The $100,000 question...

[thehog]

Any guesses at what the 2005 $100,000 was for? ie which positive did Lance get in 2004/05 to make the 2nd payment?

 

[euanli]

I'm guess it was after transfusing blood that had something in it during the Tour. Armstrong seems like the kind of guy who would take stuff that's not on the schedule so could have had something in his system when the blood was taken.

 

[spalco]

That thought crossed my mind too. If the first cover-up cost $25K, maybe the second one cost $100K? Or did McQuaid extort Armstrong for an additional payment, "or else"?

 

[TERMINATOR]

Any guesses at what the 2005 $100,000 was for? ie which positive did Lance get in 2004/05 to make the 2nd payment?

It was likely a deferred payment for the first test but made 4 years later to help obscure the quid pro quo.

There likely was no fourth positive. The first three being:

1.) Cortisone positive in 1999 which LA offered a backdated TUE.
2.) EPO positives from the '99 Tour.
3.) EPO positive from the 2001 Tour de Suisse.

I won't mention the T:E positives that Catlin made go away according to the Sports Illustrated article.

 

[Benotti69]

I find it hard to believe that the UCI could be bought for a little as $125,000.00.


There had to be more.

 

[spalco]

^^
I'm always shocked whenever corruption comes up how cheap people are, especially politicians. 125K would get you serious attention even in places like the US Congress. The UCI is nothing compared to that. I'm guessing they didn't even feel like it was a big deal.

 

[Benotti69]

^^
I'm always shocked whenever corruption comes up how cheap people are, especially politicians. 125K would get you serious attention even in places like the US Congress. The UCI is nothing compared to that. I'm guessing they didn't even feel like it was a big deal.

maybe, but i always felt corruption had to compensate getting caught and $125 is hardly a lot considering what might happen if you were caught. If you think also the Lab guy had to get his % and who else?