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

[Digger]

Let it go, the Hog.
That incident is irrelavent. Faded into irrevalency.
Bye Bye incident.
Old Long Ago. Auld Lang Syne.

Although at the time, Boo Boo Boo BooBoy was comical.
Pretty funny you must admit.
Boo Boo Boo Boo Boo Boo.
Lance took it serious back then. Heat of the race. Spreading awareness.
Today he would laugh it off. Boo Boo Boo lol.

Boo boy made me sick - he backed down immediately. I would give anything to have that opportunity - and no I would not be backing down.

 

[Polish]

Boo boy made me sick - he backed down immediately. I would give anything to have that opportunity - and no I would not be backing down.

That is why Lance needs bodyguards.
Sad really. scary.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Lance needs bodyguards to keep his *** from punching people out.

Also, the man makes a lot of enemies the way he treats people.
not nice

 

[Neworld]

That is why Lance needs bodyguards.
Sad really. scary.

Or, more to the point Polish...Lance is scary! Ethically, morally and psychologically scary.

Lance doesn't need bodyguards the public and the government do... ergo, a Federal inquiry.

Overall, if something only happens once say bullying, people let it go. But when anyone, let alone a representative/philanthropist of dying people is a recurrent bully the truth shines through. Now add on liar, doper...we all know the list, and there will be a juicy comprehensive list to follow once Novitsky brings it forward.

Lance will, and has, taken care of himself. It always works out this way. Sad, really sad.

NW

 

[Velodude]

That is why Lance needs bodyguards.
Sad really. scary.

His bodyguards are not vigilant and efficient.

Recall this youtube videoof an unhappy Lance returning to home base urinated off after being pipped for a stage 16 win of the 2010 Tour.

He is being led through the throng by his running bodyguard who stops to deal with a cretin then takes a short cut to again protectively lead his wonderboy charge.

However, the servant failed to clear the road of a pedestrian and poor Lance lost balance and had to throw his left shoulder (fortunately it was on his left side as his right shoulder collarbone was broken the previous year) into the back of the pedestrian to retain balance.

Lance skillfully used the body of the pedestrian to avoid hitting the tarmac. It is those slow speed falls that really do the damage! Lance stops, turns and thanks the pedestrian for saving an imminent accident.

And yet there were those on forums who were encouraging this unknown pedestrian to take action for assault against Armstrong.

 

[ChrisE]

Repaying Tailwind & LA the 100's of thousands they contributed to the FFF? Don't think so.

They were not duped that Floyd was innocent. Their prime motive was to discredit the same French anti-doping laboratory, Laboratoire national de dépistage du dopage de Châtenay-Malabry, that re-tested LA's 1999 "B" samples and found EPO positives.

Besides, the Tailwind backers are expected to be indicted along with LA for being part of a criminal enterprise that breached Federal laws on the road to providing PEDs to cycling team members.

I was being sarcastic. Sorry for the lack of emoticons.

So, FL will have a litmus test on who he pays back? What about the people that thought he was guilty but wanted to blow up the system? Could get pretty complicated; will people be required to take a polygraph test to see whether or not their motivation for contributions weren't solely their thinking he was innocent? I don't remember his qualifying his proclamation he would pay "everybody" back.

Back on the subject of LA, instead of this more complicated endeavor of figuring out who FL will pay back and what that basis will be, how was the UCI able to give LA protection with all of these other players like labs, etc. in the picture? Why did that lab have those positives if he has protection? Was there a breakdown in the system where he had to result to the publicly messy out like a backdated TUE?

How have all the other positives that the UCI squashed not ever leak from a staffer at Chatany Malaby, for example? Surely since that lab was public enemy number one for LA they had motivation not to play along with the UCI, don't you think? Especially if he is blatantly trying to discredit them all the time.

 

[Cobblestoned]

That is why Lance needs bodyguards.
Sad really. scary.

I remember that the baaaboooo boy was harassing Lance during the whole ToL.
He even had his moment of glory during the final podium celebration and got "the look" by one of the Schlecks.

 

[thehog]

Let it go, the Hog.
That incident is irrelavent. Faded into irrevalency.
Bye Bye incident.
Old Long Ago. Auld Lang Syne.

Although at the time, Boo Boo Boo BooBoy was comical.
Pretty funny you must admit.
Boo Boo Boo Boo Boo Boo.
Lance took it serious back then. Heat of the race. Spreading awareness.
Today he would laugh it off. Boo Boo Boo lol.

Nah. Similar style to the block on Ty at Cache Cache. He's weird in this regard. Always trying to beat people up then make some casual statment like - "Me angry? That's not the way I roll".

But you already know this.

I remember him once taking on a bouncer in Austin for not letting him into a club. Had to apologize the next day.

Like I said - weird guy.

 

[Velodude]

<snip>...Back on the subject of LA, instead of this more complicated endeavor of figuring out who FL will pay back and what that basis will be, how was the UCI able to give LA protection with all of these other players like labs, etc. in the picture? Why did that lab have those positives if he has protection? Was there a breakdown in the system where he had to result to the publicly messy out like a backdated TUE?

How have all the other positives that the UCI squashed not ever leak from a staffer at Chatany Malaby, for example? Surely since that lab was public enemy number one for LA they had motivation not to play along with the UCI, don't you think? Especially if he is blatantly trying to discredit them all the time.

To 2004 the UCI had the capacity to protect Armstrong (UCI signed up to WADA after 2004 TdF) by suppressing positives. Only the UCI had the key to riders' identities through codes.

For the 1999 Armstrong positive for corticoids the tip off to Le Monde must have come through the UCI to identify any rider.

From LA Confidentiel:

On July 19, a rest day on the Tour, Armstrong gave a press conference during which he said he never took corticosteroids and didn't have medical dispensation to use any banned products. This was a repetition of answers he gave to Pierre Ballester in a L'Equipe interview on July 8. That evening, July 19, a journalist from Le Monde newspaper received a tip off that Armstrong had tested positive following his July 4 test.

The only source was Armstrong's boasting to team mates that he avoided the EPO positive in the 2001 Tour of Switzerland by paying off the UCI. He was acting outside his UCI protection ring. The Swiss (not French) lab have since confirmed his test was positive through the current Fed investigation.

Armstrong himself acted outside of his UCI defensive guard by being bluffed into giving Damion Ressiot of L'Equipe access to his 1999 UCI Tour records on the pretension of confirming his nil TUE status. Having those records he identified Armstrong's code to align with the EPO scientific tests conducted by the Châtenay-Malabry lab in 2005 into the 1999 "B" samples.

Châtenay-Malabry acted improperly by informing Ressiot of the 1999 EPO positives but it was only the sleuthing skills of Ressiot that provided one rider's name to those results.

In brief, don't blame it on the French lab for the revelations but on Armstrong and the UCI.

 

[red_flanders]

The Swiss (not French) lab have since confirmed his test was positive through the current Fed investigation.

Whaa???? I'd never heard this confirmed. Can you point me to the details, thanks!

 

[Velodude]

Whaa???? I'd never heard this confirmed. Can you point me to the details, thanks!

The link and quote have been posted before

http://www.cycling.tv/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=20300&ATCLID=205157359

Lab chief told feds of suspicious Armstrong test

June 06, 2011 - By Associated Press LOS ANGELES (AP) -

The director of the Swiss anti-doping laboratory informed federal authorities last fall that Lance Armstrong's test results from the 2001 Tour de Suisse were ``suspicious'' and ``consistent with EPO use,'' The Associated Press has learned.

Martial Saugy made the statement in September, according to a person familiar with the investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the case.

 

[red_flanders]

The link and quote have been posted before

Oh, thanks, that I've seen. "Confirmed Positive" means something different to me that "suspicious and consistent with EPO use".

 

[thehog]

Is was possiable back in the day as if there was ever a positive the lab wouldn't know the riders name. But the result was sent to the UCI for the A sample only. Here the UCI could inform the lab that rider X provided a TUE and there was no need for the B sample test or to release any data. The lab would never know the riders name only the UCI thus no positive.

This was the method to inform the rider and arrange a payment.

The only way around it was for the lab to "guess" the result and leak the information.

Ref: Contador / Landis.

To 2004 the UCI had the capacity to protect Armstrong (UCI signed up to WADA after 2004 TdF) by suppressing positives. Only the UCI had the key to riders' identities through codes.

For the 1999 Armstrong positive for corticoids the tip off to Le Monde must have come through the UCI to identify any rider.



The only source was Armstrong's boasting to team mates that he avoided the EPO positive in the 2001 Tour of Switzerland by paying off the UCI. He was acting outside his UCI protection ring. The Swiss (not French) lab have since confirmed his test was positive through the current Fed investigation.

Armstrong himself acted outside of his UCI defensive guard by being bluffed into giving Damion Ressiot of L'Equipe access to his 1999 UCI Tour records on the pretension of confirming his nil TUE status. Having those records he identified Armstrong's code to align with the EPO scientific tests conducted by the Châtenay-Malabry lab in 2005 into the 1999 "B" samples.

Châtenay-Malabry acted improperly by informing Ressiot of the 1999 EPO positives but it was only the sleuthing skills of Ressiot that provided one rider's name to those results.

In brief, don't blame it on the French lab for the revelations but on Armstrong and the UCI.

 

[fatandfast]

So Armstrong is guilty because he folded his arms on a video interview? Novitzky is going to throttle French and Swiss lab employees because they conspired with
lab officials/race officials/Lance/UCI,ect to suppress positive tests 10 or more years ago? If Hamilton got off on chain of custody issues Armstrong probably won't even have to answer any questions about this. Coming up on 2 years and Novitzky had a slam dunk at the beginning of the case. The only thing "confirmed" by French and Swiss labs is that it takes 10 or so years to tell right from wrong. Martial Saugy will be shredded on the stand if he ever sits in front of a US judge

 

[ChrisE]

Is was possiable back in the day as if there was ever a positive the lab wouldn't know the riders name. But the result was sent to the UCI for the A sample only. Here the UCI could inform the lab that rider X provided a TUE and there was no need for the B sample test or to release any data. The lab would never know the riders name only the UCI thus no positive.

This was the method to inform the rider and arrange a payment.

The only way around it was for the lab to "guess" the result and leak the information.

Ref: Contador / Landis.

I follow, but when the A sample positives were sent to the UCI was it noted what they were positive for? Not too many TUE's flying around for EPO, etc. I would guess. If the UCI came back with TUE nonsense for an obvious PED somebody would ask WTF. I'm not buying it.

It would just seem to me that if somebody was positive all the time, like LA should have been if the total UCI coverup was happening, in 7 years and I am guessing over 100 tests in the TdF somebody at the lab would have wondered WTF, and at least leaked something to the press. This is not taking into account all the other tests from the DL and TdS.

I mean there were only 3 samples taken each stage, and LA was one of those samples for a large % of the time those 7 years.

Plus, you take into account what was going on after 2004 if WADA was in charge. Also, why Ferrari was warning LA off of EPO in 2001 if he had cover, and why TH or FL never said LA or USPS had a unique relationship with the UCI.....only that he had a positive squashed after the fact and after LA had to go to Switzerland and do it firsthand. And, this is the only story of this kind he ever told them. This makes no sense.

To qualify this post, I believe there was coverup (far more than LA but that horse is beat to death in here) but how it went about without any slip-ups is pretty remarkable. Also, I question the extent that some of you take it, but that is what debate is for.

 

[thehog]

I follow, but when the A sample positives were sent to the UCI was it noted what they were positive for? Not too many TUE's flying around for EPO, etc. I would guess. If the UCI came back with TUE nonsense for an obvious PED somebody would ask WTF. I'm not buying it.

It would just seem to me that if somebody was positive all the time, like LA should have been if the total UCI coverup was happening, in 7 years and I am guessing over 100 tests in the TdF somebody at the lab would have wondered WTF, and at least leaked something to the press. This is not taking into account all the other tests from the DL and TdS.

I mean there were only 3 samples taken each stage, and LA was one of those samples for a large % of the time those 7 years.

Plus, you take into account what was going on after 2004 if WADA was in charge. Also, why Ferrari was warning LA off of EPO in 2001 if he had cover, and why TH or FL never said LA or USPS had a unique relationship with the UCI.....only that he had a positive squashed after the fact and after LA had to go to Switzerland and do it firsthand. And, this is the only story of this kind he ever told them. This makes no sense.

To qualify this post, I believe there was coverup (far more than LA but that horse is beat to death in here) but how it went about without any slip-ups is pretty remarkable. Also, I question the extent that some of you take it, but that is what debate is for.

My post was not so much about Armstrong more about that it was "possible" for any rider with an "inside" relationship with the UCI to create a cover up.

It should be noted that a 'positive" test is only recorded once A and B are tested positive. If the B is never tested and the A is "explained" away then a positive never actually occurrs. The UCI is within their right to inform the lab not to test the B as they have qualified the A sample and no further action is required. (This is how I feel there 2001 TdS was dealt with - most EPO positive's start as "suspicious" findings and then you move on to B sample testing to discover that indeed its not suspicious any longer but actually is a beyond reasonable doubt finding of EPO use.)

More to the point sometimes its in the better interest of the UCI to create a cover up than that of the rider - marketing/publicly/promotion of the sport etc etc.

Probably where Landis and Contador fell down was that both their positive A samples were released/leaked before they could be "dealt" with. Rightly as you point out often the rider's name can be safely "guessed" by a lab leaker.

The notification of the A positive or "suspicious" findings is generally confidential between UCI, Rider and the lab. With the lab only knowing the control number not the riders name.

Someone may assist but I believe from 2005 onwards WADA is also informed of lab findings and positive A samples? Meaning the UCI/Rider can perform the deal without WADA being aware.

I have no logic to the following statement nor any evidence but what I always found strange was the zero positives for the life of USPS team for any of the riders over a 8-9 year period then 6 of them test positive post leaving the team. The only logic I can apply is they weren't tested in a manner to draw a positive or not tested at all, or covered up as per above during the USPS days to being like any other rider once they left. Mathematically the odds are very strange.

 

[Velodude]

Oh, thanks, that I've seen. "Confirmed Positive" means something different to me that "suspicious and consistent with EPO use".

Your welcome

When Landis made the revelation about the Armstrong bribe to cover up the Swiss Tour 2001 positive Saugy came forward to WADA and admitted knowledge about the suspicious EPO tests but was not aware of the rider's identification.

That story changed to an admission he knew the identity of the rider and had met with Armstrong & Bruyneel. Saugy had two meetings in Europe with Fed investigators plus correspondence. His stories changed with them also which, according to one report, may lead to charges for lying to investigators.

His claim the results were only suspicious and delayed because the lead French lab had not set any criteria to establish when an EPO sample is positive until 2002.

Strange, because the same French urine test was introduced at the 2000 Sydney Olympics the year before.

Further, even more odd was because the following cyclists had failed the French urine tests for EPO in 2001 and, where applicable, were sanctioned (courtesy of Wikipedia)


• Niklas Axelsson tested positive for EPO in the 2001 UCI Road World Championships in Lisbon

• Riccardo Forconi tested positive for blood doping/EPO use prior to the Giro d'Italia.

• Bo Hamburger becomes the first rider to test positive for EPO under a new system introduced by the UCI in 2001. Hamburger was later acquitted by the Danish Sports Federation after irregularities in the handling of Hamburger's B sample analysis

• Roland Meier from Switzerland tested positive for EPO at the end of la Flèche Wallonne on April 18.

 

[Polish]

The link and quote have been posted before:

June 06, 2011 -Quote By Associated Press LOS ANGELES (AP) -

The director of the Swiss anti-doping laboratory informed federal authorities last fall that Lance Armstrong's test results from the 2001 Tour de Suisse were ``suspicious'' and ``consistent with EPO use,'' The Associated Press has learned.

Martial Saugy made the statement in September, according to a person familiar with the investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the case. AP Endquote

Ah, the good old days. Pre-Motion.
"According to someone close to the investigation but not authorized to speak"
Gosh who could THAT be? Who is not authorized?
WSJ/ESPN/AP/SI/SundayTimes/60mins/ETC/ETC/ETC.
Ah, the good old days of "un-named sources" lol.

Of course, Martial Saugy denied ever making those statements attributed to the "un-named source. Who wouldda thunk

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/...nies-covering-lance-armstrongs-positive-test/

 

[Velodude]

So Armstrong is guilty because he folded his arms on a video interview? Novitzky is going to throttle French and Swiss lab employees because they conspired with
lab officials/race officials/Lance/UCI,ect to suppress positive tests 10 or more years ago? If Hamilton got off on chain of custody issues Armstrong probably won't even have to answer any questions about this. Coming up on 2 years and Novitzky had a slam dunk at the beginning of the case. The only thing "confirmed" by French and Swiss labs is that it takes 10 or so years to tell right from wrong. Martial Saugy will be shredded on the stand if he ever sits in front of a US judge

F&F, you are always being reminded that the prospective Fed case against the Tailwind criminal enterprise is not to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that LA doped, as it is not a Federal offense, but to address all the Federal laws breached on the way to doping.

The boasting by LA to team members, which included Landis & Hamilton, that he bribed the UCI to cover up a 2001 EPO positive is prominent. It is irrelevant whether the sample was proven only suspicious.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Ah, the good old days. Pre-Motion.
"According to someone close to the investigation but not authorized to speak"
Gosh who could THAT be? Who is not authorized?
WSJ/ESPN/AP/SI/SundayTimes/60mins/ETC/ETC/ETC.
Ah, the good old days of "un-named sources" lol.

Of course, Martial Saugy denied ever making those statements attributed to the "un-named source. Who wouldda thunk

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/...nies-covering-lance-armstrongs-positive-test/

Things have become boring since that huge amount of leaking stopped, didn't they ?
At least we have the biggest, but slowly drying, source left. And that dude is even posting around here on daily basis. Huge leaks, familiar with investigators and expert on the case. Floods of indictments were leaked.
Even so much, that the Americans could no longer walk to Hawai on foot.

Livestrong in 2012, Polish ! Also Lifestrong.

 

[Anonymous]

Riis didn't mention Armstrong? “I've never even seen a rider with a talent like Contador. Never! We must go back to Eddy Merckx probably, Bernard Hinault, perhaps, to find someone similar. Alberto can be quite scary.”

Because of his obvious doping
Armstrong is irrelevant. Faded into irrevalency.
Bye Bye Lance.
Old Long Ago. Auld Lang Syne.

 

[Neworld]

Could someone in the audience with legal experience please provide some comment on the FBI investigation as it relates to LA.

Specifically, are there certain parameters, legal requirements or endpoints that need to be fulfilled in order to continue on with a case such as this?

If certain facts, statements, levels of evidence are not brought forth or obtained can the case be dismissed and does the FBI 'have' to make a statement when the case is closed? Are there certain time-restraints or 'achievements' needed to continue with a case?

NW

 

[thehog]

Riis didn't mention Armstrong? “I've never even seen a rider with a talent like Contador. Never! We must go back to Eddy Merckx probably, Bernard Hinault, perhaps, to find someone similar. Alberto can be quite scary.”

Because of his obvious doping
Armstrong is irrelevant. Faded into irrevalency.
Bye Bye Lance.
Old Long Ago. Auld Lang Syne.

This I agree. A double kick in the teeth to the Hog who is just as irrelevant as Armstrong who had the chance to mange Contador's career but choose Comeback 2.0.

 

[Polish]

Riis didn't mention Armstrong? “I've never even seen a rider with a talent like Contador. Never! We must go back to Eddy Merckx probably, Bernard Hinault, perhaps, to find someone similar. Alberto can be quite scary.”

Because of his obvious doping
Armstrong is irrelevant. Faded into irrevalency.
Bye Bye Lance.
Old Long Ago. Auld Lang Syne.

Bjarne's last ditch effort to sway CAS is laughable harhar.
Can't blame him though. It's his job. Bread and butter.

BTW Lance is more relevant than Bjarne and Alberto combined. Use any metric of relevancy and Lance stomps them. Not a level playing field. Duh.
More relevant globally. In the USA. In Spain. Everywhere. Space station.

Of course Lance is more AWESOME than Bjarne and Alberto combined too.
Over 10 times more awesome duh.
Bjarne's old mate Ullrich is more awesome than Alberto.

History will remember Lance as a Campanissimo.
Bjarne and Bang Bang as obscure footnotes. Sorry.

 

[fatandfast]

F&F, you are always being reminded that the prospective Fed case against the Tailwind criminal enterprise is not to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that LA doped, as it is not a Federal offense, but to address all the Federal laws breached on the way to doping.

The boasting by LA to team members, which included Landis & Hamilton, that he bribed the UCI to cover up a 2001 EPO positive is prominent. It is irrelevant whether the sample was proven only suspicious.

Hamilton is telling Landis' story. His handing back of the medal he won and the new fleshy story for 60 Minutes, all the timing from a good strategist. Just as Armstrong was angry at the timing of the Flandis announcement at the ToC. In both cases the sudden internal karma clock went off when both men would get the most exposure from association w Armstrong. These clowns have and will continue to live off all things Armstrong. or maybe Landis will be a break through 45 year old Nascar driver. Maybe Hamilton will go on the hotdog circuit around Colorado, RedBull is probably looking for a middle aged man to do a crazy old school helicopter on a big jump.