Official Lance Armstrong Thread **READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING**

[flicker]

How about all that tax money paid to Mar Fabiani to lie about the dress? Mark does have a great ability to attach himself to lying douchebags

I am talking about money waste here and I am concerned. I am a US citizen and choose not to be a laughing stock to the world. Bill and Monikas triste was an absurd side show which ultimatley sank healthcare reform in the USA. The douche also sunk a senate bill. In our country we have more important issues than Monika or Ped use in pro sports. IMO. Danka.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

High school debating clubs ask disingenious questions rather than have a honest discussion, then claim victory when their silly question is not entertained. Okay I am not aware of whether Levi and Kloden were working with Ferrari that precise year, nor do I know whether Armstrong was working with him in 2009 and 2010 when he lost. Presumably you believe LA could not have lost those two tours without his help? Now answer my question?

Getting back to the point, we have it from Landis himself that he didn't need Ferrari to do blood transfusions and take HGH. Landis infers that Ferrari is overhyped and he says he did not follow his training plan. Landis won the tour. It shouldn't upset you that Ferrari may not have magical powers.

This "BPC" name. Is this something you do get the person you disagree with disappear without trace? There are a number of threads that read rather oddly that involve you and persons unknown. If that is your game, I think that is crap.

The only person I know who gets upset when its pointed out that Ferrari is known as the best doping Doctor is BPC.

So - have you ever posted on this forum using another username?

Whats disingenuous is suggesting Landis 'infers' something - the fact is its was well known that Ferrari was the best doping doctor to go to.
So as not to derail this thread - which was a common BPC tactic - if you wish to debate/discuss this item then I will be happy to do so on one of the many threads that discuss Ferrari - I trust you will have no problem remembering where they are.

 

[TheMaverick]

If you have followed the reporting on the case from WSJ, NYT, SI, and even Velonews it appears that Armstrong, and others, are being investigated for a wide range of criminal activity. Using experimental, non-approved drugs, trafficing, money laundering, tax evasion, Foreign Corrupt practices act, Fraud, Even RICO.

Are you saying he should get a pass on all of that or just the doping stuff?

But the investigation is ultimately really about doping. It was doping allegations that started it, and it's what made the federal government dig around and look for things to nail him on. I think the doping is the most damaging part to his reputation amongst the wider public who tend to be ignorant about the history of the sport. I don't think his reputation would be that badly damaged by issues like tax avoidance and classic Texas style business dealings that wouldn't takeaway from his tour wins.

 

[Race Radio]

I am talking about money waste here and I am concerned. I am a US citizen and choose not to be a laughing stock to the world. Bill and Monikas triste was an absurd side show which ultimatley sank healthcare reform in the USA. The douche also sunk a senate bill. In our country we have more important issues than Monika or Ped use in pro sports. IMO. Danka.

If you are truly concerned about the Feds wasting money on this case then you should encourage your hero to stop his silly media campaign and start working on a plea deal.....a far better option then wasting the government's money for years then going to jail anyways

 

[Race Radio]

But the investigation is ultimately really about doping. It was doping allegations that started it, and it's what made the federal government dig around and look for things to nail him on. I think the doping is the most damaging part to his reputation amongst the wider public who tend to be ignorant about the history of the sport. I don't think his reputation would be that badly damaged by issues like tax avoidance and classic Texas style business dealings that wouldn't takeaway from his tour wins.

Do you have a direct quote from Novitzky explaining how, when and why the investigation into Armstrong started? I have yet to see the real reason and time frame printed, just speculation.

It is clear that multiple governmental agencies are involved and the case is about much more then a little doping.

 

[dbrower]

Where has he said this....or did you just make it up?

Ditto. I thought it was more that Landis didn't have the willingness to pay Ferrari the necessary freight, or didn't think he was worth it. Not that he didn't think he was effective, just pricey.

Maybe if he had paid Ferrari, he wouldn't have been caught. Various reasons come to mind as possibilities.

-dB

 

[flicker]

If you are truly concerned about the Feds wasting money on this case then you should encourage your hero to stop his silly media campaign and start working on a plea deal.....a far better option then wasting the government's money for years then going to jail anyways

The money is small compared to other adventures enjoyed by our country now. Really, think about all our poor little olympians that Victor Conte is talking about these days.....
I think that it is really about our country getting on with important priorities such as education, jobs and healthcare. My point is do not get sidetracked like the Monika issue.

 

[Merckx index]

But the investigation is ultimately really about doping. It was doping allegations that started it, and it's what made the federal government dig around and look for things to nail him on.

The government began with Michael Ball. They did not look around for things to nail LA on. It was following Floyd's allegations that they expanded the investigation, and those allegations strongly implied acts beyond doping. No digging necessary at all to entertain these acts, though of course now they have to dig hard to prove them.

I don't think his reputation would be that badly damaged by issues like tax avoidance and classic Texas style business dealings that wouldn't takeaway from his tour wins.

Are you serious? You think because he's from Texas that the public will give him a pass on avoiding taxes and maybe distributing drugs, etc.? Just out of curiosity, what states could LA have hailed from where you concede that crimes like these would be a problem?

 

[flicker]

Ditto. I thought it was more that Landis didn't have the willingness to pay Ferrari the necessary freight, or didn't think he was worth it. Not that he didn't think he was effective, just pricey.

Maybe if he had paid Ferrari, he wouldn't have been caught. Various reasons come to mind as possibilities.

-dB

Yup when its time to go to court don't hire a back alley lawyer, you might end up with a botched abortion,,,

 

[TheMaverick]

The only person I know who gets upset when its pointed out that Ferrari is known as the best doping Doctor is BPC.

So - have you ever posted on this forum using another username?

Whats disingenuous is suggesting Landis 'infers' something - the fact is its was well known that Ferrari was the best doping doctor to go to.
So as not to derail this thread - which was a common BPC tactic - if you wish to debate/discuss this item then I will be happy to do so on one of the many threads that discuss Ferrari - I trust you will have no problem remembering where they are.

A large part of his reputation is being linked to the seven times tour winner, of course, but it's true he was one of the few doctors that tried to coach cyclists as well doping them, which gave them a sense of all around confidence in the regime. As I say I think they liked having him around for this reason and for the security of being on top of the game when anti doping procedures changed. This may have given them a slight edge over a long period of time, but at the end of the day there is no magic to it. Landis explained it quite simply - three 500ml blood bags and some HGH. He did the same for all his tours and simply got another doctor to do it. His main rivals did the same thing and they would openly share their info. I'm sure Ferrari is good at what he does but I really don't see it making as much difference as some like to makeout. You shouldn't be offended by this.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

A large part of his reputation is being linked to the seven times tour winner, of course, but it's true he was one of the few doctors that tried to coach cyclists as well doping them, which gave them a sense of all around confidence in the regime. As I say I think they liked having him around for this reason and for the security of being on top of the game when anti doping procedures changed. This may have given them a slight edge over a long period of time, but at the end of the day there is no magic to it. Landis explained it quite simply - three 500ml blood bags and some HGH. He did the same for all his tours and simply got another doctor to do it. His main rivals did the same thing and they would openly share their info. I'm sure Ferrari is good at what he does but I really don't see it making as much difference as some like to makeout. You shouldn't be offended by this.

Ferrari's reputation was well known before Lance - and his reputation was as a doping doctor.

I note that you didn't answer my question about other usernames.
Again - if you wish to talk about Ferrari then take it to one of the other threads where you had tried to defend him before.

 

[TheMaverick]

Are you serious? You think because he's from Texas that the public will give him a pass on avoiding taxes and maybe distributing drugs, etc.? Just out of curiosity, what states could LA have hailed from where you concede that crimes like these would be a problem?

What I'm saying is if there were no doping allegations and he was just done for tax avoidance shaddy business dealings, that wouldn't effect the main basis of his reputation. He would take a knock but he would get over it. I think it all comes back to the doping.

 

[Race Radio]

What I'm saying is if there were no doping allegations and he was just done for tax avoidance shaddy business dealings, that wouldn't effect the main basis of his reputation. He would take a knock but he would get over it. I think it all comes back to the doping.

You are under the misguided assumption that the Federal investigation is a popularity contest, it is not.

It is equally misguided to pretend that people care less about taxes then doping. Rich people dodging taxes... yeah, nobody cares about that.

 

[TheMaverick]

Ferrari's reputation was well known before Lance - and his reputation was as a doping doctor.

I note that you didn't answer my question about other usernames.
Again - if you wish to talk about Ferrari then take it to one of the other threads where you had tried to defend him before.

You ask silly questions then when I don't entertain them use this to make a point. You didn't answer my question of whether you believe Armstrong could not lose if he was working with Ferrari in 09/10? That is the logic of claiming Ferrari rider can only win because he is the best doping doctor.

The truth he is was a good doping doctor for a number of reasons, and yes perhaps the best all rounder of his era, making him a more attractive option for riders. But it by no means guaranteed victory. It just meant as well as doping he could do a little coaching and give a good pep talk.

 

[pedaling squares]

On topic please

Thats the second time you have brought up $200 million - can you link or cite that amount?

Maybe he thinks that Matt Damon movie is finally being made by the investigative team.

There. That is an example of off-topic posting. Which leads to my point.

This thread was created to discuss Congressman Kingston's perspective. It's turning into yet another thread on the merits and scope of the investigations into Lance Armstrong et al. Please restrict your discussion to Kingston or this thread will have to be absorbed into the 'yet another interesting thing' thread.

Thanks.

EDIT: I revisited FTP's sticky on creating a new LA thread and this news isn't really earth shattering. It's another interesting piece on the investigation and it's being merged into that thread. Seeing as nothing is currently going into that thread it should not disrupt anything. Hope that works for you all.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

What I'm saying is if there were no doping allegations and he was just done for tax avoidance shaddy business dealings, that wouldn't effect the main basis of his reputation. He would take a knock but he would get over it. I think it all comes back to the doping.

So how is it going to look when he is shown as a doper AND a tax cheat.

 

[TheMaverick]

You are under the misguided assumption that the Federal investigation is a popularity contest, it is not.

It is equally misguided to pretend that people care less about taxes then doping. Rich people dodging taxes... yeah, nobody cares about that.

Celebs do get into difficulties from time to time. I think if their main line of work is in another part of the world, like riding in Europe, they would get greater slack too on the matter of having to handover taxes to the IRS. If the allegations were confined to this area it wouldn't directly effect his tour wins, so you can't ignore how important the doping aspect is for people trying to ruin his reputation.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You ask silly questions then when I don't entertain them use this to make a point. You didn't answer my question of whether you believe Armstrong could not lose if he was working with Ferrari in 09/10? That is the logic of claiming Ferrari rider can only win because he is the best doping doctor.

The truth he is was a good doping doctor for a number of reasons, and yes perhaps the best all rounder of his era, making him a more attractive option for riders. But it by no means guaranteed victory. It just meant as well as doping he could do a little coaching and give a good pep talk.

I never said any of those things BPC - I just said he was the best doping Doctor.

As for not answering your question of -
"whether you believe Armstrong could not lose if he was working with Ferrari in 09/10?"
Ah Lance did lose those Tours - Ferrari is the best, but he is not a miracle worker who can transform an aging rider.

Now - your turn to answer my question.

 

[Race Radio]

Celebs do get into difficulties from time to time. I think if their main line of work is in another part of the world, like riding in Europe, they would get greater slack too on the matter of having to handover taxes to the IRS. If the allegations were confined to this area it wouldn't directly effect his tour wins, so you can't ignore how important the doping aspect is for people trying to ruin his reputation.

BPC, you are losing your touch. You used to be able to actually come up with some good trolls but this is weak. After over 200 usernames have you finally lost your game?

 

[TheMaverick]

So how is it going to look when he is shown as a doper AND a tax cheat.

Well as I say I don't think it will be very good for his reputation amongst the wider public who tend to be ignorant about the history of the sport, whereas in the sport itself it will be explained away as part of the era he was involved and won't effect his reputation that much. The only thing he might have in his favor with the public is the drip, drip effect where people are being slowly softened up rather than it all coming out in one big hit. If a trial goes on for years perhaps it will have the effect of educating people. His philanthropy will help too, of course.

 

[TheMaverick]

I never said any of those things BPC - I just said he was the best doping Doctor.

When I stated that Landis won the tour without Ferrari's help, you repeatedly asked me who was the Ferrari rider he beat? Clearly that was your attempt at claiming that the Ferrari backed rider would have won if they were riding that year. Now you say this is not what you meant. It's this type of twisting that makes me say you are disingenious. You seem more interested in catching someone out than honest discussion.

As for not answering your question of -
"whether you believe Armstrong could not lose if he was working with Ferrari in 09/10?"
Ah Lance did lose those Tours - Ferrari is the best, but he is not a miracle worker who can transform an aging rider..

That's a more realistic statement. You're right, Ferrari is not a miracle worker. He's just a good allrounder for his trade who riders really bonded with and trusted. No magic to it.

Now answer my question

I don't know what your question is. Is this the 2006 question again? I thought you'd gracefully dropped that now.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well as I say I don't think it will be very good for his reputation amongst the wider public who tend to be ignorant about the history of the sport, whereas in the sport itself it will be explained away as part of the era he was involved and won't effect his reputation that much. The only thing he might have in his favor with the public is the drip, drip effect where people are being slowly softened up rather than it all coming out in one big hit. If a trial goes on for years perhaps it will have the effect of educating people. His philanthropy will help too, of course.

The reason 'they are ignorant of the sport' is because they bought his book and believed his words. He sold people a lie and the Feds will help them find the receipt.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

When I stated that Landis won the tour without Ferrari's help, you repeatedly asked me who was the Ferrari rider he beat? Clearly that was your attempt at claiming that the Ferrari backed rider would have won if they were riding that year. Now you say this is not what you meant. It's this type of twisting that makes me say you are disingenious. You seem more interested in catching someone out than honest discussion.



That's a more realistic statement. You're right, Ferrari is not a miracle worker. He's just a good allrounder for his trade who riders really bonded with and trusted. No magic to it.



I don't know what your question is. Is this the 2006 question again? I thought you'd gracefully dropped that now.

Please do not edit my posts.

This is what I asked:
Now - your turn to answer my question - not "Now answer my question" as you have above.

It is the question about other usernames.

 

[TheMaverick]

BPC, you are losing your touch. You used to be able to actually come up with some good trolls but this is weak. After over 200 usernames have you finally lost your game?

It's an honest point. The guy made most of his money from what he did in Europe, directly or indirectly. In the minds of the public it's not that unreasonable that he keeps his cash.

It could be considered trolling to list off agencies that are looking into the case and use that as some reason why we're supposed to hate Armstrong even more. You're also that guy who is basically a real life stalker of Armstrong who creeps around at the tour taking pictures of the back of his friend's heads and spreading rumors about him, and repeatedly trolls him on twitter, so you're not in a great position to call other people trolls.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Bzzzt

But the investigation is ultimately really about doping.

No. Hanging onto this makes one look ridiculous.

The other thing is hanging a doping conviction on Team Pharmstrong isn't going to happen on the UCI's side. They, more or less, preserve the record of racing and won't let it taint the record. It won't taint the cancer awareness junk either.

Some felony convictions (Tailwind principals) would be good for the sport in the U.S.