Official lance armstrong thread, part 2 (from september 2012)

[Benotti69]

Rhubroma posted this in the USADA II thread

Citing the same French TV source (France 2) as CN, la Gazzetta dello Sport reports today that journalist Nicolas Geay recieved exclusive info from Tygart that USADA has possession of 38 blood samples of Armstrong, collected from in competition and surprise random tests between October 16 2008 and April 30 2012, which were found positive for prohibitive substances.

USADA had the intention of using them (provided by the UCI) in the Armstrong case, had he gone to arbitration. It is not known whether or not the UCI has ever provided Armstrong blood samples in the period betweem 99-05, when the Texan had his Tour streak.

Where did they get these blood samples. Are these all samples collected in the US? Did the Spanish, French and Italians hand over samples?

 

[python]

Rhubroma posted this in the USADA II thread



Where did they get these blood samples. Are these all samples collected in the US? Did the Spanish, French and Italians hand over samples?

see my post in the phase 2 thread (before it clogged again ). those samples are likely long gone. the records remain.they are most likely uci collected samples from various races including some collected by the usada...

 

[LauraLyn]

Rhubroma posted this in the USADA II thread



Where did they get these blood samples. Are these all samples collected in the US? Did the Spanish, French and Italians hand over samples?

Good question. We still do not know where all the samples were collected. We also do not know where they were tested, who tested them, and when precisely.

It seems that they may even have been tested rather recently.

 

[Benotti69]

see my post in the phase 2 thread (before it clogged again ). those samples are likely long gone. the records remain.they are most likely uci collected samples from various races including some collected by the usada...

Thanks. I thought UCI was refusing to hand over samples or had destroyed all blood samples belonging to Armstrong. Did Saugy hand over samples behind UCI's back? Would that be a violation?

 

[LauraLyn]

Thanks. I thought UCI was refusing to hand over samples or had destroyed all blood samples belonging to Armstrong. Did Saugy hand over samples behind UCI's back? Would that be a violation?

It is unlikely UCI directly provided USADA with any blood samples they have or even access to those samples.

Once the USADA charging letter was issued, it would have been too late to destroy samples. Even before that it is highly unlikely.

 

[the big ring]

Thanks. I thought UCI was refusing to hand over samples or had destroyed all blood samples belonging to Armstrong. Did Saugy hand over samples behind UCI's back? Would that be a violation?

And if the samples were destroyed, how hard is it to modify a couple of numbers in a database to get them to an acceptable level? I've written a LIMS before and the first thing you do is an edit screen to allow corrections of wayward spectrometer values so they make sense.

Why is the lab in Lausanne the one that got the ABP gig? Other than it's in Switzerland and so is the UCI? The guy involved in the 2001 TdS positive is still there as the head of the lab!

Is the system so robust that incriminating evidence detected in the lab is untouchable / unmodifiable after the fact?

Seems highly unlikely to me.

Even Armstrong was able to republish his values with minor changes. How the hell can you trust anything coming out of the UCI office.

And JV has the temerity to say ABP is cleaning up the sport.

How do we know for sure that the ABP is based on actual detected values from the lab?

ETA: ABP tests are not A / B samples, are they? It's just one sample, grab the values, save them in the database. Done.

 

[Race Radio]

Rhubroma posted this in the USADA II thread



Where did they get these blood samples. Are these all samples collected in the US? Did the Spanish, French and Italians hand over samples?

This is wrong

France TV did not get the info from Travis and the positives are from Pre 2006

 

[the big ring]

This is wrong

France TV did not get the info from Travis and the positives are from Pre 2006

wtf are the French doing? They claimed LA was gambling on himself at the Tour but it sounds like the SCA insurance deal. They mentioned a bunch of riders as witnesses but no proof as to the veracity of these claims - no better than the Telegraaf or er yeah anyone who has a clue about the last 14 years of tours..

Makes no sense for Tygart to release something to FTV2 either - clusterflucked is what it sounds like.

Are they just crowing and trying to get some kudos in the media market or what?

 

[Benotti69]

This is wrong

France TV did not get the info from Travis and the positives are from Pre 2006

Rhubroma got his info from Gazzetta dello sport who must have wrongly reported what was on French TV.

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

Watched Stade 2 on France 2 last night.

They were trying to big themselves up when actually they had nothing of substance. There was some speculation as to who made the call to stop the raid in Pau. But no names were named, even Sarcoastically.

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

I couldn't see anything new in there, honestly. I think it was re-interpretation.

 

[B_Ugli]

I dont want to be a conspiracy theorist but I would suggest that the UCI may possibly have a "protected list" of riders which is compiled for financial, commercial and in some cases friendly reasons. Perhaps the list leaked to the public re Tour testing a couple of years back was in fact a protected list??? I seem to remember Mechov (one of the highest on that list) being tested only once that year.

If the alleged hushed up positive is to be believed in 1999 I cannot see the motives for the UCI covering it up. I am not saying it didnt happen but what would be their motives? At that time he had not even won a Tour which suggests that being protected is not just commercial or financially motivated. Again if what is alleged is proved to be fact.

Was it a pre-existing ONCE style gentlemans agreement (Bruyneel being and ex ONCE rider).

 

[LauraLyn]

. . . .

France TV did not get the info from Travis and the positives are from Pre 2006

You do not know that. If you had watched the program, you would know that Nicolas Geay did not reveal the source of his information.

 

[LauraLyn]

I couldn't see anything new in there, honestly. I think it was re-interpretation.

Yes, nothing all too new. The statement that Kristin Armstrong provided evidence is perhaps one new element.

I do not think this is quite the same thing as De Telegraaf/Telesport "leak" of the names of the riders that supposedly testified to the USADA. I suspect Team Armstrong had a role in that. There is no evidence concrete evidence for that, but it is based on how other articles in De Telegraaf are composed regarding Armstrong.

Telesport only made short mention of the Stade 2 report today while other European newspapers gave it much more attention.

 

[zalacain]

The programme was really a resume of what most people here already knew although the stopping ot the police raid in Pau was new to me. He said they were trying to find out who had called it off.

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

LauraLyn,

Please don't quote me, there's a good girl/boy. Is there a point to your inane babble? Or shall I just put you straight on 'ignore' like others have?

 

[ManInFull]

I dont want to be a conspiracy theorist but I would suggest that the UCI may possibly have a "protected list" of riders which is compiled for financial, commercial and in some cases friendly reasons. Perhaps the list leaked to the public re Tour testing a couple of years back was in fact a protected list??? I seem to remember Mechov (one of the highest on that list) being tested only once that year.

I hope that's not the case, but it's beginning to feel like that is certainly a possibility. Maybe I am the conspiracy guy, but I always wondered if someone decided that the 2006 TdF was too good to be true--Landis couldn't have such an incredible victory...Maybe Lance? Or that Alberto Contador, who was already extremely unpopular with the Fanboys and with other English-speaking fans, could not be allowed to win another TdF after he had not "respected" the yellow jersey, Andy Schleck?

Yes, likely ridiculous thoughts, but I suspect I may not be the only one who thinks these things now and then.

 

[zalacain]

Watched Stade 2 on France 2 last night.

They were trying to big themselves up when actually they had nothing of substance. There was some speculation as to who made the call to stop the raid in Pau. But no names were named, even Sarcoastically.

You can see for yourselves here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJc8IGFRvE8
seemed to me that several people had much of substance to say

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

You can see for yourselves here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJc8IGFRvE8
seemed to me that several people had much of substance to say

True, I should have expressed myself more eliquently. I meant there was nothing new to come out of the report. Although the Sarkozy slant is pretty obvious from the panel discussion.

 

[Bosco10]

Hi. I'm not a serious cyclist, but the Armstrong case fascinates me. I'm aware of the exaggerated 500 claim, but has Lance ever publicly said straight-up that he didn't dope or use PEDs? Or does he just dance around the question?

 

[LauraLyn]

Hi. I'm not a serious cyclist, but the Armstrong case fascinates me. I'm aware of the exaggerated 500 claim, but has Lance ever publicly said straight-up that he didn't dope or use PEDs? Or does he just dance around the question?

It is in his sworn submission to the Federal court in Austin, Armstrong vs. USADA.

But you are right. Mostly he has been very careful to avoid saying "I never doped". Usually he just said "I passed all the tests." (The number varies depending on when he is saying it and how many he believes he can get away with claiming. The largest claim, I believe, (again in the Fed case) is "500-600."

A real possible number is probably somewhere around 230.

Travis Tygart & the USADA requested Lance to send him a list of the tests he claimed to have had, but he did not respond.

There is a lot more information in earlier postings here.

 

[Merckx index]

Benotti:

Rhubroma posted this in the USADA II thread:

Citing the same French TV source (France 2) as CN, la Gazzetta dello Sport reports today that journalist Nicolas Geay recieved exclusive info from Tygart that USADA has possession of 38 blood samples of Armstrong, collected from in competition and surprise random tests between October 16 2008 and April 30 2012, which were found positive for prohibitive substances.

USADA had the intention of using them (provided by the UCI) in the Armstrong case, had he gone to arbitration. It is not known whether or not the UCI has ever provided Armstrong blood samples in the period betweem 99-05, when the Texan had his Tour streak.

Python replies:

see my post in the phase 2 thread (before it clogged again ). those samples are likely long gone. the records remain.they are most likely uci collected samples from various races including some collected by the usada...

To be a little more specific, about two months ago, after the charging letter came out, Python began a thread on the passport evidence against LA. This was based on the same 38 samples referred to in Rhubroma’s post, originally reported by The New York Daily News. As Python says, the samples probably were tossed, only the passport data remain (HT, reticulocytes, Hb %, etc.). IOW, the NYDN probably misunderstood the situation, thinking USADA had access to actual samples, when probably all they had access to were data from analysis of the samples. If this is the case, the French are reporting nothing new, as well as propagating this misunderstanding. There would be no previously undiscovered positives, because there would be no samples to test.

What may or may not exist in storage are old urine samples. These are what one would want to test, for DEHP as well as possibly CERA. Tyler says in his book that he saw LA transfuse following stage 11 in the 2000 TDF. This would have been the first rest day, and LA was in yellow at the time, so he would have been tested the next day, following stage 12. If any of that urine sample remains, I think there is a very good chance that it would test positive for DEHP. The post-stage sample would have been taken 18-36 hours following the transfusion, so DEHP levels should have been significantly higher than background. AFAIK, about 90% or more of blood bags in use at that time contained DEHP.

In a previous post, I point out that from 2002-2005, LA was in yellow two days or less following a rest day more than half a dozen times.

Edit: I just realized the EPO test was introduced at the Olympics in 2000. That was after the TDF that year. So there would have been no testing for EPO during that Tour. That being the case, I'm a little surprised that riders were transfusing, and wonder if the journalist who quoted Tyler was wrong about the date, or if Tyler himself was. Or possibly Ferrari, seeing that the EPO test was coming, and not sure if it would be used during the 2000 Tour, warned USPS riders to begin transfusing. But we also know that LA was using EPO as late as the TdS in 2001. He could have been using it to raise retics, and mask the effects of withdrawal, but I don't think that little trick was appreciated, even by Ferrari, at that time. I also recall reading somewhere that LA was relatively late to the transfusion game, that Ferrari had to warn him that using EPO was unsafe.

So some unanswered questions here.

 

[LauraLyn]

. . . .

This was based on the same 38 samples referred to in Rhubroma’s post, originally reported by The New York Daily News. As Python says, the samples probably were tossed, only the passport data remain (HT, reticulocytes, Hb %, etc.). IOW, the NYDN probably misunderstood the situation, thinking USADA had access to actual samples, when probably all they had access to were data from analysis of the samples. If this is the case, the French are reporting nothing new, as well as propagating this misunderstanding. There would be no previously undiscovered positives, because there would be no samples to test.

. . . .

The samples would not be tossed.

The Stade 2 [French TV] report from yesterday was a good summary of the case for the general public. There were no misunderstandings propogated.

 

[Bosco10]

It is in his sworn submission to the Federal court in Austin, Armstrong vs. USADA.

But you are right. Mostly he has been very careful to avoid saying "I never doped". Usually he just said "I passed all the tests." (The number varies depending on when he is saying it and how many he believes he can get away with claiming. The largest claim, I believe, (again in the Fed case) is "500-600."

A real possible number is probably somewhere around 230.

Travis Tygart & the USADA requested Lance to send him a list of the tests he claimed to have had, but he did not respond.

There is a lot more information in earlier postings here.

Thanks and wow! So he testified to that under oath. Wonder if he could end up in prison like Marion Jones.

 

[Oldman]

Thanks and wow! So he testified to that under oath. Wonder if he could end up in prison like Marion Jones.

He hasn't testified to under oath to any Federal charges. So-no. He would be stating a "fact" based on what was "known" during a civil suit so again; not a chance for consequences. The existence of the evidence and sworn testimony stating he intended, conspired and took aids to cheat would be of interest to SCA in a civil matter as they paid him Million$ based on fraudulent intent.