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

[Dr. Maserati]

But the FACT remains that Lance was breaking Omerta.
As a Patron of the Tour. Most Important spokesperson.
Raising the flag.

The Tours were getting cleaner. EPO usage amongst the GT Dangermen ended per Floyd's e-mail and the EPO test.
The era of simple blood transfusions was back in style. Not a PED.
But Lance raised the flag on the Bovine PED.
Broke Omerta way back in 2003.
Donated funds for a Sysmex Machine soon after.
The Tours were getting cleaner in 2003 2004 and 2005.
Backslid violently in 2006 and 2007 etc. Much dirtier.

The fact that it was private and leaked by Baal appears to have been lost on you.
I wonder did Armstrong promise a 'donation' with the email?

 

[MarkvW]

Ah - the "everyone does it" defense, that never gets old.

I don't do it. I know a lot of other people who don't do it. I'm not saying that everybody does it. I'm saying that the pro cycling subculture is pervasively corrupt.

 

[Polish]

The fact that it was private and leaked by Baal appears to have been lost on you.
I wonder did Armstrong promise a 'donation' with the email?

It wasn't "private". Why do you say it was "private"?

It was sent to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI.
That is not private.
That is appropriate.
Big deal, he did not send it to 60 Minutes.
Waa.

 

[sherer]

Herer is the link to the CN story of Lance Breaking the Omerta:
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/jun04/jun08news2

Have to admit I stand corrected. Although none of us know exactly what those e-mails said and I don't think the book by Baal is available in English to get the proper quotes from him.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't do it. I know a lot of other people who don't do it. I'm not saying that everybody does it. I'm saying that the pro cycling subculture is pervasively corrupt.

So, even though its pervasive, not everyone is doing it, ok.

How is Lance, who remember paid off the UCI only a symptom of this disease? Surely, that is part of the disease?

It wasn't "private". Why do you say it was "private"?

It was sent to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI.
That is not private.
That is appropriate.
Big deal, he did not send it to 60 Minutes.
Waa.

Because he didn't make it public Polish, please keep up.

 

[Polish]

Because he didn't make it public Polish, please keep up.

Sending the e-mail to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI is making it public.
That is not private. Ok, so he did not copy you. Fine.

But riders should follow Lance's lead.
That is the correct way to break omerta.
You do not have to be the Patron either.
If Cadel sees doping - send an e-mail.
If the Schlecks see doping - send an e-mail.
If Alberto sees doping - send an e-mail.
Send an e-mail to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI.
The Sport will be better for it.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Sending the e-mail to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI is making it public.
That is not private. Ok, so he did not copy you. Fine.

But riders should follow Lance's lead.
That is the correct way to break omerta.
You do not have to be the Patron either.
If Cadel sees doping - send an e-mail.
If the Schlecks see doping - send an e-mail.
If Alberto sees doping - send an e-mail.
Send an e-mail to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI.
The Sport will be better for it.

Wouldn't the sport be a lot better if instead of sending (private) emails, Armstrong had not spent his entire career consuming large quantities of PEDs paying the authorities off and bullying people?

 

[Polish]

Wouldn't the sport be a lot better if instead of sending (private) emails, Armstrong had not spent his entire career consuming large quantities of PEDs paying the authorities off and bullying people?

You may want to read Floyd's e-mails for an answer to your question.
But the short answer is "no".

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You may want to read Floyd's e-mails for an answer to your question.
But the short answer is "no".

Actually, I'd prefer to read the Armstrong emails - you said they were public, so where are they, thanks.

 

[thehog]

Have to admit I stand corrected. Although none of us know exactly what those e-mails said and I don't think the book by Baal is available in English to get the proper quotes from him.

I'll take that as an apology ;-)

 

[MacRoadie]

But riders should follow Lance's lead.
That is the correct way to break omerta.
You do not have to be the Patron either.
If Cadel sees doping - send an e-mail.
If the Schlecks see doping - send an e-mail.
If Alberto sees doping - send an e-mail.
Send an e-mail to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI.
The Sport will be better for it.

If Floyd sees doping, send an email...or two.

Check.

 

[thehog]

Herer is the link to the CN story of Lance Breaking the Omerta:
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/jun04/jun08news2

Book deal? Typical. Just like Ty & Floyd Baal was seeking publicity of Lance's back.

I'm looking forward to Lances 3rd book in his trilogy. Should be a ripper!

 

[thehog]

The Armstrong letter was written after the Dauphine Libere in 2003. Mayo had been attacking him all race and it made wonderboy a little scared so he wrote a email to the UCI and ASO that some riders were using synthetic hemoglobin derived from cattle and they should focus their testing efforts. The inference at the time was he was referring to Spanish riders.

The email stayed quite for a year until it was discussed inn a book written by former French federation president and Tour de France assistant director Daniel Baal.

Kinda comical to have wonderboy complaining about other riders using experimental drugs

I also heard that Armstrong wrote more emails in 2004 when Mayo was ripping the cranks out of their sockets at the Dauphine. Once the UCI targeted Iban his career was over.

Also lovely of Lance to ask the UCI to "do what they can"!

Awesome guy all round. Chase down clean guys as get dirty guys busted. I'd say we've learnt a lot in the last two days about Lance.

 

[thehog]

If Floyd sees doping, send an email...or two.

Check.

.....or post a message to the clinic.

 

[Neworld]

I look at it like pro cycling is a disease, and Lance as a vile symptom and waste product of that disease.
...

Lance is a reprehensible dope cheat. In other words, he is a fair representative of the pro peloton.

Sorry Mark I only agree with a fraction of what you say.

Two wrongs don't make a right, and worse than that Lance was not just being a passive/neutral doper in the peloton... he was much much worse...you know the rest.

Some posters are saying he was a saviour, 'the' patron of the peloton, a fresh rediscovery of the ethics pro cycling needed...please, rediscover some morality or at least be honest. Some posters here act like delisional demented patients with incoherent logic and memories. A real Patron would have come clean, asked to have all his previous blood and urine samples retested to prove his clean and heightened status. He's just another doper who is getting caught. He is an example of what not to be.

He is why people record historical facts and revisit those facts to teach others what not to do. He is a waste of skin.

NW

 

[Velodude]

It wasn't "private". Why do you say it was "private"?

It was sent to WADA, the ASO, and the UCI.
That is not private.
That is appropriate.
Big deal, he did not send it to 60 Minutes.
Waa.

Baal also reveals that defending Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong had sent a letter to ASO and the UCI several days prior to the 2003 Tour raising suspicion of a possible use of synthetic haemoglobin by certain riders in the peloton.

Polish, you claim WADA was a recipient. Baal does not.

Why would the Armstrong email of complaint against his advancing adversaries be sent to WADA in 2003 when Verbruggen resisted on behalf of the UCI signing up to the WADA code until August 2004?

It was reported that prior to 2005 LA had confirmed he had made a six figure donation to the UCI "several years prior"

In 2005, Armstrong confirmed he made a donation of “six figures”to the UCI several years prior, purportedly “to help fight doping.”In keeping with his desire to “work quietly behind the scenes,”Armstrong wanted the gift kept secret.“

This is not my position or my modus operandi to advertise what I do,”Armstrong told Eurosport .“So, if I’ve donated money to the UCI to combat doping, step up controls and to fund research, it is not my job to issue a press release. That’s a secret thing, because it’s the right thing to do.”

The amount admitted by UCI prior to 2005, $25,000, is only a five figure amount.

One can understand that Armstrong would garner sympathetic support from the UCI against his cheating rivals in return for the unaccounted six figure amount of donations.

 

[Neworld]

But the FACT remains that Lance was breaking Omerta.
As a Patron of the Tour. Most Important spokesperson.
Raising the flag.

The Tours were getting cleaner. EPO usage amongst the GT Dangermen ended per Floyd's e-mail and the EPO test.
The era of simple blood transfusions was back in style. Not a PED.
But Lance raised the flag on the Bovine PED.
Broke Omerta way back in 2003.
Donated funds for a Sysmex Machine soon after.
The Tours were getting cleaner in 2003 2004 and 2005.
Backslid violently in 2006 and 2007 etc. Much dirtier.

What Polish is trying to say is that all dopers don't dope equally (ie: Autologous doping is expensive and only a few riders could afford it). So, by ratting on the Spanish (so Lance got from Landis what he delivered to the Spanish) he could expose them, reduce the number of potential cheaters and get the more expensive version of doping to make him artificially better than the rest. As we all know GTs are about winning with small advantageous percentages.

Thank you Polish.

NW

 

[Neworld]

I also heard that Armstrong wrote more emails in 2004 when Mayo was ripping the cranks out of their sockets at the Dauphine. Once the UCI targeted Iban his career was over.

Also lovely of Lance to ask the UCI to "do what they can"!

Awesome guy all round. Chase down clean guys as get dirty guys busted. I'd say we've learnt a lot in the last two days about Lance.

Makes you wonder if Lance informed 'certain' authorities of the OPuerto operation in an attempt to end Basso and Ullrich's careers...only partially successful.

NW

 

[MarkvW]

Sorry Mark I only agree with a fraction of what you say.

Two wrongs don't make a right, and worse than that Lance was not just being a passive/neutral doper in the peloton... he was much much worse...you know the rest.

Some posters are saying he was a saviour, 'the' patron of the peloton, a rediscover of the ethics pro cycling needed...please, rediscover some morality or at least be honest. Some posters here act like delisional demented patients with incoherent logic and memories. A real Patron would have come clean, asked to have all his previous blood and urine samples retested to prove his clean and heightened status. He's just another doper who is getting caught. He is an example of what not to be.

He is why people record historical facts and revisit those facts to teach others what not to do. He is a waste of skin.

NW

I agree with you, but I honestly can't say Armstrong was any worse than Vino or Ullrich, for example. Both led dirty, dirty teams. And Vino is as morally repugnant as Lance.

I don't know that there is any hope for pro cycling to ever be "clean". I think that the Armstrong cycle, or lesser variations of it will play out over and over again. That's what I mean with the disease analogy. Today Lance version 1.0, five years from now Lance version 2.0. I don't mean to minimize Lance's bad behavior, just emphasize that the "Lance Effect" (in the worst sense) is a perpetual curse on a dirty sport.

Sooner or later (if not already) the cyclists are going to start gambling with undetectable genetic treatments that will put their health at great risk. Too bad.

 

[Neworld]

I agree with you, but I honestly can't say Armstrong was any worse than Vino or Ullrich, for example. Both led dirty, dirty teams. And Vino is as morally repugnant as Lance.



Sooner or later (if not already) the cyclists are going to start gambling with undetectable genetic treatments that will put their health at great risk. Too bad.

Yes, true. Lance was much more than just a cheat you see that too right?

But that doesn't mean we bury the past and forget about it. Expose the bad, encourage the good.

THink Nov 11th every year.

NW

 

[MarkvW]

What Polish is trying to say is that all dopers don't dope equally (ie: Autologous doping is expensive and only a few riders could afford it). So, by ratting on the Spanish (so Lance got from Landis what he delivered to the Spanish) he could expose them, reduce the number of potential cheaters and get the more expensive version of doping to make him artificially better than the rest. As we all know GTs are about winning with small advantageous percentages.

Thank you Polish.

NW

Not sure it is the "simple" autologous blood, though. Suggest "PED-Improved" autologous blood, instead.

 

[Polish]

Book deal? Typical. Just like Ty & Floyd Baal was seeking publicity of Lance's back.

I'm looking forward to Lances 3rd book in his trilogy. Should be a ripper!

I am looking forward to Dr Ferarri's book someday where he will reveal that Lance doped LESS than most (if not all) of his other clients.

That book won't come out for awhile. Now is not the right time - the McCarthy witch hunt era of pro cycling.
But the truth will come out someday. Always does.

 

[Velodude]

I am looking forward to Dr Ferarri's book someday where he will reveal that Lance doped LESS than most (if not all) of his other clients.

That book won't come out for awhile. Now is not the right time - the McCarthy witch hunt era of pro cycling.
But the truth will come out someday. Always does.

Don't have to wait. Read Willy Voet's book "Breaking the Chain"

Here is an extract from the book written by the Festina soigneur whose arrest caused the 1998 tour crisis:

Thus it was that Richard Virenque paid a visit to Ferrari at his home in Ferrara at the start of 1996. One consultation was enough. Richard came back in a rather perplexed state. Being prepared by the Italian would have worked out very expensive. What's more, teaming up with Ferrari was like putting a saucepan up your backside: it was immediately obvious what you were doing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I agree with you, but I honestly can't say Armstrong was any worse than Vino or Ullrich, for example. Both led dirty, dirty teams. And Vino is as morally repugnant as Lance.

I don't know that there is any hope for pro cycling to ever be "clean". I think that the Armstrong cycle, or lesser variations of it will play out over and over again. That's what I mean with the disease analogy. Today Lance version 1.0, five years from now Lance version 2.0. I don't mean to minimize Lance's bad behavior, just emphasize that the "Lance Effect" (in the worst sense) is a perpetual curse on a dirty sport.

Sooner or later (if not already) the cyclists are going to start gambling with undetectable genetic treatments that will put their health at great risk. Too bad.

Why can't you Mark??
Why is it that you can't say Armstrong was any worse than Vino or Ullrich?
Do you think they were the same?

Yes, they all led teams and they doped.
Why is Vino "morally repugnant"? Because he is a doper? An unapologetic doper?
Did Ullrich or the "morally repugnant" Vino pay off the UCI? Did they get OOC notification? Did they pay to beat a test?? Write books about how clean they were?

Are you seriously trying to compare them??
Its rather odd that you defend the only one of the 3 not to be sanctioned.

 

[Polish]

Don't have to wait. Read Willy Voet's book "Breaking the Chain"

Here is an extract from the book written by the Festina soigneur whose arrest caused the 1998 tour crisis:

Exactly. And when Lance came back from cancer treatment, Dr F became more conservative. And the go-go EPO Era ended for the GT Dangermen too. EPO test in place.

History will show that Lance doped LESS than most of Dr F's clients.
A lot less I bet.