The Mike Anderson story

[serottasyclist]

his primary beef with Armstrong is that Armstrong failed to fund a bike shop consistent with the terms of an informal email agreement that Anderson no longer possesses. Not only does this have nothing to do with doping, but it also makes Anderson look more than a little foolish. I do not think a reasonable person would reach an informal agreement to fund a bike shop with terms no more specific than "yeah, I will help you start up a shop when the time comes."

I think his primary beef now is that, when he tried to reasonably negotiate the terms by which he might sign a non-disclosure with Armstrong after being fired by Armstrong, Armstrong sued him for extortion to attempt to (a) paint him in such a bad light that it didn't matter what he ever said about him in public and (b) bankrupt the poor guy. Its not evidence of doping, but its evidence of something arguably worse.

 

[hrotha]

Response from Lance's camp:
Lance Armstrong Responds to Mike Anderson

You stay classy!

My favourite part might be this:

My favourite part is "He uses the nick 'Andersatan'! The horror!"

 

[aphronesis]

Oh, I don't know about that.

I had a recent doping conversation with a multi-time Paris-Roubaix winner, former world champion and multi-time Tour of Flanders winner who said exactly the same thing to my face.

It's very persuasive when someone admits.

How's the name checking going for you?

 

[Anonymous]

How's the name checking going for you?

Meh, doubt if you wish. Makes no difference to me.

 

[knewcleardaze]

I thought the bruddah lived in NZ these days.

Where do you see that he is not living in New Zealand?

 

[aphronesis]

Touching as this is, I'm not sure that Mike would have found life in academia to be more salutory.

 

[hrotha]

Meh, doubt if you wish. Makes no difference to me.

Might as well say who it was because with that data it boils down to one of two people, and if it's Museeuw, who has already been involved in doping scandals, it's unfair to leave people thinking it might be Boonen.

 

[serottasyclist]

Touching as this is, I'm not sure that Mike would have found life in academia to be more salutory.

I agree that he doesn't sound like the kind of guy that would excel in academia. But that doesn't change the fact that being sued for extortion when someone first approached you to sign a non-disclosure agreement and you attempted to negotiate the terms by which you would be willing to sign said contract is egregious, even in the cut-throat worlds of business and academia.

 

[BotanyBay]

Where do you see that he is not living in New Zealand?

Sorry, the caption said Austin TX, but in 2000-FIVE My bad.

 

[python]

My impression is that Mike is telling the truth.

agreed.

What concerns me is that his narrative helps fill in details about Lance Armstrong's personality, which has no bearing on whether Lance doped or not.

this is wrong. Armstrong's personality has a direct bearing on his nefarious choices.

The whole strategy employed by Lance is one of misdirection.

agree.

I feel as though Mike's story plays into the Lance Armstrong strategy even if it is true.

either you are seriuosly confused or are physhing.

 

[knewcleardaze]

I don't understand the OCC doping control showing up at Lance's place.
There's talk of sending someone to retrieve Lance's SUV from the airport.
SUV has tinted windows, so OCC doping control guys think it may be Lance driving.
Would they not stay and try to get OCC sample?

 

[Race Radio]

Having seen the reply by Fabiani, several things stick out:

1) Both Russey and Korioth deny Mike's story about a visit from USADA. So either Mike made that story up or both Russey and Korioth are lying, presumably as a result of pressure from LA.

2) The "Andersatan" signature doesn't sound lo me like something one would do as a joke. Unless it was an in-joke, something he had done before.

3) the nanny's testimony that long after the discover of the steroids, Mike told her he was sure LA never took PEDs. If she was not lying, the most positive spin you could put on this for Mike is that he didn't want others to know what he now strongly suspected.

Overall, it's clear that there are enough claims and counter-claims here to weaken the story. But again, it's mostly not evidence of doping, anyway.

Andersatan is an inside joke. Mike is a Catholic

 

[gatete]

I don't know that we should put a lot of stock in Mike Anderson's account. First, it is largely peripheral. He claims to have found a box of andro among Armstrong's things. Otherwise, he saw and heard very little that incriminates Armstrong on the doping front. One stray comment about how everyone in cycling dopes that was allegedly made by Armstrong does not weigh very heavily.

Second, his primary beef with Armstrong is that Armstrong failed to fund a bike shop consistent with the terms of an informal email agreement that Anderson no longer possesses. Not only does this have nothing to do with doping, but it also makes Anderson look more than a little foolish. I do not think a reasonable person would reach an informal agreement to fund a bike shop with terms no more specific than "yeah, I will help you start up a shop when the time comes."

Using personality driven stuff like this against Lance is just a distraction that make us look less than objective. Sure, Lance is a jackass, but that doesn't make him a doper. What makes him a doper is all the high quality evidence that Lance doesn't want to address.

Well, he does mention Ferrari, to me that's huge

 

[Race Radio]

Oh, I don't know about that.

I had a recent doping conversation with a multi-time Paris-Roubaix winner, former world champion and multi-time Tour of Flanders winner who said exactly the same thing to my face.

It's very persuasive when someone admits.

You talking with Hennie again?

 

[Benotti69]

I don't understand the OCC doping control showing up at Lance's place.
There's talk of sending someone to retrieve Lance's SUV from the airport.
SUV has tinted windows, so OCC doping control guys think it may be Lance driving.
Would they not stay and try to get OCC sample?

"Even though the WADA people wouldn’t be able to contact Armstrong directly, the trick would allow him to avoid getting hit with a so-called non-analytical positive, based on a failure to accurately report his location. Under the rules of the World Anti-Doping Code, Armstrong had to let WADA know exactly where he was at all times"

I didn't understand the bit where they turned up to test Armstrong and he wasn't there. Did he come back at all?

 

[Anonymous]

Might as well say who it was because with that data it boils down to one of two people, and if it's Museeuw, who has already been involved in doping scandals, it's unfair to leave people thinking it might be Boonen.

Not gonna say who... it's irrelevant.

The point is when someone at that level, even in a round-about way, admits... it is very impressive. KayLow wasn't too impressed with Lance's comment to MA. I am and can understand why Mike was.

 

[D-Queued]

Not gonna say who... it's irrelevant.

The point is when someone at that level, even in a round-about way, admits... it is very impressive. KayLow wasn't too impressed with Lance's comment to MA. I am and can understand why Mike was.

KayLow is a PR strategies plant or the next best thing, looking to plant seeds of doubt and hoping somebody will water them.

But, agree that this was a 'beautiful' rebuttal, particularly as it flips around the JM dialog even if JM was not the rider being quoted.

Dave.

 

[KayLow]

In his interview with Paul Kimmage, Floyd Landis told a somewhat similarly baffling story. Floyd claims he bought a Harley so that he could have a relative whose identity would be concealed under a full face helmet leave on the Harley as soon as testers arrived at his house. This was intended to allow Floyd to claim that he was home when he said he would be without actually being forced to take any tests. IIRC Floyd claims that he never used this strategy, but only because testers never showed up at his house.

 

[KayLow]

KayLow is a PR strategies plant or the next best thing, looking to plant seeds of doubt and hoping somebody will water them.

But, agree that this was a 'beautiful' rebuttal, particularly as it flips around the JM dialog even if JM was not the rider being quoted.

Dave.

Definitely not a plant nor am I trying to sow seeds of doubt. Lance definitely doped; the evidence is overwhelming.

 

[python]

In his interview with Paul Kimmage, Floyd Landis told a somewhat similarly baffling story. Floyd claims he bought a Harley so that he could have a relative whose identity would be concealed under a full face helmet leave on the Harley as soon as testers arrived at his house. This was intended to allow Floyd to claim that he was home when he said he would be without actually being forced to take any tests. IIRC Floyd claims that he never used this strategy, but only because testers never showed up at his house.

ok. thanks for the reminder though i did not need one.

what exactly does this mean in you opinion ?

did lance try to avoid the testers or are you're hinting at the lance accusers becoming too boring with the same story ???

you think usada paid them to coordinate the stuff or that might be the truth ?

 

[KayLow]

ok. thanks for the reminder though i did not need one.

what exactly does this mean in you opinion ?

did lance try to avoid the testers or are you're hinting at the lance accusers becoming too boring with the same story ???

you think usada paid them to coordinate the stuff or that might be the truth ?

I think what it shows is that the testing protocols let athletes get away with too much chicanery. If Floyd were making up his story to make Lance look bad, I see no reason why he would not connect his story to Lance in some form or fashion ("I learned it from you, Dad"). That he didn't means he is either far more subtle than I think he is or he is telling the truth.

Mike Anderson probably wasn't in the best position to fully understand what was going on, but it seems that he picked up the gist of it. Lance was trying to duck the testers. The strategy employed seems pathetic to me, but, then again, the guy managed to dope throughout his entire career without ever being popped for a positive test. Mike Anderson's story confirms that there are some problems with relying on a testing regime to catch the dopers.

 

[rickshaw]

whats what

I don't know that we should put a lot of stock in Mike Anderson's account.
Sure, Lance is a jackass, but that doesn't make him a doper. What makes him a doper is all the high quality evidence that Lance doesn't want to address.

The article does not claim to prove that LA is a doper, so don't change the subject and say it does. The article tries to show us LA the sociopath. LA the callus, spiteful, vindictive, cruel, megalomaniac, the [fill in blank].

Furthermore, what doping references there are, "the box", the "everybody does it" are not evidence presented in a court of law to prove LA was a doper. They are incidents part of a narrative meant to show the evolution of their relationship.

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

It's up on Drudge, left-hand column.

LANCE ARMSTRONG'S PERSONAL ASSISTANT UNLOADS ...

http://drudgereport.com/

 

[lean mean &green]

"Even though the WADA people wouldn’t be able to contact Armstrong directly, the trick would allow him to avoid getting hit with a so-called non-analytical positive, based on a failure to accurately report his location. Under the rules of the World Anti-Doping Code, Armstrong had to let WADA know exactly where he was at all times"

I didn't understand the bit where they turned up to test Armstrong and he wasn't there. Did he come back at all?

We might need some clarification on the whereabouts system.

From memory (ie I might be wrong)... Whereabouts must be reported but not at "all times" so you don't have to worry about a innocent trips to the store or the yellow rose for instance. You must report an address and you must be available at that address for a few hours each day. The athlete can choose the 2-3 hours they like best. Most choose the same time slot early in the morning each day for a number of reasons, many of those reasons are NOT good.

WADA or NADO's can test at any time but the only time athletes are totally responsible for is the time slot the athlete has chosen. If drug control officers just miss someone outside of the hours the athlete has chosen because they've left for the grocery store or they "already left for the airport" it wouldn't count as a missed test. They might try and find you at the store but the airport would probably be the best place to be running off to for obvious reasons.

This is my understanding of the whereabouts system, it likely may have changed since I've read this part of the code carefully which is some time ago.

 

[aphronesis]

I agree that he doesn't sound like the kind of guy that would excel in academia. But that doesn't change the fact that being sued for extortion when someone first approached you to sign a non-disclosure agreement and you attempted to negotiate the terms by which you would be willing to sign said contract is egregious, even in the cut-throat worlds of business and academia.

LA has no mediating ground between class nothingness and corporate directives. This much is numbingly clear. Did Mike occupy a similar pole of naievte? Seems so. Nothing said here changes the face of cycling, legal machinations, nor anyone's take on LA. Pro or con. Which Fred suit is going to moved by this?

Mike is having his 15 minutes of reality