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

[Magic Spanner]

I feel sorry for every mid-pack hack cyclist who's tested positive and blackballed from the sport.
.

I feel sorry for every mid-pack hack cyclist who never doped and couldn't perform at the highest level. Let alone win!

Don't feel sorry for dopers whether caught or not.

 

[powerste]

ESPN commentary piece that pretty much gets it, IMO:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?id=6583566

He's gone too far, expended too much energy, savaged too many reputations to come out with a steely-eyed "My bad" at this point.

"I've done too many good things for too many people."

 

[Granville57]

ESPN commentary piece that pretty much gets it, IMO:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?id=6583566

Excellent article. Still, some would like to paint those of us in The Clinic as misguided and driven by hate. If that's the case, then it seems to be contagious.

Lance Armstrong is either
(1) the most persecuted and unjustly targeted athlete in the history of the world, or
(2) the most accomplished liar since the advent of the multiplatform sports superstar.

There's no longer any room in between.

And so, to believe the majority of the peloton was doping while the guy who won seven straight was pure is to believe in pink unicorns and lollipop rainbows.

 

[thehog]

Excellent article. Still, some would like to paint those of us in The Clinic as misguided and driven by hate. If that's the case, then it seems to be contagious.

You get the feeling that the press pack have passed around the link to “journalistic ethics” and other associated statements. No one likes to be lectured by anyone on their own profession. An attack on 60 Minutes is an attack on journalism as a whole. The wolves are circling. The sheer number of “fess up lance” articles compared to the “too much good, does it really matter?” type articles is staggering.

It’s the end.

Has to be hard when you've had the media in the palm of your hand for years to now not be able to speak with any of them.

 

[powerste]

You get the feeling that the press pack have passed around the link to “journalistic ethics” and other associated statements. No one likes to be lectured by anyone on their own profession. An attack on 60 Minutes is an attack on journalism as a whole. The wolves are circling. The sheer number of “fess up lance” articles compared to the “too much good, does it really matter?” type articles is staggering.

It’s the end.

Has to be hard when you've had the media in the palm of your hand for years to now not be able to speak with any of them.

Good point Hog - facts4lance has prolly done much more harm than good in that respect. But I suspect they threw it up knowing full well that the "60 minutes" piece constituted the beginning of the end as far as the media are concerned anyway. The image is beyond salvage, just as the straws are beyond their grasp.

 

[D-Queued]

Another positive - Dauphine 2002?

There appears to be a lot of buzz about another Armstrong EPO positive, this time at the Dauphine 2002.

Anyone have a link/more information?

Dave.

 

[VeloCity]

"despite promising the $100,000 in April of 2002, Armstrong only paid up in 2005 after the UCI sent him a reminder of payment."

I remember thinking it a bit odd at the time that the UCI would send a "reminder" letter to Armstrong if the payment was supposed to be just a gift.

 

[thirteen]

There appears to be a lot of buzz about another Armstrong EPO positive, this time at the Dauphine 2002.

Anyone have a link/more information?

Dave.

yes, please!

saw it on twitter and initial searches brought me back here

 

[MarkvW]

You get the feeling that the press pack have passed around the link to “journalistic ethics” and other associated statements. No one likes to be lectured by anyone on their own profession. An attack on 60 Minutes is an attack on journalism as a whole. The wolves are circling. The sheer number of “fess up lance” articles compared to the “too much good, does it really matter?” type articles is staggering.

It’s the end.

Has to be hard when you've had the media in the palm of your hand for years to now not be able to speak with any of them.

It is more like the beginning of the end. Advertisers have contracts with Lance, and they will only break them for cause. After the SCA fiasco, I suspect past doping is not cause, because Lance would negotiate to avoid that. Will existing advertisers re-up with Lance? Will Lance get new advertising contracts? Things could change dramatically if Lance is indicted. All these things are a ways down the road.

 

[Granville57]

Posting this again because it is my favorite Lance Photo:

As fantastic an image as that is, the thing that should really get everyone's attention is the OLN logo on the jersey. Outdoor Life Network morphed into Versus. They sponsored a team that they were covering, and whose coverage relied upon a positive spin of that same team to generate more viewers.

I can't possibly imagine a conflict of interest arising.

I've always had a vague memory from back then of Lance having some ownership in OLN. Anyone have specific info on that?

 

[thehog]

yes, please!

saw it on twitter and initial searches brought me back here

Its doing the rounds. Apparently Floyd knew of this one as well. There's another sworn affidavit in the wild. So I'm told. Same lab that Floyd got bunged by hence his OTT defence.

Perhaps thats what he was digging for in the hacking case?

 

[thirteen]

Its doing the rounds. Apparently Floyd knew of this one as well. There's another sworn affidavit in the wild. So I'm told. Same lab that Floyd got bunged by hence his OTT defence.

Perhaps thats what he was digging for in the hacking case?

interesting... i did note that the lab was the same...

but being what he was digging for? lol! way to start a rumour, hog

 

[thehog]

interesting... i did note that the lab was the same...

but being what he was digging for? lol! way to start a rumour, hog

Sorry. I didn't want to start a rumor and I didn't mean anything by it. What meant was you start to understand the reaction from Floyd in terms of his defence when he knew Lance and others had always gotten away with it. I think Floyd expected the same.Not protection but how did he ever test positive for a p1ssy positive like T/E ratio when Armstrong and others were dodging EPO positives!

 

[D-Queued]

It is more like the beginning of the end. Advertisers have contracts with Lance, and they will only break them for cause. After the SCA fiasco, I suspect past doping is not cause, because Lance would negotiate to avoid that. Will existing advertisers re-up with Lance? Will Lance get new advertising contracts? Things could change dramatically if Lance is indicted. All these things are a ways down the road.

On that point.

(Thanks to RR for flagging it)

There is a good article today in Adweek on Lance's damaged brand:

Armstrong's Brand Hurt by Latest Doping Allegations

The association of a health and wellness site with a reported drug-abusing athlete shows the risk of unknowns in celebrity-content partnerships.

Dave.

 

[thirteen]

Sorry. I didn't want to start a rumor and I didn't mean anything by it. What meant was you start to understand the reaction from Floyd in terms of his defence when he knew Lance and others had always gotten away with it. I think Floyd expected the same.Not protection but how did he ever test positive for a p1ssy positive like T/E ratio when Armstrong and others were dodging EPO positives!

i was only teasing -- my apologies for not making that clear.

however, you brought up a good point and i'm glad i made you clarify it.

 

[thehog]

i was only teasing -- my apologies for not making that clear.

however, you brought up a good point and i'm glad i made you clarify it.

No problem and cheers.

I think the dots connect nicely.

Floyd's defence wasn't really "I didn't dope" it really was "Everyone dopes, we talk about it in the peloton on a daily basis, the UCI scrubs out positives for hard drugs on a regular basis, we get tipped off about surprise testing so how in the hell after I won the biggest race in the world against known dopers did I test positive for an above average testosterone level - makes no sense!!" - in a corrupt world he was calling "conspiracy".

Same applies to Tyler. We couldn't understand why they wouldn't just tell the truth. But in a sense they were.

 

[D-Queued]

There appears to be a lot of buzz about another Armstrong EPO positive, this time at the Dauphine 2002.

Anyone have a link/more information?

Dave.

yes, please!

saw it on twitter and initial searches brought me back here

Looks like RR only speaks to me through Twitter:

@TheRaceRadio

L'equipe is source for 2002 EPO "positive" story. They had it in todays print edition.

Dave.

 

[webvan]

Here is the article. They're saying that it may not have been abnormal for the UCI to let Armstrong off the hook if the readings were "borderline" but they're implying he could have used this to boast to his teammates that he was "protected". Typical LA...

 

[knewcleardaze]

To me it's evidence of how many times he was blood tested.

That too could be the case. I get plenty of exercise jumping to conclusions.
I am curious as to how many times doping control takes intravenous samples during a three week GT.

 

[D-Queued]

Here is the article. They're saying that it may not have been abnormal for the UCI to let Armstrong off the hook if the readings were "borderline" but they're implying he could have used this to boast to his teammates that he was "protected". Typical LA...

And, given the payments and the cortizone back-dated TUE, there is more than just the 'appearance' of being protected.

Some borderlines likely get re-tested. Others, not so much.

Dave.

 

[Merckx index]

Here is the article. They're saying that it may not have been abnormal for the UCI to let Armstrong off the hook if the readings were "borderline" but they're implying he could have used this to boast to his teammates that he was "protected". Typical LA...

I don't buy that, and discussed this in the TdS thread before. A test is either positive or negative. There is a gray or ambiguous area in the EPO test, where it could be and probably is a positive, but is nevertheless ruled a negative, in order to minimize chances of a false positive Any gel scored as a positive is unambiguously so.

While someone scoring the gel might regard a negative in that area as a borderline negative, all that would be reported is a negative. Certainly you would not identify the rider and call him in to explain that it was a borderline that could go either way. In the first place, the decision on how to rule it would already have been made earlier, with the technicians aware of the rule. In the second place, even if the tech were unsure of a particular gel, and discussed it with a superior, there would be no reason at that stage to identify the rider, let alone invite him in to discuss it.

Back in 2001-02, when the EPO gel test was new, there may have been differences of opinion by different researchers/labs as to what the exact criterion for a positive was, but still, the rule for any lab would have been laid down in advance. You can't have a situation where the criterion is in effect determined at the time of the test.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

Looks like Fabiani is at a loss for words. Has nothing to say in reply to Hamilton's counsel.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2011...rmstrong-defense-as-angry-and-impotent_175728

 

[tockit]

From What we Know now, What kind of Charges could Armstrong be Facing?

Just curious.

I know this subject has been mentioned, but I was wondering what you all think Novisky is going to end up charging LAand company with, and what the likely charges will be for him if convicted???

 

[VeloGirl]

Add another chargeto LAs long but distinguished list:

"potential charges that include defrauding the US government, drug trafficking, acting as a physician without a license, endangering public health, and money laundering. Several government agencies are purported to be involved in the investigation in addition to the FDA including the FBI and IRS."

 

[Cal_Joe]

Just curious.

I know this subject has been mentioned, but I was wondering what you all think Novisky is going to end up charging LAand company with, and what the likely charges will be for him if convicted???

Do your research, look at the other gazillion LA threads, read them - no reason to be lazy and start another thread.