between the two is that in baseball the players visited a doctor, received training programs and purchased the drugs. This all occurred within the US. With Flandisgate Armstrong and co. set up vast drug importation networks and payment schemes. They also avoided paying tax on winnings within Europe. The latter is far far worse than what Bonds or Clemens ever got up to.
important point…doesn’t it jive well with my pointabove ?

Different (ii): prosecution’s pool of incriminating witnesses is very much deeper in cycling (due to team-organized doping) than in baseball or athletics - imho, this one is particularly damaging to texas

superleicht said:
A 1922 Supreme Ct. ruling granted major league baseball an exception from antitrust laws, holding that professional baseball was not commerce. As such, they gave Congress some added oversight. Congress was exercising that oversight re PEDs.
does this mean landisgate has no chance of being heard before congress ? and how does the fact affect the chances of the eventual truth being known ?
 
Jul 18, 2010
171
0
0
Visit site
the organized team level nature of doping in cycling means crap loads more witnesses.

LA is not just an employee but could be considered both owner and part of management.

lots of cross border international transport of money and drugs required in cycling.

the possibility that the governing body was/is also involved. that is huge.
 
Aug 4, 2010
198
0
0
Visit site
In baseball the use of PED wasn't illegal at the time they were using them so there was no crime of that nature. Clemens went before a Congressional hearing of his own free will and testified before them he didn't use PED, hense the perjury charge. Another player and his trainer said before a GJ he used PED so now he's in some trouble.

Balko had tested a bunch of baseball players and kept the results a secret and Jeff Novitzky got a search warrent for Balko and recovered the test results. Then the Mitchell investagation started, here is the report from Mitchell to baseball.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/news/mitchell/index.jsp
 
python said:
important point…doesn’t it jive well with my pointabove ?

Different (ii): prosecution’s pool of incriminating witnesses is very much deeper in cycling (due to team-organized doping) than in baseball or athletics - imho, this one is particularly damaging to texas


does this mean landisgate has no chance of being heard before congress ? and how does the fact affect the chances of the eventual truth being known ?

The key is not only the witnesses but there will be vast amounts of documentation that will need to be explained. Most people here think that Landis needs other witnesses to back him up. Not entirely true. For example if Landis states that Armstrong was calling him daily after his positive test to keep him quite then phone records will show that occurred and Armstrong will have to explain. Could be explained away. The killer will be if Landis says that they all flew to Belgium to receive a blood extraction and drugs then there is documents. Flights, hotels, purchase of PED’s etc. How were those flights paid for? How were the hotels paid for on the trip? Follow that link. You see how it flows. Landis says Armstrong went away for a few weeks to train and he was asked to mind the apartment. Again check flight plans, hotels, landis made phone call from the apartment. You get the picture. Bruyneel and Armstrong go to the UCI to make a payment. Again flight plans, check the bank statements for tranaction records etc. (could pose difficult if in Switzerland) The SCA never had any hope in proving any of this but the Feds do and along with Interpol have all the information they need. I’m just scratching the surface here. They will have access to a lot lot more.


All of sudden the Landis claims have a lot weight. Not only do you have 2-3 people backing up the claims but you start to have a nice trail of evidence. So it stops becoming “I never tested positive and Landis has no credibility” to “I’m not sure why $550,000 left my bank account on the same day the exact amount entered an account in Switzerland”.
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,295
0
0
Visit site
The primary accuser lacks credibility and his motivations are at best suspicious.
The only traction the investigation has is based on LA's celebrity. If the lead suspect was Floyd the prosecutor would be a low level attorney and a $50 budget.
No matter what you believe the entire case is going to be a he said she said circus. The outcome is going to be entirely based on personalities and the personal attacks will be all about betrayal.
The verdict won't change any minds unless it comes with some admission by the accused.
There is little if any physical evidence that would be admissible and it is spread all over the world. Except for spending sponsor money on doping in whose jurisdiction did these offences occur. Is there a special prosecutor in Spain?
Even if it can be proven that doping existed on the team and was organized by the team you will need to also prove the money spent was the money from USPS and not self funded by individuals, and spent by the teams owners.
Other than the participants of this forum almost no one else cares.
Novitsky is star struck and is riding celebrity to gain personal notoriety.
Landis is actually not a sociopathic liar and blackmailer.
We can stand this for the next 3 years.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The main difference is that in baseball the players, owners and league officials could care less about drugs running rampant in their sport, much less cleaning it up. (You think Omerta in cycling is bad!!) All they care about is that almighty dollar. So their players gets caught, he gets a slap on the wrist and they come back like nothing happened and the media moves on to the next story and rarely revisits. (see Manny Ramirez, A-Fraud)

And like the cases of Bonds and Clemens and the whole Mitchell report... if they have the $$$ to stall the system, fans and the media will forget all about it in a few short years. And without much hooplah we'll eventually see these cases disappear. Although Clemens is having a hard time keep his trap shut.

I see LA like Bonds. Either you love him or hate him. There is no in between.
 
Mar 18, 2009
1,003
0
0
Visit site
Master50 said:
The primary accuser lacks credibility and his motivations are at best suspicious.
The only traction the investigation has is based on LA's celebrity. If the lead suspect was Floyd the prosecutor would be a low level attorney and a $50 budget.
No matter what you believe the entire case is going to be a he said she said circus. The outcome is going to be entirely based on personalities and the personal attacks will be all about betrayal.
The verdict won't change any minds unless it comes with some admission by the accused.
There is little if any physical evidence that would be admissible and it is spread all over the world. Except for spending sponsor money on doping in whose jurisdiction did these offences occur. Is there a special prosecutor in Spain?
Even if it can be proven that doping existed on the team and was organized by the team you will need to also prove the money spent was the money from USPS and not self funded by individuals, and spent by the teams owners
Other than the participants of this forum almost no one else cares.
Novitsky is star struck and is riding celebrity to gain personal notoriety.
Landis is actually not a sociopathic liar and blackmailer.
We can stand this for the next 3 years.

What money do you think they used? Private funds? They'd have used the money they were paid as professional riders which, in some part, will have come from the sponsorship money paid by USPS - it's not like that money will have been ringfenced for some team expenses and not others
 
Mar 7, 2010
64
0
0
Visit site
thehog said:
The biggest between the two is that in baseball the players visited a doctor, received training programs and purchased the drugs. This all occurred within the US. With Flandisgate Armstrong and co. set up vast drug importation networks and payment schemes. They also avoided paying tax on winnings within Europe. The latter is far far worse than what Bonds or Clemens ever got up to.

I will add, there are many willing witnesses in Landisgate that were lacking in bbgate. This investigation is moving much more rapidly as a result. I also agree, the stakes are much higher than doping and the possibility of perjury. In my opinion, that's the least of LA and Co. worries.
 
Master50 said:
The primary accuser lacks credibility and his motivations are at best suspicious.and blackmailer.

This point comes up a lot. The question of credibility. Alas there Is no point of law on credibility. Its an opinion not a point of law. Evidence is not delineated between the non-credible and the credible. Each part of testimony is presented and argued on an equal basis. Of course the defence could argue that a piece of evidence lacks credibility but if there is significant evidence to back the claim then it doesn’t matter who is makes the claim or what the claimants history might be. I think Floyd history gives him more credibility but that’s just my opinion.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
i think that flandis's credibility is largely irrelevant both to the thread title as i meant it and to the novitzky/miller case mechanics.

the topic irrelevancy is obvious as there are 67 other threads addressing it.

as to the federal case dynamics and flandis's credibility it was pointed 100+ times - it would matter if flandis was the only witness. as it is, we know at least two other riders corroborated main elements of his story. so, please, lets stop bringing irrelevant overused cliches it the subject not meant for it.

back to the topic...

someone mentioned that baseball steroid case had congress's attention.

what would be the driver for getting landisgate before congress ? may that new guy was hired (name ?) to prevent it from congress hearing ?
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
bianchigirl said:
What money do you think they used? Private funds? They'd have used the money they were paid as professional riders which, in some part, will have come from the sponsorship money paid by USPS - it's not like that money will have been ringfenced for some team expenses and not others
how much could a consumable amount of epo, roids, hgh, etc.; cost over the course of a season? $5k max for a few riders I would think. Not hard to cover that up with the team's petty cash-mcdonalds happy meal expense budget.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
scribe said:
how much could a consumable amount of epo, roids, hgh, etc.; cost over the course of a season? $5k max for a few riders I would think. Not hard to cover that up with the team's petty cash-mcdonalds happy meal expense budget.
jezus, why are u so ignorant of the commonly known facts of the costs involved in team wide doping. it was quoted several million of times the cost of the drugs themselves and the services of qualified personnel involved in advising, transporting and administering runs into hundreds of thousands ? are u deliberately obtuse ?
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
python said:
jezus, why are u so ignorant of the commonly known facts of the costs involved in team wide doping. it was quoted several million of times the cost of the drugs themselves and the services of qualified personnel involved in advising, transporting and administering runs into hundreds of thousands ? are u deliberately obtuse ?

are there rules against the hiring of physicians???
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
python said:
i dont follow you.

are there rules against paying them what they demand for the extra services ?
Of course you don't follow me. That's what makes engaging most of you guys here so tedious.

A team's medical program can be a legitimate expense and likely shows up along the money trail. Unless you tie controlled substances and banned procedures onto that expense, you don't really have anything actionable. If a cheating team were smart, and there is no guarantee of that, the expense materials will be no where to be found.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
scribe said:
Of course you don't follow me. That's what makes engaging most of you guys here so tedious.

A team's medical program can be a legitimate expense and likely shows up along the money trail. Unless you tie controlled substances and banned procedures onto that expense, you don't really have anything actionable. If a cheating team were smart, and there is no guarantee of that, the expense materials will be no where to be found.
of course you deliberately chose to obfuscate.

it was pointed above but you chose to ignore it (after your transparent bait about just cost of drugs involved) - transportation of illegal substances across borders, administration in front of witnesses, purchases etc all leave trail regardless of what you call expense.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
python said:
of course you deliberately chose to obfuscate.

it was pointed above but you chose to ignore it (after your transparent bait about just cost of drugs involved) - transportation of illegal substances across borders, administration in front of witnesses, purchases etc all leave trail regardless of what you call expense.
oh yeah. Witnesses is a lot different than proof of 'where'd da money go'

but anyway. Regarding the differences in cases of bball and cycling. On balance, this will be about perjury, just as the bball is. Doesn't matter much the path of each investigation. Without proof it'll all boil down to who is lying.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
scribe said:
oh yeah. Witnesses is a lot different than proof of 'where'd da money go'

but anyway. Regarding the differences in cases of bball and cycling. On balance, this will be about perjury, just as the bball is. Doesn't matter much the path of each investigation. Without proof it'll all boil down to who is lying.
thanks for a (finally) contribution on topic (no tongue in cheek).

regarding you previous post on the 'expense' accounts...don't know what you do for living but in my business we look at two sides all the time

if one side claimed an expense and tried to conceal it under a 'no receipt required' column, than there is the other side where the item was used/procured and or purchased - a drug store or an internet dealer or a swiss epo seller (not obligated by a prescription)..someone, somewhere has to have a record of a transaction. that's what novitzky is shooting for.
 
Mar 18, 2009
1,003
0
0
Visit site
scribe said:
Of course you don't follow me. That's what makes engaging most of you guys here so tedious.

A team's medical program can be a legitimate expense and likely shows up along the money trail. Unless you tie controlled substances and banned procedures onto that expense, you don't really have anything actionable. If a cheating team were smart, and there is no guarantee of that, the expense materials will be no where to be found.

Shame that USDiscastana have not been smart on at least two occasions - leaving a very physical evidence trail in 2000 (actovegin) and 2009 (transfusion waste)
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Visit site
Master50 said:
Other than the participants of this forum almost no one else cares.

You have to be kidding us.

There is a worldwide community of folks connected by cancer who think the guy is a deity.

My father, a 70yr. old guy who knows nothing about cycling -- but who is a cancer survivor -- was following the daily TdF online ticker on AOL when Lance was going for #6 and #7.

A couple of years ago, there was a HUGE 20' tall photo of Lance in the display window at major metropolis "NikeTown" store. I stood on the sidewalk giving a big "thumbs down", while having a friend snap a digipic. (My idea was to send the photo to my fanboy friends.) While attempting this, I actually had strangers coming up to me and THREATENING me. Expletives, etc. As if I was defacing the Koran or something. :eek:

Trust me, a lot of ppl will sit up and notice if this guy is exposed as a fraud. (For the same reason we take notice when a televangelist is caught w/ a $50 prostitute.)