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

[FitSsikS]

Livestrong still exists?

I think they are life support mode these days looking for a new angle. Or a new angel.

You'll never recognize them now.

 

[thehog]

You'll never recognize them now.

Maybe they'll get bought out in a hostile take over by another charity?

I've seen old timers still wearing the kit out on the road to hisses and hollers by a passing group.

I think Enron has a better name!

 

[DirtyWorks]

... there is more to it than just the PED results.

Yes! Nothing like the owner of the National Federation personally profiting from the success of the team. And how about the International federation protecting him by sanctioning Armstrong's former teammates? How about those unenforced positives? How about those positives his former teammates got for leaving the cult?

A race is hard to lose when the federations are clearing the way in every way imaginable for a win.

 

[D-Queued]

The US Postal Team Time Trial was better executed by USPS than the other teams I saw televised. Maybe they just showed the bad teams on TV.
Just looking at it and their smooth transitions. All speed and any PEDs aside - they were just better than everyone else.
Like riding cobbles, TTs, crossing fields to avoid a crash etc., there is more to it than just the PED results.

Well, so long as YOU saw it televised... it must have been profound.

A couple of questions, though:

1. How many of those Tours did they even have a TTT?
2. How much time did Lancey-poo pick up on his rivals on TTT stages?
3. How relevant was the TTT again?

You may want to reconsider your adoration given that the 'winning strategy' has nothing to do with TTT's.

Since you actually watched the TdF on TV, you must be familiar with it.

If so, then you may be familiar with the fact that the winning TdF strategy, since forever, has everything to do with a combination of ITT's and mountain stages.

As those are the stages that get the most benefit from PEDs and blood transfusions, then the best PED wins.

Take Lance's PEDS away and the racehorse reverts to a donkey.

LeMond was being charitable when he said Lance without PEDs was a possible 30th.

No way. He wouldn't even finish.

Dave.

 

[TheEnoculator]

Well, so long as YOU saw it televised... it must have been profound.

A couple of questions, though:

1. How many of those Tours did they even have a TTT?
2. How much time did Lancey-poo pick up on his rivals on TTT stages?
3. How relevant was the TTT again?

You may want to reconsider your adoration given that the 'winning strategy' has nothing to do with TTT's.

Since you actually watched the TdF on TV, you must be familiar with it.

If so, then you may be familiar with the fact that the winning TdF strategy, since forever, has everything to do with a combination of ITT's and mountain stages.

As those are the stages that get the most benefit from PEDs and blood transfusions, then the best PED wins.

Take Lance's PEDS away and the racehorse reverts to a donkey.

LeMond was being charitable when he said Lance without PEDs was a possible 30th.

No way. He wouldn't even finish.

Dave.

For a one-day racer like Armstrong to finish top 30 in the GT would be quite an achievement. Even Gilbert has never cracked the top 30 in a GT himself. I personally think an un-doped Armstrong would be at most a top 50 rider, if he's lucky.

 

[darwin553]

You know, considering that after the attorney asks you who you are, and certain other personal information, everything else pretty easily fits under "material" as it is defined for the purposes of perjury charges...

So in my own way, I guess I'm not agreeing with you.

Yup an attorney isn't going to then, after swearing in the witness and getting some personal details, ask irrelevant questions to their case to a witness during their testimony in order to waste the court/hearing's time

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Thirty years prior to the 1999 UCI benders:

Suspension lifted Merckx JAN JANSSEN : " A GREAT SCANDAL "

The International Wieier Union ( UCI ) has decided to lift the suspension. Of Belgian cyclist Eddie Merckx All this happened after a three - and - a-half hour meeting in Brussels, where the appeal was handled , the Belgian Cycling Federation had lodged against the suspension of one month after Merckx in the Tour of Italy showed that Merckx prohibited stimulants had used .
Merckx denied that and suggested that " others " had given him. Verhoden the substances The UCI based the cancellation to the suspension of the doubts surrounding the case that there were raised . The release of the month suspension has led to different reactions in the cycling world.

Jan Janssen called it a scandal . " I am myself , like Gimondi and Aimar , suspended and that cost me a month's salary . There is no reason for Merckx , because he happens Merckx is to search an escape clause in the regulations On the contrary , precisely because Merckx is Belgian , he should be punished doubly heavy In Italy , France , Switzerland and Belgium , we can be checked on the use of banned stimulants , but in Belgium also has the police are entitled to search our luggage and the contents of our suitcases we may be condemned . "

Other reactions; Lucien Aimar did not say anything. "I have had such a case at hand itself , so I prefer to remain silent about it . Besides, I already had enough trouble about some things I have said before . on here but nobody will blame me that I think of mine . "

Vittorio Adorni was particularly happy with lifting Merckx ' suspension . " I know him through and through , because we have a full season driving for the same team and I dare to state that he has never used dope at that time with my hand on my heart . " Belgian sports director Brik Schotte : " This is a great solution . from now on there will be no one punished for doping on my team, it is enough again and again to deny . " persistent Rolf Wolfshohl : " It is now possible for any rider who is drugged , and was not previously punished , says he has taken no stimulants but that one who wants him zi.jn and without his knowledge has administered . Maybe it will make any difference what the rider says " Raymond Poulidor " . I dare to say anything one will be able to prove that Merckx is guilty , but no one can prove that he is innocent " . . Raymond Delisle : " Now what is done is unimaginable. when I
last year after the first stage of the Tour of Italy for doping from the battle was taken , I sincerely talked to everyone about my innocence . But no - tanned me . However Merckx is innocent , even after the second opinion has been positive " Jean Jourden : . Deslisle is punished because he was only a small rennertje but Merckx is exonerated because he is a great champion . " Eddy Merckx : "It has been my suspension lifted , but I am not acquitted . Therefore I can not be completely happy with the decision . V , r will always remain a blot rest on me.

Same thing happened after Lombardia 1973. UCI always loved golden gooses it looks like...

 

[Benotti69]

Thirty years prior to the 1999 UCI benders:


Same thing happened after Lombardia 1973. UCI always loved golden gooses it looks like...

Well found FGL. SSDD.

 

[poupou]

Well, so long as YOU saw it televised... it must have been profound.

A couple of questions, though:

1. How many of those Tours did they even have a TTT?
2. How much time did Lancey-poo pick up on his rivals on TTT stages?
3. How relevant was the TTT again?

You may want to reconsider your adoration given that the 'winning strategy' has nothing to do with TTT's.

Since you actually watched the TdF on TV, you must be familiar with it.

If so, then you may be familiar with the fact that the winning TdF strategy, since forever, has everything to do with a combination of ITT's and mountain stages.

As those are the stages that get the most benefit from PEDs and blood transfusions, then the best PED wins.

Take Lance's PEDS away and the racehorse reverts to a donkey.

LeMond was being charitable when he said Lance without PEDs was a possible 30th.

No way. He wouldn't even finish.

Dave.

To weight more on that, we just have to remember hat for, Atlanta Olympic Games, Lance's recovery ability was rated, after tests as too bad for multi-stages races, and has been adviced too focus on one day races or short multi-days races.

 

[MarkvW]

Yup an attorney isn't going to then, after swearing in the witness and getting some personal details, ask irrelevant questions to their case to a witness during their testimony in order to waste the court/hearing's time

And fishing expeditions never happen.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Yup an attorney isn't going to then, after swearing in the witness and getting some personal details, ask irrelevant questions to their case to a witness during their testimony in order to waste the court/hearing's time

And fishing expeditions never happen.

Yea, because "or is capable of influencing," is such an onerous burden for any testimony. Whether they pursue the perjury charge is irrelevant. Whether it falls under that part of the the definition of "material" is another issue all together. The reality is that it's a very low bar. Surely you two legal scholars can see that, right?

You guys keep pretending that the testimony everyone is referring to is immaterial...

EDIT: I am going to leave the splitting of hairs here to you to legal eagles. Mark told someone they were wrong without supplying the legal definition of the term he was referring to, or then applying that definition to the specific testimony that was being referenced. Mark overshot his mark because the poster in question wasn't "wrong" as Mark said, he just needed to add greater detail to his definition. Happens all the time with that guy. He loves to play intertubes legal expert. The reality of the topic at hand is that Lance committed perjury, and the perjured testimony everyone is referring to is clearly "material" to the case that deposition was part of. Have fun with your razor blades.

 

[thehog]

Thirty years prior to the 1999 UCI benders:


Same thing happened after Lombardia 1973. UCI always loved golden gooses it looks like...

LeBlanc at the worlds also. Or was that Brochard who also did a backdated TUE?

 

[thehog]

LeBlanc at the worlds also. Or was that Brochard who also did a backdated TUE?

Brochard it was.... 1997.

Brochard also said that he had presented a pre-dated medical certificate to justify the use of an illegal substance after he had tested positive in a urine control prior to the Championships. However, he claimed that he won the World Championship "only because of his legs".

The banned substance in question was Lidocaine (a local anesthetic) that was used to treat a herniated disc after a crash. A urine control in Spain revealed its presence, and Brochard's manager, Bruno Roussel claimed that he had received a phone call from French National Team director, Charly Mottet who "knew what to do".

"When Brochard was positive, Charly Mottet told me: "Don't you worry. It is necessary to ask for a predated medical certificate from Fernando Diaz Jimenez (the Spanish doctor). And in fact the UCI gave the us the means to do this. The concern was to save the furniture," said Roussel.

"This certificate should have been produced on the day of the race. If the rider does not produce it, then a sanction should be applied. The UCI therefore did not apply its rules," he stated.

 

[FitSsikS]

For a one-day racer like Armstrong to finish top 30 in the GT would be quite an achievement. Even Gilbert has never cracked the top 30 in a GT himself. I personally think an un-doped Armstrong would be at most a top 50 rider, if he's lucky.

This is not to say that he wasn't doped* but pre cancer Lance's TDF record was:

1993, DNF (although some web sites state that he finished 62 in his first attempt....I gather that he was in 62nd when he dropped out.)

1994, DNF

1995, 36th

*Maybe he just didn't quite have the process "down" yet.

 

[darwin553]

And fishing expeditions never happen.

Only if the judge or presiding arbitrator is incompetent or lackadaisical

 

[DirtyWorks]

This is not to say that he wasn't doped* but pre cancer Lance's TDF record was:

1993, DNF (although some web sites state that he finished 62 in his first attempt....I gather that he was in 62nd when he dropped out.)

1994, DNF

1995, 36th

*Maybe he just didn't quite have the process "down" yet.

I'm thinking that's Carmichael's doping. It would certainly be consistent with Carmichael.

 

[Shardi]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrong-may-take-part-in-cookson-doping-inquiry

Will this lead to any ball-breaking?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Armstrong the snitch. So the chicken is coming home to roost.

 

[Bosco10]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrong-may-take-part-in-cookson-doping-inquiry

Will this lead to any ball-breaking?

Well, I guess we all know that Armstrong wants his lifetime ban to go away, and he will heroically squeal to get things his way. Any chance of this happening now?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrong-may-take-part-in-cookson-doping-inquiry

Will this lead to any ball-breaking?

Lance Armstrong is a snitch, and as we know from Armstrong fanboys, there is nothing worse than a snitch...

 

[IrishBias]

For a one-day racer like Armstrong to finish top 30 in the GT would be quite an achievement. Even Gilbert has never cracked the top 30 in a GT himself. I personally think an un-doped Armstrong would be at most a top 50 rider, if he's lucky.

He also lost some weight. Doping etc. aside - weight matters.
How do you think that figures in?

 

[ultimobici]

He also lost some weight. Doping etc. aside - weight matters.
How do you think that figures in?

It doesn't because according to his own figures from the SCA trial he lost no weight.

This myth of weight loss keeps on rearing its ugly head.

 

[D-Queued]

It doesn't because according to his own figures from the SCA trial he lost no weight.

This myth of weight loss keeps on rearing its ugly head.

It certainly has created an enormous industry, though.

Dave.

 

[Puckfiend]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/armstrong-loses-key-ruling-bonus-212059069--spt.html

 

[thehog]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/armstrong-loses-key-ruling-bonus-212059069--spt.html

I love Herman. The guy is a legend. He should bill Lance double for this. He cashed in on the original hearing and is about to do it all over again.

SCA spokesman Jeff Dorough said the ruling effectively rejects Armstrong's claim that the settlement bars the company from recovering its money. But Armstrong attorney Tim Herman noted the ruling determined only whether the panel would hear the case, not whether Armstrong should be forced to pay.

Herman said he remains confident the original settlement - which stated that ''no party may challenge, appeal or attempt to set aside'' the payment and was ''fully and forever binding'' - favors Armstrong.

''Nothing has changed on the merits of this case,'' Herman said.