The Article: WSJ - reopened!

[Anonymous]

I think it is safe to say, if you and a few of your friends paid a couple of women to come back to your hotel to take off their clothes and dance for you, while you all were getting intoxicated (be that liquor or blow), there would be some contact between you and one or more of the women.

that sounds more like women of the night we have those, but as far as I know you go to theirs, im not sure if they come to you, I would have to check with someone who knows though.

yeah. That's what lance says too

worryingly, reading it back thats the sort of thing he would say. We are the same age as well you know.

 

[Anonymous]

yeah. That's what lance says too

worryingly, reading it back thats the sort of thing he would say. We are the same age as well you know.

 

[Cobblestones]

I have never had contact with a stripper, to be honest, i wouldnt even know where to find a strip club. I remember when i was growing up in the seventies and early eighties we would peek through the windows of the local pubs cos they would have "strippers" on sunday afternoons (in the very loosest sense of the word - as far as i remember they where not actually allowed to strip past their underwear), but i wouldnt know where to even find a strip joint.

They are not very common over here.

What a sad country.

 

[joe_papp]

First off, best quote of the article right here:

His lawyer, Tim Herman of Austin, said: "Mr. Armstrong had no contact with strippers or cocaine."

don't know why but this keeps making me laugh a little.

Agreed.

Second, just throwing out pure speculation with no proof to back up, but regarding the sales of bikes to fund doping programs. I feel a few times a year you always hear about team vans being broken into and bikes/wheels being stolen. What if (and a rather large what if) that this is the way that some teams deal their bikes to get some extra cash on the side? Just throwing it out there, I could be totally off base.

Are you wondering if teams sell their equipment to generate off-the-books cash, or if teams claim false robbery to generate cash by both selling the supposedly stolen bikes and collecting insurance?

Teams absolutely sell their riders' bikes out from under them, though usually not for as nefarious purposes as funding a doping program. Often times the money goes straight into the pocket(s) of the team's manager (or owner) and his cronies.

In other instances the equipment and surplus gear is sold legitimately, on-the-books, and revenue placed into the team's general account.

For example, you can contact the Quick Step team in December and buy-up a ton of clothing from them that was originally intended for riders, but is surplus and can't be used the following season.

Quick Step takes pains to document those sales and insure they comply with all applicable laws.

In the case of my former Italian team, however, the team's owner and principle director, Simone Biasci, forced several riders to return bicycles that had been promised to them (and in one instance specified as belonging to the rider at the end of the season, and written-in to a rider's contract (!!!)) - so that he could sell them himself and pocket the cash. This money was also used to cover the cost of some doping products.

Biasci and several others are under investigation in Italy now for this and other financial crimes resulting from their being dicks in the running of the team. One scam they had going was to generate fake invoices and receipts for sponsors to allow them to sometimes double or triple the amount recorded on the books as having gone to the team. This allowed them to launder money that they wished to avoid paying taxes on, and brought in additional money for the team.

7-Eleven team used to sell their surplus kit at Superweek out of the back of a van that would follow the race around Wisconsin. In one instance I remember seeing a long-sleeve Motorola skinsuit w/ the name of a famous rider hand-written into the collar. I wish I'd bought it then, but who knew he would be so famous?

 

[joe_papp]

I have never had contact with a stripper, to be honest, i wouldnt even know where to find a strip club. I remember when i was growing up in the seventies and early eighties we would peek through the windows of the local pubs cos they would have "strippers" on sunday afternoons (in the very loosest sense of the word - as far as i remember they where not actually allowed to strip past their underwear), but i wouldnt know where to even find a strip joint.

They are not very common over here.

They sure are in Latin America. For awhile some of my more ardent "supporters" insisted that I must have met my wife at a strip club and that she was both an exotic dancer and a hooker.

 

[Publicus]

that sounds more like women of the night we have those, but as far as I know you go to theirs, im not sure if they come to you, I would have to check with someone who knows though.



worryingly, reading it back thats the sort of thing he would say. We are the same age as well you know.

He went to them and then paid a couple to come back to his office/place for a private party. Women of the Night. Hookers. Escorts. Strippers in the Champagne/VIP Room or private party. All the same thing.

 

[Anonymous]

Has just occured to me, I wonder if lance is denying the strippers to keep the ex wife at bay.

I can imagine kiki wouldnt be too pleased if it was true. "all the time i was home raising your kids you where *&*&£"^ strippers in some bar.. well screw you lance"..

 

[Ferminal]

Agreed.



Are you wondering if teams sell their equipment to generate off-the-books cash, or if teams claim false robbery to generate cash by both selling the supposedly stolen bikes and collecting insurance?

Teams absolutely sell their riders' bikes out from under them, though usually not for as nefarious purposes as funding a doping program. Often times the money goes straight into the pocket(s) of the team's manager (or owner) and his cronies.

In other instances the equipment and surplus gear is sold legitimately, on-the-books, and revenue placed into the team's general account.

For example, you can contact the Quick Step team in December and buy-up a ton of clothing from them that was originally intended for riders, but is surplus and can't be used the following season.

Quick Step takes pains to document those sales and insure they comply with all applicable laws.

In the case of my former Italian team, however, the team's owner and principle director, Simone Biasci, forced several riders to return bicycles that had been promised to them (and in one instance specified as belonging to the rider at the end of the season, and written-in to a rider's contract (!!!)) - so that he could sell them himself and pocket the cash. This money was also used to cover the cost of some doping products.

Biasci and several others are under investigation in Italy now for this and other financial crimes resulting from their being dicks in the running of the team. One scam they had going was to generate fake invoices and receipts for sponsors to allow them to sometimes double or triple the amount recorded on the books as having gone to the team. This allowed them to launder money that they wished to avoid paying taxes on, and brought in additional money for the team.

7-Eleven team used to sell their surplus kit at Superweek out of the back of a van that would follow the race around Wisconsin. In one instance I remember seeing a long-sleeve Motorola skinsuit w/ the name of a famous rider hand-written into the collar. I wish I'd bought it then, but who knew he would be so famous?

Nice information, thanks Joe.

 

[Cobblestones]

In other instances the equipment and surplus gear is sold legitimately, on-the-books, and revenue placed into the team's general account.

If the proceeds are used to purchase doping products, I think it would be a fair guess that no. That's not what happened.

 

[Publicus]

If the proceeds are used to purchase doping products, I think it would be a fair guess that no. That's not what happened.

Tax evasion. Tailwind and CAS are American companies. If they were selling goods for cash and not reporting the income, that's open and shut tax evasion.

 

[Cobblestones]

Has just occured to me, I wonder if lance is denying the strippers to keep the ex wife at bay.

I can imagine kiki wouldnt be too pleased if it was true. "all the time i was home raising your kids you where *&*&£"^ strippers in some bar.. well screw you lance"..

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

Probably she's over it, though. The big alimony checks might help, too.

 

[Anonymous]

pretty poor hatchet job of reporting the article by the washington post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/02/AR2010070205925.html

is the wp the us equivalent of a red top tabloid or something.

Armstrong, a seven-time Tour de France winner, has repeatedly denied taking performance-enhancing drugs and has never failed any drug tests. Landis flunked a drug test that cost him his 2006 Tour de France title, then claimed for nearly four years that he never took drugs, raising money from cycling fans to support his defense of doping allegations

 

[scribe]

Speaking of selling loot. Landis mighta got a handsome sum from his TdF trophy if hadn't destroyed it.

 

[BroDeal]

Tax evasion. Tailwind and CAS are American companies. If they were selling goods for cash and not reporting the income, that's open and shut tax evasion.

It is not income unless they converted the proceeds to their own use. If they pocketed it then it is tax evasion. If they used it to buy Powerbars for the team then it is not. If they used it to buy dope then it is a fuzzier situation; it could be considered a team business expense
.

 

[Publicus]

It is not income unless they converted the proceeds to their own use. If they pocketed it then it is tax evasion. If they used it to buy Powerbars for the team then it is not. If they used it to buy dope then it is a fuzzier situation; it could be considered a team business expense
.

If they bought assets with it, there would be proof of it. Even powerbars.

Forensic accountants could sort it out.

Edit: tax evasion would be a means to an end.

 

[BroDeal]

Has just occured to me, I wonder if lance is denying the strippers to keep the ex wife at bay.

I don't think that the strippers would be a problem compared to all the cheating on his wife. The dude is notorious for being unable to keep it in his pants around anyone with two legs and a skirt.

 

[Cobblestones]

Anyway, there's one more thing I would like to write about (again) before I go to bed and that's about Floyd's positive in 2006.

Much has been made of, that even now, he claims that he didn't do testosterone during the tour. What I found interesting though is that he confirms to have done testosterone before the tour, and he did a transfusion (or two) during.

It's not a new theory by any means, but maybe worth repeating that possibly the testosterone was in the bagged blood he transfused. IIRC the ratio was only about 8 to 1 or something, not really much above threshold. I think some time later Sinkewitz got busted with something like 60 to 1 (can't be bothered to check the exact numbers). I don't know whether it ever occurred to him that that might be a possibility. Someone should ask. Otherwise, maybe he simply cannot bring himself to admit that single point as others have said. Who knows. I just wanted to throw this out again because that point will surely come up again in the discussions.

 

[SpartacusRox]

pretty poor hatchet job of reporting the article by the washington post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/02/AR2010070205925.html

is the wp the us equivalent of a red top tabloid or something.

Other than the arguable alleged 1999 failed test, what part of the quote are you unhappy with? It all appears pretty factual to me

 

[luckyboy]

Anyway, there's one more thing I would like to write about (again) before I go to bed and that's about Floyd's positive in 2006.

Much has been made of, that even now, he claims that he didn't do testosterone during the tour. What I found interesting though is that he confirms to have done testosterone before the tour, and he did a transfusion (or two) during.

It's not a new theory by any means, but maybe worth repeating that possibly the testosterone was in the bagged blood he transfused. IIRC the ratio was only about 8 to 1 or something, not really much above threshold. I think some time later Sinkewitz got busted with something like 60 to 1 (can't be bothered to check the exact numbers). I don't know whether it ever occurred to him that that might be a possibility. Someone should ask. Otherwise, maybe he simply cannot bring himself to admit that single point as others have said. Who knows. I just wanted to throw this out again because that point will surely come up again in the discussions.

Yeah I think that's probably what happened tbh.

I don't think that the strippers would be a problem compared to all the cheating on his wife. The dude is notorious for being unable to keep it in his pants around anyone with two legs and a skirt.

Let's hope he never went to Scotland then

 

[this_is_edie]

I don't think that the strippers would be a problem compared to all the cheating on his wife. The dude is notorious for being unable to keep it in his pants around anyone with two legs and a skirt

... - that looks like his mother

 

[Hugh Januss]

Other than the arguable alleged 1999 failed test, what part of the quote are you unhappy with? It all appears pretty factual to me

It may be, but it sure is focusing on the little picture.

 

[Cobblestones]

It is not income unless they converted the proceeds to their own use. If they pocketed it then it is tax evasion. If they used it to buy Powerbars for the team then it is not. If they used it to buy dope then it is a fuzzier situation; it could be considered a team business expense
.

I'm not familiar with the financial side at all, but wouldn't the sale of gifted bikes have to show up in their books somewhere? What about straightforward sales tax for starters? Also, shouldn't it be counted as income? Tailwind is a for-profit company I presume, so all accounting has to be proper.

 

[joe_papp]

Anyway, there's one more thing I would like to write about (again) before I go to bed and that's about Floyd's positive in 2006.

Much has been made of, that even now, he claims that he didn't do testosterone during the tour. What I found interesting though is that he confirms to have done testosterone before the tour, and he did a transfusion (or two) during.

It's not a new theory by any means, but maybe worth repeating that possibly the testosterone was in the bagged blood he transfused. IIRC the ratio was only about 8 to 1 or something, not really much above threshold. I think some time later Sinkewitz got busted with something like 60 to 1 (can't be bothered to check the exact numbers). I don't know whether it ever occurred to him that that might be a possibility. Someone should ask. Otherwise, maybe he simply cannot bring himself to admit that single point as others have said. Who knows. I just wanted to throw this out again because that point will surely come up again in the discussions.

This scenario has definitely occurred to USADA, and has been suggested to Floyd.

With the details of his doping controls throughout the season (ie, the results), the following is the only information that an anti-doping scientist needs in order to reach a reasonably-sure conclusion about whether or not the blood that was reinfused contained metabolites of testosterone:

1) Dates of doping with testosterone or other anabolics
2) Dose and route of administration of #1
3) Dates of blood extractions and amount removed
4) Dates that blood was reinfused during the Tour or just before it

Floyd swears that he did not KNOWINGLY use testosterone during the 2006 Tour. That leaves open the possibility that he consumed another doping product that was mistaken for something else but was actually an anabolic; that the blood he transfused contained metabolites of testosterone from previous doping; or he's lying about this point.

As I've explained before in this Forum, my positive test for testosterone came during a race in which I wasn't knowingly using testosterone. I haven't taken the time to go back and have the Turkish lab's results reviewed, but I know I'm not lying, so either my team accidentally gave me T, or they knowingly gave me T and didn't tell me. Or there was a test error. The game was up for me though, so I eventually capitulated but haven't and still refuse to admit to intentionally doping with the substance I was supposedly positive for... Yet Floyd seriously considered ALSO admitting to doping with testosterone during the 2006 Tour just to squelch the negative feedback stemming from his contention that, while he doped with everything else needed during a GT, Testosterone wasn't included in the program.

I think that if he really didn't intentionally use T, and it came from the transfused blood, or it's a false (+), then he shouldn't admit to using it just to shut some people up. Because those people would just rag on him for something else, anything else, in an effort to defend Lance.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And while we're (not) on the topic:

With the WSJ article thread having pages and pages of posts before the article itself was even published, one can only imagine how big it will become before the weekend is over.

While it's great to see evidence of wide-ranging discussion with many participants, after 10 pages a thread seems to become incoherent and impossible to follow w/o dedicating an hour to a single topic.

I think that in a case like the Landis Allegations/Landisgate, rather than one sticky and then a paltry one or two threads with hundreds of posts in them, CN should create a Clinic sub-forum JUST for the Landis Affair. Then people could start threads on nuanced topics that were actually accessible, rather than having their point buried on page 80, for example.

I believe that the Daily Peloton actually had a forum just for Landis's arbitration, and it was very workable and highly user-friendly.

Cyclingnews staff - PLEASE consider making this adjustment ASAP, like right now. You need a separate Landis sub-forum!

 

[BroDeal]

If they bought assets with it, there would be proof of it. Even powerbars.

Forensic accountants could sort it out.

Maybe not. If they were paranoid not to talk for fear of bugs while transfusing then they were paranoid enough to cover their financial tracks. Records have a way of disappearing over time, especially after a business has been shut down for several years. If lots of business was done in cash then that would complicate matters a lot.

 

[joe_papp]

Enron

Tailwind is a for-profit company I presume, so all accounting has to be proper.

Ha. Tell that to Enron.