LeMond II

[Archibald]

The inequality of bans is due to the inequality in participation in the process.

Assuming you mean "the process" of participating with USADA.

Let's face it, georgie boy doped his ar$e off for years and deserves far more than the 6month "tsk tsk" that he got. But he 'did a deal' for those 6 months, and so that's what he ended up with.

but my question to Digger is which end of the inequality is his issue - LA's being too much or the others not being enough.

I know, not really to do with Lemond, but I'm curious to know which it is that Digger is more annoyed by

 

[Digger]

Wrong again.

Section 10.6 of the WADA code does allow for longer bans for aggravated circumstances. The goal of this section is to allow for 4 years bans for riders and staff who push riders to dope, play a key role in an organized program, or traffic. Multiple riders said that Lance ridiculed those who did not take their doping seriously enough, would not participate in the program, or would not pay Ferrari. It was very clear who was the boss and bullied other into doping

As for zero months, nope it was never originally zero months. It has always been 6 months as this is the limit of the reduction in the WADA code (Section 10.5.3). Some may have assumed that these rules did not apply to them but they do. Anyone who can read can see it was always 6 months.

The first paragraph is nonsensical. You are equating bullying and being mean to trafficking. Quite a jump to a life time ban. Each one would have trafficked at one stage or another by definition. George showed others how to dope...that's 'aggravating' haha!
Second paragraph. Check your facts. Clearly usada notified them of this and had to change thereafter. http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE8640D620120705?irpc=932

Although this is jv so who knows...

Back to the point...no way does lance deserve life in comparison to what the others got...which was basically a paid holiday in winter...or in jv and ryder's case it was nothing....you would nearly think jv had the sol in his mind....
And to Greg....kimmage is someone who thinks highly of him and even he was annoyed with Greg over Marco and other hypocritical statements he made in the summer...money talks I guess and he is enjoying the money from that gig and the promotion it gives his brand. As for his statement that tests will be fool proof in three years time etc, absolutely amazing.

 

[Bluenote]

Seems like the Armstrong stuff belongs in the Armstrong thread, not here.

As for the Lemond related discussion from the last few pages - I don't get it? It seems like setting up an impossible standard , then sitting "from up high" and declaring no one else is the perfect anti-doper.

Basically Lemond's critics set up two positions Lemond can have - "Angel Anti-doping crusader" or "bitter anti-Lance, anti-doping hypocrit."

They then set up an incredibly (impossibly?) strict standard of behavior that Lemond is supposed to follow. Don't ride in a car with dopers, use a lawsuit against Trek as a public platform against Armstrong, investigate and call out every possible doper everywhere, don't shake hands with or smile around dopers, etc...

Deviating from "the code," means Lemond falls from grace and goes from 'Angel' to 'hypocrit.'

Truth is, life isn't black and white. Lemond can have more of a grey position. I don't think that automatically makes him a hypocrit. It just means he has a different opinion on how to fight doping. He's been stuck in some tough positions and has had to take some calculated risks. I don't think "picking his battles" automatically makes him a hypocrit. Maybe it makes him pragmatic, or risk adverse - but it doesn't jettison him from 'angel' straight to 'heretic.'

He may have decided that being cordial to dopers, while publically acknowledging their doping past was sufficient. That throwing public 'I won't shake your hand, I won't talk to you' fits didn't do much. He may feel out of touch with today's peleton and not in a position to weigh in on 'who is using ACAR,' or 'which team is dirty.'

One might disagree with how he handles certain things, but not judge him by such black and white standards.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

It has always been 6 months as this is the limit of the reduction in the WADA code (Section 10.5.3).

Section 10.5.3 of the WADA code states "No more than three-quarters of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended."

So USADA didn't have to give the full reduction to Hincapie et al. They chose to be as generous as they were. They could have gone for a year long ban that actually included some of the racing season and I don't think anyone would be claiming that Hincapie et al got a rough deal.

The same section also states "If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the non-suspended period under this section must be no less than eight (8) years."

So I don't know why you've previously suggested the same deal was on offer to Lance. It couldn't have been. His offence - trafficking with aggravating circumstances - carries a life ban so the best he could ever have hoped for was an 8 year ban.

 

[gooner]

Section 10.5.3 of the WADA code states "No more than three-quarters of the of applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended."

So USADA didn't have to give the full reduction to Hincapie et al. They chose to be as generous as they were. They could have gone for a year long ban that actually included some of the racing season and I don't think anyone would be claiming that Hincapie et al got a rough deal.

The same section also states "If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the non-suspended period under this section must be no less than eight (8) years."

So I don't know why you've previously suggested the same deal was on offer to Lance. It couldn't have been. His offence - trafficking with aggravating circumstances - carries a life ban so the best he could ever have hoped for was an 8 year ban.

Hincapie had the life ban threat on him if he didn't come forward. IIRC he said so in The Armstrong Lie either life ban or come forward and get 6 months. Lance had a similar opportunity to do the same. In Wheelmen, his lawyers were still playing the "never tested positive" card in a conference call with Bill Bock in the summer '12.

He blew it, plain and simple and admitted it so in the Oprah interview.

If I'm not the mistaken, the 8 year minimum one only comes in as the reduction clause after the lifetime ban is handed down. Lance had his chance to stay clear of this possibility.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Hincapie had the life ban threat on him if he didn't come forward. IIRC he said so in The Armstrong Lie either life ban or come forward and get 6 months.

Now that's very interesting. There is no offence under the WADA code that can get between a 6 month ban and a life time ban depending on the level of cooperation. So by implication, the "coming forward" appears to have reduced the offence with which Hincapie was charged and also got him the maximum reduction sentence-wise for cooperation (after the offence had been reduced already for cooperating...)

So if this logic had applied to Lance then he could indeed have got off with a 6 month out of competition ban. I have say that even in the realms of pro cycling, this does seem unlikely, but we'll never know.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

If I'm not the mistaken, the 8 year minimum one only comes in as the reduction clause after the lifetime ban is handed down. Lance had his chance to stay clear of this possibility.

My understanding is that Lance's life time ban results from trafficking (8 - life for a first offence) with aggravating circumstances (being involved in the conspiracy, pressuring other riders etc.) giving the "upgrade" to life. It's very difficult to see how under the WADA code cooperation in any form, even if it results in handing over the keys to the Amgen factory, can get rid of the trafficking and aggravating circumstances as these occurred before Lance was given the opportunity to cooperate.

"Plea bargaining" may be a part of normal judicial processes, but it's not in the WADA code, which should surely be the basis of doping sanctions.

 

[Digger]

My understanding is that Lance's life time ban results from trafficking (8 - life for a first offence) with aggravating circumstances (being involved in the conspiracy, pressuring other riders etc.) giving the "upgrade" to life. It's very difficult to see how under the WADA code cooperation in any form, even if it results in handing over the keys to the Amgen factory, can get rid of the trafficking and aggravating circumstances as these occurred before Lance was given the opportunity to cooperate.

"Plea bargaining" may be a part of normal judicial processes, but it's not in the WADA code, which should surely be the basis of doping sanctions.

the pressuring other riders is a very grey area to be banning someone for longer over imo...

but aside from that, the trafficking - they all would have trafficked at one stage or another, or helped each other out. So they should all have had the doping and trafficking as a starting point - and then reduce accordingly...all of them. To think Lance was the only one of them all who trafficked is idiotic...good posts above btw

 

[red_flanders]

Yes, there was inequity in the process. Yes, others should have gotten more. The world isn't perfect. Much better to have nailed Armstrong, Bruyneel and the doctors than to have let them go.

Easy trade. Did they throw the book at Lance? Yes. Does it mean doping ended? Was it totally fair? No. But it was a great result.

Get over it and move on, folks.

 

[Race Radio]

Basically Lemond's critics set up two positions Lemond can have - "Angel Anti-doping crusader" or "bitter anti-Lance, anti-doping hypocrit."

They then set up an incredibly (impossibly?) strict standard of behavior that Lemond is supposed to follow. Don't ride in a car with dopers, use a lawsuit against Trek as a public platform against Armstrong, investigate and call out every possible doper everywhere, don't shake hands with or smile around dopers, etc...

Deviating from "the code," means Lemond falls from grace and goes from 'Angel' to 'hypocrit.'

Good post. Even Kimmage cannot live up to the irrational standards set by some

 

[RownhamHill]

My understanding is that Lance's life time ban results from trafficking (8 - life for a first offence) with aggravating circumstances (being involved in the conspiracy, pressuring other riders etc.) giving the "upgrade" to life. It's very difficult to see how under the WADA code cooperation in any form, even if it results in handing over the keys to the Amgen factory, can get rid of the trafficking and aggravating circumstances as these occurred before Lance was given the opportunity to cooperate.

"Plea bargaining" may be a part of normal judicial processes, but it's not in the WADA code, which should surely be the basis of doping sanctions.

Your first paragraph sounds about right, but isn't the implication that had he gone in and talked/admitted he might have then got a two year ban, with the others getting six months? And doesn't that instinctively seem more or less OK as an outcome in the (completely hypothetical) case of Lance actually co-operating and showing a bit of contrition? (ie they all talked, they all took a reduced ban, but Lance, as ringleader got a bit more jeopardy?)

I guess the lesson is don't carry on picking a fight when the opposition is holding a loaded gun to your head. One would think it's a pretty obvious lesson to be fair, but there you go.

 

[Race Radio]

the pressuring other riders is a very grey area to be banning someone for longer over imo...

but aside from that, the trafficking - they all would have trafficked at one stage or another, or helped each other out. So they should all have had the doping and trafficking as a starting point - and then reduce accordingly...all of them. To think Lance was the only one of them all who trafficked is idiotic...good posts above btw

You are welcome to pretend it is just about pressuring others and trafficking but we both know it is not. From 10.6 of the WADA code regarding extended bans

engaged in deceptive or obstructing conduct to avoid the detection or adjudication of an anti-doping rule violation.

circumstances described in this Comment to Article 10.6 are not exclusive and other aggravating factors may also justify the imposition of a longer period of Ineligibil

ity

Luckily there is a thread where you can discuss Wonderboy.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=19751&page=972

This is the LeMond thread, no need to highjack it.

 

[Benotti69]

Yes, there was inequity in the process. Yes, others should have gotten more. The world isn't perfect. Much better to have nailed Armstrong, Bruyneel and the doctors than to have let them go.

Easy trade. Did they throw the book at Lance? Yes. Does it mean doping ended? Was it totally fair? No. But it was a great result.

Get over it and move on, folks.

This.^^^

It was a great result.

LeMond has a bike business to resuscitate.

 

[Digger]

You are welcome to pretend it is just about pressuring others and trafficking but we both know it is not. From 10.6 of the WADA code regarding extended bans



Luckily there is a thread where you can discuss Wonderboy.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=19751&page=972

This is the LeMond thread, no need to highjack it.

You avoided Wallace's points and my quote from jv...that line from the code, they were all guilty of that!!! Six month ban in winter was a nice trade off. Which was literally the minimum...even red flanders above admits there wasn't equity...Anyway back to greg. You conceded yesterday that Greg was a hypocrite. So really that's all that this was about. But he has a bike business to promote. Telling people that Oleg is good for cycling and that testing will be fool proof in three years - those are wise words for someone with money on their mind. I feel for Floyd in all this though. Trampled on by Greg to get to lance. And Stephanie being lied to by Greg...not good.

Now please stay on topic race. Greg. There is a thread for lance related issues.

 

[Bosco10]

Wow.. has Greg been working arms? He's got some pretty good guns there...

http://vimeo.com/93221541

 

[Digger]

Wow.. has Greg been working arms? He's got some pretty good guns there...

http://vimeo.com/93221541

That video..made about two weeks after lance made his one...and Greg even managed to get his token mention of his vo2 max into the video which was an impressive achievement. Has there ever been a week that goes by where Greg doesn't manage to mention his own vo2 max...

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Yes, there was inequity in the process. Yes, others should have gotten more. The world isn't perfect. Much better to have nailed Armstrong, Bruyneel and the doctors than to have let them go.

Easy trade. Did they throw the book at Lance? Yes. Does it mean doping ended? Was it totally fair? No. But it was a great result.

Get over it and move on, folks.

It wasn't a great result, as Hincapie et al "walked" with a much shorter penalty than was allowed under the WADA code, even factoring in their cooperation. It was a good result, but not great.

Life being as it is, potential dopers won't be thinking "If I behave like Lance I'll get banned for life and have the SoL lifted". They'll be thinking "If I dope, keep my head down, confess only when necessary but grass someone up so doing then I'll get a short, out of season ban. So where's the syringe?"

 

[Benotti69]

It wasn't a great result, as Hincapie et al "walked" with a much shorter penalty than was allowed under the WADA code, even factoring in their cooperation. It was a good result, but not great.

Life being as it is, potential dopers won't be thinking "If I behave like Lance I'll get banned for life and have the SoL lifted". They'll be thinking "If I dope, keep my head down, confess only when necessary but grass someone up so doing then I'll get a short, out of season ban. So where's the syringe?"

Potential dopers dont look at those caught, no matter who gets caught, they think about personal risk Vs personal reward.

Most potential dopers who have half a brain will recognise that all those guys in the reasoned decision never failed a test!

No it was not the perfect result that some dopers got only 6 winter month bans and some nothing. They all got to keep their ill gotten gains. No monetary fines for doping seems a joke. But Armstrong got taken down, the guy who had been rubbing everyones noses in it. I'll take that. The others are all labelled dopers and that means they are tarnished.

 

[thehog]

It wasn't a great result, as Hincapie et al "walked" with a much shorter penalty than was allowed under the WADA code, even factoring in their cooperation. It was a good result, but not great.

Life being as it is, potential dopers won't be thinking "If I behave like Lance I'll get banned for life and have the SoL lifted". They'll be thinking "If I dope, keep my head down, confess only when necessary but grass someone up so doing then I'll get a short, out of season ban. So where's the syringe?"

Agreed.

I've long made comment here that the method & lenacy shown to Ryder Hesjedal is very concerning.

We long complain about Armstrong's close relationship with the UCI, but there you had Vaughters directly negotiating a deal to fit around SoLs etc.

No one should have allowed or accepted that to occur. Hesjedal wasn't your DaveZ type, he knowingly went out and sought to dope and did so for years on end.

That's not inequity, that's corruption!

 

[red_flanders]

It wasn't a great result, as Hincapie et al "walked" with a much shorter penalty than was allowed under the WADA code, even factoring in their cooperation. It was a good result, but not great.

Life being as it is, potential dopers won't be thinking "If I behave like Lance I'll get banned for life and have the SoL lifted". They'll be thinking "If I dope, keep my head down, confess only when necessary but grass someone up so doing then I'll get a short, out of season ban. So where's the syringe?"

Yeah, I just don't get this perspective. After the decade + of hand-wringing we all did–or at least those of us who got that he was a massive doper and basically kingpin in the sport–he got nuked. WAY harder than I ever thought he would given all the political and financial bullying he did to escape what was coming to him.

I a MORE than pleased with that particular ring of scumbags having gotten what they got. That some guys who were part of it but not the key enablers and pushers got off lightly...that I can be OK with.

No it's not fair or perfect. But it's way more than I ever dared hope for. In particular, to bring this back to the topic, the vindication of LeMond after all the lies, astro-turfing, personal attacks, business attacks...that his reputation was restored at least somewhat is yet another benefit.

The smaller fish swam through the net. In the greater scheme of things, so what. Yeah, it smells. It sits badly. Bottle is still running Gran Fondo's in my neck of the woods and the ******bags who want to lap up the remaining granules of his fame get to do so. As with Hincapie.

I'll live. I'm more than pleased with what USADA did. It was nothing short of FANTASTIC. Kudos up and down and all over again.

Greg LeMond. Only legit US winner of the TdF. As it should be. ****ing HURRAH.

 

[DirtyWorks]

You avoided Wallace's points and my quote from jv...that line from the code, they were all guilty of that!!!

Except none of them had the visibility of Wonderboy.

Wail and moan all you like. The way the world works is quite different than your high standards of intellectual consistency.

LeMond has been pragmatic about his post-career anti-doping advocacy and it still got him legal problems.

To add to red_flanders excellent post above, the best part, for me, about USADA's sanction is the narrative they constructed has been accepted by almost every casual sports fan and it's had implications for other IOC sports. The trust an occasional IOC sports viewer had is largely gone. Worldwide.

 

[Bluenote]

...Anyway back to greg. You conceded yesterday that Greg was a hypocrite. So really that's all that this was about. But he has a bike business to promote. Telling people that Oleg is good for cycling and that testing will be fool proof in three years - those are wise words for someone with money on their mind.

I feel for Floyd in all this though. Trampled on by Greg to get to lance. And Stephanie being lied to by Greg...not good.

I'd call this a logic fail. Being stringently anti-doping today can help one's business. Look at how many fans Kimmage, Walsh, Bassons, Millar have today. Tyler and Frankie have their supporters, too. I'm not saying being anti-doping is a huge money maker, I'm just saying it need not hurt one's business. Lemond need not uphold omerta to help his popularity or his sales.

So first you hold him up to an impossible black and white standard 'anti-doping angel' versus 'hypocrit.'

And now you are a mind reader who knows his motives (money)?

As for Landis, IMHO, Landis is a piece of human garbage. His team attempted to blackmail Lemond over Lemond being a survivor of child sexual abuse. IMO Landis was somehow involved, or at least knew what was / had happened. I think its about one of the lowest things you can do to someone. Between that and the Floyd Fairness Fund and all the lies - I have no sympathy for Landis.

I don't feel sorry for Landis at all. He dug his own grave, I'm fine that he now gets to lay in it. I'm not shedding any tears for poor old Landis (who might get very rich out of all of this).

 

[Scott SoCal]

You avoided Wallace's points and my quote from jv...that line from the code, they were all guilty of that!!! Six month ban in winter was a nice trade off. Which was literally the minimum...even red flanders above admits there wasn't equity...Anyway back to greg. You conceded yesterday that Greg was a hypocrite. So really that's all that this was about. But he has a bike business to promote. Telling people that Oleg is good for cycling and that testing will be fool proof in three years - those are wise words for someone with money on their mind. I feel for Floyd in all this though. Trampled on by Greg to get to lance. And Stephanie being lied to by Greg...not good.

Now please stay on topic race. Greg. There is a thread for lance related issues.

Yeah, just horrible.

Then Stephanie perjured herself... not good.

 

[RownhamHill]

Yeah, I just don't get this perspective. After the decade + of hand-wringing we all did–or at least those of us who got that he was a massive doper and basically kingpin in the sport–he got nuked. WAY harder than I ever thought he would given all the political and financial bullying he did to escape what was coming to him.

I a MORE than pleased with that particular ring of scumbags having gotten what they got. That some guys who were part of it but not the key enablers and pushers got off lightly...that I can be OK with.

No it's not fair or perfect. But it's way more than I ever dared hope for. In particular, to bring this back to the topic, the vindication of LeMond after all the lies, astro-turfing, personal attacks, business attacks...that his reputation was restored at least somewhat is yet another benefit.

The smaller fish swam through the net. In the greater scheme of things, so what. Yeah, it smells. It sits badly. Bottle is still running Gran Fondo's in my neck of the woods and the ******bags who want to lap up the remaining granules of his fame get to do so. As with Hincapie.

I'll live. I'm more than pleased with what USADA did. It was nothing short of FANTASTIC. Kudos up and down and all over again.

Greg LeMond. Only legit US winner of the TdF. As it should be. ****ing HURRAH.

You've nailed it here.

 

[Scott SoCal]

I'd call this a logic fail. Being stringently anti-doping today can help one's business. Look at how many fans Kimmage, Walsh, Bassons, Millar have today. Tyler and Frankie have their supporters, too. I'm not saying being anti-doping is a huge money maker, I'm just saying it need not hurt one's business. Lemond need not uphold omerta to help his popularity or his sales.

So first you hold him up to an impossible black and white standard 'anti-doping angel' versus 'hypocrit.'

And now you are a mind reader who knows his motives (money)?

As for Landis, IMHO, Landis is a piece of human garbage. His team attempted to blackmail Lemond over Lemond being a survivor of child sexual abuse. IMO Landis was somehow involved, or at least knew what was / had happened. I think its about one of the lowest things you can do to someone. Between that and the Floyd Fairness Fund and all the lies - I have no sympathy for Landis.

I don't feel sorry for Landis at all. He dug his own grave, I'm fine that he now gets to lay in it. I'm not shedding any tears for poor old Landis (who might get very rich out of all of this).

And yet LA is still the 7-time TdF winner without that piece of human garbage.

If we are going to attach wrongdoings of underlings to Landis then, in fairness, we should do the same for everybody involved.

Wasn't Floyd Fairness Fund the brainchild of Weisel, Stapleton, Knaggs and LA himself?

Floyd may well have dug his own grave right next to all the others digging theirs.