• 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!

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

Page 568 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.
 
Re:

StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.
Curious, how would you compare this with bill clinton impeachment, and Trump saga unfolding. To me, no different.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

I haven't paid any attention whatsoever to his podcasts...so what's all the euphoria? Does he offer any insight on doping issues at the Tour? Maybe things such as what might Sky's program consist of and how it compares to his & USPS? Now that would be some interesting stuff that would motivate me to tune in. Lol.

I don't understand why LA wants to be in the limelight considering his pending legal issues and the general consensus that many ex-fans still despise him...who could have imagined. And given the tumultuous end to his career, I would think he would be content to lay low with his millions of dollars, and be grateful that what happened to Marion Jones with the catastrophic consequences of her doping scandal didn’t happen to him.
 
Re:

StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents involved.
 
Re: Re:

Walkman said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents
involved.


Do we have proof of that?
 
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
Walkman said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents
involved.


Do we have proof of that?
Eyewitness accounts aren't proof enough?
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Walkman said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents involved.

It is hard to argue against that, but then they dont top the medals tables so are other countries 'just doing it' better?

I would argue this. USA, China and GB all finished ahead of Russia. We know GB have some big names in important influential positions, WADA, IAAF etc.....

It could be argued that Nike have the most sophisticated programs going or funded.
 
I don't think Lance is that unique--except for the fact he got caught.

He got caught because:
1. He is a pretty dumb guy
2. He cannot control his jerk impulses.
3. He is hilariously arrogant.
4. He had control over his team.
5. He cheated the USA (which had the power to really scare his accomplices into telling the truth).
6. He couldn't suppress 2. above enough to hire Floyd. Floyd got him gooood.

I look at Saiz, Vinokourov, and Brailsford and see much smarter, more capable guys. If they pulled what Armstrong pulled (just not with the USA), they would doubtless get away with it--especially given how pervasively corrupt pro cycling has been for the longest time.

Lance is just another putrid excresence in the filthy cesspool of pro cycling.

I laugh at the argument that Lance damaged pro cycling! Lance embodies the true (not wishfully thought) spirit of pro cycling!
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Visit site
Re:

MarkvW said:
I don't think Lance is that unique--except for the fact he got caught.

He got caught because:
1. He is a pretty dumb guy
2. He cannot control his jerk impulses.
3. He is hilariously arrogant.
4. He had control over his team.
5. He cheated the USA (which had the power to really scare his accomplices into telling the truth).
6. He couldn't suppress 2. above enough to hire Floyd. Floyd got him gooood.

I look at Saiz, Vinokourov, and Brailsford and see much smarter, more capable guys. If they pulled what Armstrong pulled (just not with the USA), they would doubtless get away with it--especially given how pervasively corrupt pro cycling has been for the longest time.

Lance is just another putrid excresence in the filthy cesspool of pro cycling.

I laugh at the argument that Lance damaged pro cycling! Lance embodies the true (not wishfully thought) spirit of pro cycling!
sad dude brah. :geek:
 
Re: Re:

Irondan said:
BullsFan22 said:
Walkman said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents
involved.


Do we have proof of that?
Eyewitness accounts aren't proof enough?


Whose eyes are we talking about? Those that doped, were caught, suspended, and didn't get the 'support' and money from their federation for their defense?
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
Walkman said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents involved.

It is hard to argue against that, but then they dont top the medals tables so are other countries 'just doing it' better?

I would argue this. USA, China and GB all finished ahead of Russia. We know GB have some big names in important influential positions, WADA, IAAF etc.....

It could be argued that Nike have the most sophisticated programs going or funded.

The Russians are the number 1 priority. Nobody cares about American or British dopers, otherwise people like Farah, Salazar, Rupp, Radcliffe, Ohurogou, Ennis-Hill, Brownlee brothers, American sprinters, etc, would have been suspended by now. Just look at USADA scrapping failed tests and re-instating dopers like Gil Roberts (a gold medalist in Rio). Tygart wants the Russians suspended from the Olympics, but when American medalists get popped, he defends them and doesn't want them suspended.
 
Re:

MarkvW said:
I don't think Lance is that unique--except for the fact he got caught.

He got caught because:
1. He is a pretty dumb guy
2. He cannot control his jerk impulses.
3. He is hilariously arrogant.
4. He had control over his team.
5. He cheated the USA (which had the power to really scare his accomplices into telling the truth).
6. He couldn't suppress 2. above enough to hire Floyd. Floyd got him gooood.

I look at Saiz, Vinokourov, and Brailsford and see much smarter, more capable guys. If they pulled what Armstrong pulled (just not with the USA), they would doubtless get away with it--especially given how pervasively corrupt pro cycling has been for the longest time.

Lance is just another putrid excresence in the filthy cesspool of pro cycling.

I laugh at the argument that Lance damaged pro cycling! Lance embodies the true (not wishfully thought) spirit of pro cycling!

I kind of agree. If you look at how sport has changed globally in the past few decades, it's a shift from 'teams' to 'brands' and simultaneously, 'supporters' to 'consumers'. i.e. from 'sport' to 'product/commodity form'.

But look at pro cycling: the teams were always brands! Apart from that period of national teams, you were always cheering a bank or an insurance company.

Point being: pro-cycling has always been a purely capitalistic venture, in all of its madness, glory and self-interest. Lance played that game to perfection. He didn't invent it!
 
Re: Re:

BullsFan22 said:
Walkman said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents
involved.


Do we have proof of that?

http://www.bbc.com/sport/36823453
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/18/wada-report-russia-sochi-winter-olympics

It seems so.
HOWEVER, the one thing that was never cleared in the Armstrong case was if Lance was tipped off before out of competition tests. There has been some reports:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12726/AFLD-claims-Armstrong-was-regularly-tipped-off-about-tests.aspx

But I feel like CN forums and others has soundly failed in this part of the Armstrong story. If he was tipped off, then by who? There are multiple organizations that do tests, WADA, USADA, AFLD and perhaps even more. Did he have people everywhere? Or are there a central unit (the UCI) that has information of all the different organizers and knows when they aim to test riders? Thus making it possible to gain all the necessary information through one source?
 
Re: Re:

Walkman said:
It seems so.
HOWEVER, the one thing that was never cleared in the Armstrong case was if Lance was tipped off before out of competition tests. There has been some reports:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12726/AFLD-claims-Armstrong-was-regularly-tipped-off-about-tests.aspx

But I feel like CN forums and others has soundly failed in this part of the Armstrong story. If he was tipped off, then by who? There are multiple organizations that do tests, WADA, USADA, AFLD and perhaps even more. Did he have people everywhere? Or are there a central unit (the UCI) that has information of all the different organizers and knows when they aim to test riders? Thus making it possible to gain all the necessary information through one source?
I am pretty certain that at least part of the information originates from the Kelme-whistleblower Jesús Manzano, who told in a L'Équipe interview that Dr. Walter Viru tipped off Luis Garcia del Moral about possible tests:

http://www.cyclisme-dopage.com/portraits/delmoral.htm
Jesus Manzano affirme dans une interview au journal L'Equipe que Del Moral était informé par le Dr Viru, médecin de l'équipe Kelme et responsable d'un laboratoire acrédité pour les contrôles antidopage, lorsque des contrôles devaient être effectués sur des coureurs de l'équipe US Postal.
I am pretty convinced that this was mentioned in the English language audiobook-version of Tyler Hamilton's The Secret Race (by Blackstone) and it is mentioned in some of the translations, but omitted at least in the 2013 revised UK edition (it should be in a footnote between footnotes on pages 178 and 187). Not sure whether it is the British libel laws or whether the information was unreliable...?
 
Re: Re:

Walkman said:
BullsFan22 said:
Walkman said:
StyrbjornSterki said:
The breadth, the depth, the corruptive influence, the moral turpitude, the criminality, and the sheer professionalism of the Pharmstrong doping ring is an order of magnitude grander than anything else ever uncovered. Nothing else comes close.

One would imagine certain characteristics are common to all doping programs, such as the cheating (the PEDs themselves), the lying (cover-ups), the (international) drug smuggling, and maybe even the money laundering (even on those points, Pharmstrong's was perpetrated with far more élan than the rest). But how many others were involved in extorting the complicity of the unwilling? Orchestrating the personal destruction of those unwilling to comply (or daring to j'accuse)? Witness intimidation/tampering? Bribery and/or extortion of sporting officials?

How many were so bold as to defraud a government agency for tens of millions of dollars with the full intention of violating the terms of the agreement under which the monies were paid?

How many others have traded on their stature as a "legitimate" sporting hero to set themselves up as the figurehead for a worldwide charitable movement and then siphoned off hundreds of millions of donated dollars to purposes only at best tangentially related to the cause?


I don't give a fig about the doping or the lying. Competitive cyclists were caught doping all the way back to the 1860s, so the doping is SSDD. And one would presume they've been lying about it every bit as long as they've been doping. What I find so morally reprehensible is the damage Pharmstrong caused to the sport's integrity, and how he spurned the opportunity to get it started healing.


I am the first one to throw Lance under the bus, no questions asked, but this statement is simply false. The Russian state sponsored doping regime is clearly more sophisticated as evidenced by the fact that they had FSB agents
involved.


Do we have proof of that?

http://www.bbc.com/sport/36823453
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/18/wada-report-russia-sochi-winter-olympics

It seems so.
HOWEVER, the one thing that was never cleared in the Armstrong case was if Lance was tipped off before out of competition tests. There has been some reports:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12726/AFLD-claims-Armstrong-was-regularly-tipped-off-about-tests.aspx

But I feel like CN forums and others has soundly failed in this part of the Armstrong story. If he was tipped off, then by who? There are multiple organizations that do tests, WADA, USADA, AFLD and perhaps even more. Did he have people everywhere? Or are there a central unit (the UCI) that has information of all the different organizers and knows when they aim to test riders? Thus making it possible to gain all the necessary information through one source?


Almost the entire Russian national cross country ski team trains and competes exclusively in continental Europe, where they get tested on a regular basis, even more so, since they are Russian and they have to be held under a microscope. One of the men in question, Alexander Legkov, won the 50km in Sochi and got a silver in the relay, trained with german and swiss coaches, outside of Russia, in verified anti doping labs. The week before the Olympics, he won the tune up event, a 15km classic. The week after the Olympics, he finished 3rd, week after that? 3rd. The last weekend of racing that season, he finished 3rd twice, in a skiathlon race and in the overall tour. Finished in the top 5 in the Tour de Ski around new year's, and before the holidays, helped the Russians to a relay win in Norway, and prior to that finished 3rd in a mini tour opening weekend in Finland. Every podium finisher gets tested. As you can see, he had many top 3 finishes that season. Where are the test results from all those races? Did the Russians break in to the labs and switch urine samples in Switzerland? Or did the FSB somehow manipulate tests in Norway, Finland, Sweden, Italy, Germany and Austria?

The Russians swept the 50km in Sochi. Not a shocking result, because the guys on that podium have won world cup races before, as well as world championship medals and Legkov and Chernousov have medals form world juniors/U23's. Chernousov wasn't named in that report. He is a longtime training partner of Legkov's. They trained together outside the Russian team from May 2010. They have since parted ways, but how is Chernousov's name not on the 'alleged' (I say 'alleged,' because that's what the document is filled with) list? Did he refuse to 'allegedly' dope? Did they forget about him? Did he go through the cracks? Or is the guy that tried to commit suicide, sued his wife and fled to California in 2011 talking out his behind?
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

Okay, I give, I admit it, I was wrong. I failed to consider government actors, and amateur-level competition.

Pharmstrong only ran he SECOND most expansive doping program caught out to that point.


It' a distinction without a difference. All other pro cycling PEDs programs were pikers by comparison.


Besides rumours that Pharmstrong was given advance notice of surprise testing, there's also been speculation he might have played a role (at least influentially, maybe moreso) in the positives of FLandis and El Pistolero.
 
Re: Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession

StyrbjornSterki said:
Pharmstrong only ran he SECOND most expansive doping program caught out to that point.
My favourite Christopher Hitchens quote:

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

1) Aside from some troublingly motivated, biased and bombastic bitching and whining from part of people such as Tygart and Walsh, I am not certain if there exists any evidence for the allegation that the USPS program was "more extensive than any previously revealed in professional sports history". As far as I know, the magnitude of PED-use as well as the arsenal of doping products used by the USPS/Discovery appears to be same or even limited when compared to the methods used by their competitors. Even the CIRC-report has the following paragraph about differences between "Schumi" and "Ufe":
CIRC-report said:
Dr Michele Ferrari was reported to be conservative in terms of how he recommended and administered doping programmes. In comparison, a number of riders characterised Dr Eufemiano Fuentes as the “go-to” doctor if you wanted to try new, sometimes “experimental”, ideas in doping.
Even Jonathan Vaughters has in his sworn affidavit the following paragraph:
Vaughters Affidavit said:
84. In August or September of 1999 I had a conversation with Johan about the Tour de France. We were talking about how all the other teams were saying that Lance had a drug that was developed by Nasa. Johan said, "if people only knew we were using the same amount of drugs we used back on ONCE, in fact we used a lot less than we did on ONCE".
Perhaps they did it "better". What if the USPS handled the logistics of the doping better? What is the problem of running a doping program more professionally? Is is better that the blood storage and other things are run by Dr. Nick in a fashion reminiscent of a Marx brothers comedy?
Artists-and-the-Value-of-Learning-to-Market-Yourself..jpg

In the end, there are some strange and troubling items (UCI meetings etc.) about the USPS, but when one contrasts this to the evidence on other teams/riders/doctors and in mind all the focus there has been on Michele Ferrari, Lance and his teammates, to prove that they had a super-program, the researchers have come up pretty much with nothing.
Zero, zip, nada.
 

TRENDING THREADS