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

[Digger]

At this point it is clear you have no intention of discussing this. Landis A&B had already tested positive. That is the process. He was offer the opportunity for a reduced sanction. He turned it down

If you actually read the WADA code you would not need the faux outrage.



There is a process for Floyd to address any testing "Inconsistencies" He followed that process to the end. Don't know why you would pretend he was not allowed to defend.Vaughters was supposed to tell all, but Floyd was supposed to keep quite? Zerbil never should have talked about doping on other teams and riders?

You have no idea what you are talking about - what USADA did or didn't do - and how they subsequently contravened their own rules...one small example - their representation for the Johan arbitration sitting. And that is only one example.

He followed the case to the end but you clearly have zero idea about the make up of arbitration panels.

 

[Race Radio]

You have no idea what you are talking about

You should start a Floyd thread to explain to us. A suggestion, perhaps you can include some facts and not just innuendo this time

Still waiting for you to explain to us how Travis broke the rules in the Armstrong case.

 

[Digger]

You should start a Floyd thread to explain to us.

Still waiting for you to explain to us how Travis broke the rules in the Armstrong case.

the clue is in the above post (Johan link)...anyway you are the one with all the insider info

 

[thehog]

At this point it is clear you have no intention of discussing this. Landis A&B had already tested positive. That is the process. He was offer the opportunity for a reduced sanction. He turned it down

If you actually read the WADA code you would not need the faux outrage.

There is a process for Floyd to address any testing "Inconsistencies" He followed that process to the end. Don't know why you would pretend he was not allowed to defend.

Vaughters was supposed to tell all, but Floyd was supposed to keep quite? Zerbil never should have talked about doping on other teams and riders?

Thanks. I'm still not following though.

The expectation was that Landis revealed everything he knew about USPS to receive a reduced sentence still assumes "guilt" on his "testosterone" positive.

We're discussing Tygart's method in seeking USDA dirt rather than dealing directly with the testosterone positive. Because once Landis wasn't able to provide the dirt Tygart went after him with... errr... Joe Papp! you know that guy?

I also think the assistance rule in full helps what would be required. Perhaps not as straightforward as you depict.

And, yes, I agree with you, where was Vaugters when this went down? Oh that's right he was confirming to a arbitration hearing in Texas that there was no doping at USPS. Perhaps Tygart should have given him 10 years for lying in the first instance? (I jest).

10.5.3 Substantial Assistance in Discovering or Establishing Anti-Doping Rule Violations.

An Anti-Doping Organization with results management responsibility for an anti-doping rule violation may, prior to a final appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of the time to appeal, uspend a part of the period of Ineligibility imposed in an individual case where the Athlete or other Person has provided Substantial Assistance to an Anti- Doping Organization, criminal authority or professional disciplinary body which results in the Anti-Doping Organization discovering or establishing an anti-doping rule violation by another Person or which results in a criminal or disciplinary body discovering or establishing a criminal offense or the breach of professional rules by another Person. After a final appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of time to appeal, an Anti-Doping Organization may only suspend a part of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility with the approval of WADA and the applicable International Federation. The extent to which the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended shall be based on the seriousness of the anti-doping rule violation committed by the Athlete or other Person and the significance of the Substantial Assistance provided by the Athlete or other Person to the effort to eliminate doping in sport. No more than three-quarters of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended. 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. If the Anti-Doping Organization suspends any part of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility under this Article, the Anti- Doping Organization shall promptly provide a written justification for its decision to each Anti-Doping Organization having a right to appeal the decision. If the Anti-Doping Organization subsequently reinstates any part of the suspended period of Ineligibility because the Athlete or other Person has failed to provide the Substantial Assistance which was anticipated, the Athlete or other Person may appeal the reinstatement pursuant to Article 13.2.

 

[Race Radio]

the clue is in the above post (Johan link)...anyway you are the one with all the insider info

More innuendo.....let us know when you have some facts.

 

[Digger]

Thanks. I'm still not following though.

The expectation was that Landis revealed everything he knew about USPS to receive a reduced sentence still assumes "guilt" on his "testosterone" positive.

We're discussing Tygart's method in seeking USDA dirt rather than dealing directly with the testosterone positive. Because once Landis wasn't able to cooperate Tygart went after him with and spill the beans Armstrong... errr... Joe Papp, you know that guy?

I also think the assistance rule in full helps what would be required. Perhaps not as straightforward as you depict.

Travis has received hero status - but the point is this - as landis said, why should he reward USADA (in 2006), with info on Lance, for not doing their job, when it's partly their fault they all had so little option but to dope....'I was mad at them....they were at fault, I was at fault, we were all at fault.'

 

[Digger]

More innuendo.....let us know when you have some facts.

like Richie porte look into his eyes at lunch facts?

Anyway the important point here is Ventoux last year was encouraging.
It's nice that doping died with lance - which nicely brings us right back to the point of this thread right now - the blatant hypocrisy of so many in terms of lance and others.

 

[gooner]

This "only about Lance" stuff is a total strawman. I haven't heard one prolific poster on here say doping went with Lance gone from the sport.

But hold on, Travis doesn't have a clue and Di Luca talked sense about legalising doping.

 

[Digger]

This "only about Lance" stuff is a total strawman. I haven't heard one prolific poster on here say doping went with Lance gone from the sport.

But hold on, Travis doesn't have a clue and Di Luca talked sense about legalising doping.:rolleyes:

Yep - because clearly the tests work

 

[Bluenote]

like Richie porte look into his eyes at lunch facts?

Anyway the important point here is Ventoux last year was encouraging.
It's nice that doping died with lance - which nicely brings us right back to the point of this thread right now - the blatant hypocrisy of so many in terms of lance and others.

So, will you be answering my questions - giving specific suggestions on how current anti-doping efforts can be improved?

Do you want to engage in dialoge about how to fix anti-doping?

Or do you want to sit around spewing strawmen that 'oh, everyone thinks doping stopped with Armstrong?'

 

[thehog]

This "only about Lance" stuff is a total strawman.

I read David Walsh's book 'Inside Sky' and 'The Climb'. I believe now its become some form of religion.

Its in print and published. Gone well beyond a strawman, its a "belief".

 

[Digger]

So, will you be answering my questions - giving specific suggestions on how current anti-doping efforts can be improved?

Do you want to engage in dialoge about how to fix anti-doping?

Or do you want to sit around spewing strawmen that 'oh, everyone thinks doping stopped with Armstrong?'

anti doping can't be fixed

there you go - sorted

anyway back to the original point - when others are as vociferous about the current crop as they were about lance........because clearly doping died with lance

 

[gooner]

Yep - because clearly the tests work

Thanks for proving what I'm been saying.

Again, who has said doping went after Lance's downfall? This strawman has been thrown a lot at people.

 

[Digger]

Thanks for proving what I'm been saying.

Again, who has said doping went after Lance's downfall? This strawman has been thrown a lot at people.

so there are tests for gene doping - awesome


I said doping went with lance - testing works

Doping is now gone


Sky are clean

Johan and lance bullied everyone into doping


And everyone who went after lance with such gusto has been as tough on all the others...

 

[thehog]

like Richie porte look into his eyes at lunch facts?

Anyway the important point here is Ventoux last year was encouraging.
It's nice that doping died with lance - which nicely brings us right back to the point of this thread right now - the blatant hypocrisy of so many in terms of lance and others.

And David Moncoutie, apparently he's a doper.

 

[Digger]

And David Moncoutie, apparently he's a doper.

When they met for lunch David wouldn't look into his eyes.

Anyway it's 'encouraging' to see the sport clean itself up so much.

Everyone found Jesus.

 

[gooner]

I read David Walsh's book 'Inside Sky' and 'The Climb'. I believe now its become some form of religion.

Its in print and published. Gone well beyond a strawman, its a "belief".

Where did he say doping was gone? He has said he thinks it's cleaner, not gone. You obviously didn:t hear him talking about Riis and Vino during the Tour. Whatever anyone thinks, no one knows for certain if Brailsford is the next coming of the two just mentioned. He said doping was all gone in "ITS" he yet has a whole chapter to JTL.

At the Vuelta last year, he said he tweeted he didn't like what he saw. Last year he said similar about Cancellara.

Where did he say that direct quote? In fact who on this forum has said it?

 

[Digger]

Where did he say doping was gone? He has said he thinks it's cleaner, not gone. You obviously didn:t hear him talking about Riis and Vino during the Tour. Whatever anyone thinks, no one knows for certain if Brailsford is the next coming of the two just mentioned. He said doping was all gone in "ITS" he yet has a whole chapter to JTL.

At the Vuelta last year, he said he tweeted he didn't like what he saw. Last year he said similar about Cancellara.

Where did he say that direct quote? In fact who on this forum has said it?

You do realise this post makes Walsh sound an even bigger hypocrite

 

[gooner]

so there are tests for gene doping - awesome


I said doping went with lance - testing works

Doping is now gone


Sky are clean

Johan and lance bullied everyone into doping


And everyone who went after lance with such gusto has been as tough on all the others...

Maybe we should legalise Xenon gas str by your logic.

Again, strawman with the Lance stuff.

 

[Digger]

Maybe we should legalise Xenon gas str by your logic.

Again, strawman with the Lance stuff.

Well the system of catching one per hundred works well.

 

[gooner]

You do realise this post makes Walsh sound an even bigger hypocrite

I don't agree with Walsh on everything but this thing thrown around that people think doping ended with Lance is a falsehood. Walsh's comments about Vino, Riis, Canc and fhe Vuelta last year say otherwise.

I still haven't got an answer to who has said this comment.

 

[Digger]

I don't agree with Walsh on everything but this thing thrown around that people think doping ended with Lance is a falsehood. Walsh's comments about Vino, Riis, Canc and fhe Vuelta last year say otherwise.

I still haven't got an answer to who has said this comment.

I already answered.

Anyway Walsh calls out these guys and defends sky who kick their a&&...Walsh is one example of the hypocrisy

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Well, I never disliked Lance because of the doping. I disliked him because of how he treated people. That hasn't changed, and neither has my Hater Love. If I have to carry the banner, I will.

Most of the reason I don't like Froome is because of his fan's blindness to his obvious doping, and his insufferable personality.

Dopers dope, and they always will. On some level, it's even understandable.

Treating people like crap isn't.

I'm a Hater, deal with it.

 

[Afrank]

Everyone, please cease with baiting and trolling each other or bans will be handed out.

 

[the delgados]

Well, I never disliked Lance because of the doping. I disliked him because of how he treated people. That hasn't changed, and neither has my Hater Love. If I have to carry the banner, I will.

Most of the reason I don't like Froome is because of his fan's blindness to his obvious doping, and his insufferable personality.

Dopers dope, and they always will. On some level, it's even understandable.

Treating people like sh!t isn't.

I'm a Hater, deal with it.

I'm no Froome fan, nor am I a troller (I think), but I wonder why you say Froome has an "insufferable" personality. Seems to me he keeps things pretty low key. He tries to fly under the radar. Just curious to know what it is about him that annoys you so much.