Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession)

[TexPat]

Was talking to a friend last week and he as talking about when he first moved to Europe as a Pro and was at the Challenge Mallorca. He said it surprised that all the staff looked like they belonged in prison, always a surprised to Americans. Cycling appears to be filled with carnies.

Duffy springs to mind!

 

[TexPat]

and Lance fit in perfectly and seamlessly

I'm afraid your right on the mark there.
Stapleton, too.

 

[mewmewmew13]

omg..
this..
the last sentences are pure gold



http://articles.latimes.com/1996-06-29/sports/sp-19594_1_tour-dupont

 

[Race Radio]

Duffy springs to mind!

The guy would be at home running the Tilt-A-Whirl

 

[mewmewmew13]

effing large pic!
destroyed my mind


…and I remember when they had to hose down the seat before they loaded the next poor fool onto the ride….hence the white rubber shoes
#hedidthat

 

[Race Radio]

effing large pic!
destroyed my mind

Sorry, tried to re-size it but could not.....besides this way you get Duffy in all his glory. Love the suspenders

 

[ChewbaccaD]

One can conclude anything one wants, but one should not assume that investigations remain ongoing forever.

It's most likely that whatever investigation has been done has already been terminated or submitted to the US Attorney. I can't imagine what more investigation the feds need to do to decide whether or not they can make a case against Lance Armstrong. It's not like Armstrong's obstructing acts were particularly difficult to investigate.

Obstructing also has a five year statute of limitations, and there's likely no room for "tolling," or RICO, or "conspiracy" extensions.

It would also be very unusual for an obstruction prosecution to parallel a civil case where the feds are seeking a lot of money. It is inappropriate and unwise to use a criminal case as a wedge to seek money in a civil case, or to appear to do so.

The public announcement of the termination of Birotte's criminal investigation was unusual. You shouldn't expect anything similar from another investigation. One of the problems with Birotte's case that prompted his announcement might have been leaks. There is some reason to believe that the investigators in Birotte's case may not have been professional. Remember the statements in the media that some people involved in the investigation were surprised by Birotte's decision and thought there was enough evidence to go further--such statements should never have been made.

The only way anyone would know whether an investigation is closed or open would be if that person had access to the FBI case files or could identify a recent investigative act (contacting a person, summoning a person to a GJ, etc.). Otherwise, we're simply looking at a "Tuesday" kind of announcement. Or maybe the person making the claim is just trying to aggravate Lance Armstrong.

There might be an investigation right now or there might not. (Sorry about the gray area, Dr. Maserati). The facts point more to the latter than to the former.

Cool story Bro!

I used to think you were a bafoon, but now I think you just might be the most brilliant troll here.

 

[Berzin]

Seeing as Armstrong exposês are becoming de rigueur, any chance we see Walsh's book "LA Confidentiel" finally translated into English anytime soon?

I know it contains nothing earth-shattering and is old hat by now, but I'm sure some people would like to read it.

Then again, Willy Voet's book "Breaking The Chain" was never fully translated, either. I heard many pertinent passages were simply left out of the English translation for whatever reason.

 

[Race Radio]

Seeing as Armstrong exposês are becoming de rigueur, any chance we see Walsh's book "LA Confidentiel" finally translated into English anytime soon?

I know it contains nothing earth-shattering and is old hat by now, but I'm sure some people would like to read it.

Then again, Willy Voet's book "Breaking The Chain" was never fully translated, either. I heard many pertinent passages were simply left out of the English translation for whatever reason.

Most of LA Confidential made it into Lance to Landis. I used to have an English translation and it was not much different. I don't think much was left out of Voet's book except some things he was sued for.

 

[86TDFWinner]

The guy would be at home running the Tilt-A-Whirl

LOL, definitely the Ferris Wheel

 

[Berzin]

I don't think much was left out of Voet's book except some things he was sued for.

Those are the parts I want to read.

 

[DirtyWorks]

omg..
this..
the last sentences are pure gold



http://articles.latimes.com/1996-06-29/sports/sp-19594_1_tour-dupont

To the bolded... WHAT????!!!!???

That whole article is the fraud in full propaganda mode. At first I was going to award it the best, but really, the myth was sort of vaguely chained to facts at the time.

Armstrong's body is nearly off the charts in terms of metabolic efficiency.

"The way he can process energy is twice as high as the average American male," said Jay T. Kearney, senior sports physiologist at the U.S. Olympic Training Center at Colorado Springs, Colo. "Lance has the highest value we've recorded for any cyclist here at the lab."

Maybe we need a poll. I can't decide.

 

[Race Radio]

From the NYT article

bags filled with the blood booster EPO, human growth hormone, blood thinners, amphetamines, cortisone, painkillers and testosterone, a particularly popular drug he’d hand to riders “like candy.”

By 1993, Armstrong was using all of those substances,

Worlds on EPO. Yup.

One more troll talking point dies

 

[mewmewmew13]

Which makes the hospital convo even more clearly true to non-believers ^^^^

 

[Oldman]

Hendershot.....finally

I've mentioned some of the very talented junior cyclists and espoirs from our area that, once exposed to the harsh and drug-tainted future of the pro's life quit the sport. Tim Peddie was one of those and he wasn't alone. The really sad fact is there are many that had better natural talent. Armstrong's tri-credentials are clearly questionable and the coaches that grabbed on to that potential needed to keep their jobs. They weren't necessarily looking for pure talent...they needed riders that would do what the competition did.
It's be interesting to hear his view on that moment and his decisions on cycling as a career.

 

[ralphbert]

It's be interesting to hear his view on that moment and his decisions on cycling as a career.

Interesting only in getting another opportunity to see wundernut twist the narrative to his needs. Having some uncoloured truth come from those lips is as likely as Putin winning the peace prize.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

Nice quote: "What we did was tread the fine line of dropping dead on your bike and winning"

Love how this kills the "leveling the playing field" and the "conservative" arguments in one shot. And confirms a lot of the cancer speculation. And confirms Lance as a very high level pathological liar.

 

[MarkvW]

Love how this kills the "leveling the playing field" and the "conservative" arguments in one shot. And confirms a lot of the cancer speculation. And confirms Lance as a very high level pathological liar.

Lance lied TWICE to Oprah!! That's unheard of! That's just got to get him a third apology show!

 

[andy1234]

Was talking to a friend last week and he was talking about when he first moved to Europe as a Pro and was at the Challenge Mallorca. He said it surprised him that all the staff looked like they belonged in prison, always a surprise to Americans. Cycling appears to be filled with carnies.

Yes, cycling was definitely no place for fresh faced, trust fund, yanks.
Those that stayed, caught on quickly enough though, and channeled their inner trailer trash.....

 

[jens_attacks]

From the NYT article



Worlds on EPO. Yup.

One more troll talking point dies

link pls

by the way, lance's story was hard to believe. in 1993 if you wanted to compete at the highest level, epo was already a must imo. it was already widespread
almost as hard to believe as the 2009 lie.

 

[kingjr]

link pls

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/s...ride-for-lance-armstrong.html?ref=sports&_r=0

 

[blackcat]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/s...ride-for-lance-armstrong.html?ref=sports&_r=0

Would that be the first time Yellow Rose gets a mention in the Grey Lady?

The Grey Lady fa chrissakes. The Yellow Rose.

I think it is about time Yellow Rose becomes a definite article The Yellow Rose. so so so good. They gotta franchise the $hit outta this like Spearmint Rhino.

VIP Rooms ftw

Armstrong did poorly and admitted to Neal that he’d been up late the night before, drinking at an Austin strip club named the Yellow Rose. Neal passed it off as his being just another rambunctious teenager testing his newfound freedom.

Tina Turner Private Dancer up the charts like a rocket http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4QnalIHlVc&feature=kp

 

[Merckx index]

From the NYT article



Worlds on EPO. Yup.

One more troll talking point dies

So he was taking EPO at least four years before cancer. I'm not surprised, but this deepens the mystery of how he became such a good climber, and a better TTer, after cancer. RR and some others think he was a high responder, and it does appear he has a naturally low HT that would have allowed him to get a larger benefit from EPO than many other riders. But why did the benefit not really become apparent until after cancer? If being a high responder is what enabled him to win all those Tours, why could he do nothing in GC in four tries before cancer? Other alleged high responders, like Ulle and Pantani, seemed to reach their GC potential much sooner. Even Riis was a better climber than Armstrong at that time.

Was it Ferrari? Maybe, but I find it hard to believe that Ferrari + EPO made a bigger difference in his GC performance over EPO alone than EPO alone did over no EPO. All EPO seemingly did for him is make him a much better one day racer. For four years. Then boom, suddenly he can climb, not just better, but he goes from a total non-climber to the best in the world. Was Ferrari's program really that good?

Was it being protected by the UCI? Maybe, but all that would have done is allowed him to take as much EPO as he wanted, and he could have done that in the 90s before cancer, when there was no 50% rule. Protection would have allowed him to take more than his competitors, but it wouldn't explain how he was so much better than he was in the mid 90s.

Was he using some other substance, such as HemAssist or PFCs? Maybe, but plenty of testimony (including his own, for what that's worth) indicates he was blood doping throughout his TDF dominance, so it doesn't sound as though anything else he was using was very important. If he could have achieved the same effects with a non-detectable substance, there wouldn't have been much point in using EPO or even transfusions.

 

[ChrisE]

So he was taking EPO at least four years before cancer. I'm not surprised, but this deepens the mystery of how he became such a good climber, and a better TTer, after cancer. RR and some others think he was a high responder, and it does appear he has a naturally low HT that would have allowed him to get a larger benefit from EPO than many other riders. But why did the benefit not really become apparent until after cancer? If being a high responder is what enabled him to win all those Tours, why could he do nothing in GC in four tries before cancer? Other alleged high responders, like Ulle and Pantani, seemed to reach their GC potential much sooner. Even Riis was a better climber than Armstrong at that time.

Was it Ferrari? Maybe, but I find it hard to believe that Ferrari + EPO made a bigger difference in his GC performance over EPO alone than EPO alone did over no EPO. All EPO seemingly did for him is make him a much better one day racer. For four years. Then boom, suddenly he can climb, not just better, but he goes from a total non-climber to the best in the world. Was Ferrari's program really that good?

Was it being protected by the UCI? Maybe, but all that would have done is allowed him to take as much EPO as he wanted, and he could have done that in the 90s before cancer, when there was no 50% rule. Protection would have allowed him to take more than his competitors, but it wouldn't explain how he was so much better than he was in the mid 90s.

Was he using some other substance, such as HemAssist or PFCs? Maybe, but plenty of testimony (including his own, for what that's worth) indicates he was blood doping throughout his TDF dominance, so it doesn't sound as though anything else he was using was very important. If he could have achieved the same effects with a non-detectable substance, there wouldn't have been much point in using EPO or even transfusions.

So many 'maybe's'.

Now Hendershot is saying that LA was taking EPO in 1993, yet he never administered it to him. And we have affidavits from others on the team saying that EPO didn't start until 95.

Just what to believe from Ms. Macur, who was so cavalier about bribing by our hero FA, we now latch onto this new bit of porn like white on rice. Don't look now, but she also has our hero going to Como getting his fixes from Testa.

Yes, so many 'maybe's'. The LA saga is just like the bible. Only believe the parts that support your convenient prejudices.

 

[SundayRider]

So he was taking EPO at least four years before cancer. I'm not surprised, but this deepens the mystery of how he became such a good climber, and a better TTer, after cancer. RR and some others think he was a high responder, and it does appear he has a naturally low HT that would have allowed him to get a larger benefit from EPO than many other riders. But why did the benefit not really become apparent until after cancer? If being a high responder is what enabled him to win all those Tours, why could he do nothing in GC in four tries before cancer? Other alleged high responders, like Ulle and Pantani, seemed to reach their GC potential much sooner. Even Riis was a better climber than Armstrong at that time.

Was it Ferrari? Maybe, but I find it hard to believe that Ferrari + EPO made a bigger difference in his GC performance over EPO alone than EPO alone did over no EPO. All EPO seemingly did for him is make him a much better one day racer. For four years. Then boom, suddenly he can climb, not just better, but he goes from a total non-climber to the best in the world. Was Ferrari's program really that good?

Was it being protected by the UCI? Maybe, but all that would have done is allowed him to take as much EPO as he wanted, and he could have done that in the 90s before cancer, when there was no 50% rule. Protection would have allowed him to take more than his competitors, but it wouldn't explain how he was so much better than he was in the mid 90s.

Was he using some other substance, such as HemAssist or PFCs? Maybe, but plenty of testimony (including his own, for what that's worth) indicates he was blood doping throughout his TDF dominance, so it doesn't sound as though anything else he was using was very important. If he could have achieved the same effects with a non-detectable substance, there wouldn't have been much point in using EPO or even transfusions.

I think he was definetly on EPO during 1993, amongst other things. He was definetly on EPO pre '96.

Maybe his training was a lot more dedicated on to become a GT rider? This combined with his PED program achieved the desired effect. He also lost a lot of muscle mass - both upper and lower body.