Urine Trouble

[BotanyBay]

I understand that.

Just getting tired of all the other posts about Novitsky:

-He's gonna get schooled...
-LA's lawyers will have a field day with him...
-He's gonna be real sorry...
-He'll be sorely disappointed..
-He's barking up the wrong tree...
-If Landis is all he's got, he's got nothing...
-Blah, blah, blah...

It's like these guys here think Novitsky is some lone-wolf, small town, hayseed sheriff who got the job because his dad is the mayor.

The guy is a seasoned federal agent, first with the IRS and now with the FDA. He has superiors, they have superiors, and nothing gets done unless it is fully vetted: especially intercontinental flights and meetings with foreign law enforcement, Interpol, and formal Letters Rogatory (which involves the DoJ).

Similarly, the Assistant USAG's on the case have superiors and THEY have superiors. The expense and extent of this investigation has likely gone well up the chain of command at the Justice Department and the FDA. How much they spend, what they feel are the potential charges, what the political evironment is and what the blow back might be, will all have been discussed by people well removed from the actual investigation.

This is the US Federal Government, not some guys wearing cheesy vests with "Control Anti-Dopage" on the back, chasing after riders after a race in the middle of the Alps. These guys make EVERYONE involved in anti-doping in sport look like high school hallway monitors. They don't do ANYTHING unless they have extreme confidence that their efforts are worthwhile and their efforts robust.

And you are totally right. I just hate seeing one small bit of the evidence. I'm literally salivating over what they might be planning to DO with it. But I see your point about those who are being extremely negative. It's very telling for some.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I understand that.

Just getting tired of all the other posts about Novitsky:

-He's gonna get schooled...
-LA's lawyers will have a field day with him...
-He's gonna be real sorry...
-He'll be sorely disappointed..
-He's barking up the wrong tree...
-If Landis is all he's got, he's got nothing...
-Blah, blah, blah...

It's like these guys here think Novitsky is some lone-wolf, small town, hayseed sheriff who got the job because his dad is the mayor.

The guy is a seasoned federal agent, first with the IRS and now with the FDA. He has superiors, they have superiors, and nothing gets done unless it is fully vetted: especially intercontinental flights and meetings with foreign law enforcement, Interpol, and formal Letters Rogatory (which involves the DoJ).

Similarly, the Assistant USAG's on the case have superiors and THEY have superiors. The expense and extent of this investigation has likely gone well up the chain of command at the Justice Department and the FDA. How much they spend, what they feel are the potential charges, what the political evironment is and what the blow back might be, will all have been discussed by people well removed from the actual investigation.

This is the US Federal Government, not some guys wearing cheesy vests with "Control Anti-Dopage" on the back, chasing after riders after a race in the middle of the Alps. These guys make EVERYONE involved in anti-doping in sport look like high school hallway monitors. They don't do ANYTHING unless they have extreme confidence that their efforts are worthwhile and their efforts robust.

Nice post. It gave me a good chuckle... Reminded me of the actual orange-vested minions trying to flag riders down after the finale. Nice.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

He's only different because he was better at it and more successful. So the rest of his team were at it. Is this different than Ullrich, Virenque, Millar etc? Not to me it isn't. A cheat's a cheat in my book.

Jesus, buddy...

I really hope you're posting in english as a second language, because that opening phrase should have given it away. "Different because" does not exclude the fact that it's different. It's actually the entire foundation of two things being different, whether 'because' of something or not.

If two things aren't the same (regardless of why or how), they tend to be different. Hence their difference.

Sheesh! What a stump...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Look, I think it's unjust to attack people who pick apart evidence (or its value) and brand them as fanboys or apologists. We're supposed to be having an adult discussion here, right? C'mon.

Don't get your ti*†s all twisted in a knot. I simply asked a question about being a hypothetical juror and looking at this evidence. Why so much anger here?

To be honest - you're the one that sounds angry.

I did call Mambo a fan (not a fanboy) and IMO there is nothing actually wrong with being a fan or defending LA, but I also don't see anything wrong in exposing their claim of being 'objective', when they are not - we are adults as you say.

I actually welcome your view on this issue(questioning the samples and what they have to do with the investigation) - as you are objective.

 

[MacRoadie]

Jesus, buddy...

I really hope you're posting in english as a second language, because that opening phrase should have given it away. "Different because" does not exclude the fact that it's different. It's actually the entire foundation of two things being different, whether 'because' of something or not.

If two things aren't the same (regardless of why or how), they tend to be different. Hence their difference.

Sheesh! What a stump...

He's only different because he isn't the same. Otherwise, he isn't different at all.

Makes total sense, right?

 

[Cobblestoned]

Ok, done another 10 pages - and I now see the typical ending.
Mambo is a fanboy now.

Excellent posts here, Mr.Mambo. Great work.

I always enjoy your accurate posts.
You seem to be the only one with an overview and eyes like an eagle, next to python.
Yes, python. That came from me. But don't generalize that tribute.

 

[pedaling squares]

Most likely scenario is that they're going hard after Lance's dealer and they are setting up Lance as the star witness against the dealer.

I don't know about that. This investigation will take many months and cost a few million dollars. The directors will want the headlines that come with bringing down a star, not some unknown person. I think this is all about Armstrong.

Look, I think it's unjust to attack people who pick apart evidence (or its value) and brand them as fanboys or apologists. We're supposed to be having an adult discussion here, right? C'mon.

Don't get your ti*†s all twisted in a knot. I simply asked a question about being a hypothetical juror and looking at this evidence. Why so much anger here?

No anger, but you've mentioned several times that the samples could produce bad evidence due to their age. Why? Do you have any knowledge of a substandard level of care or a kink in the chain of custody? And I'm not attacking you, just wondering if you have any info on the lab's handling/storage practices or the degradation of drugs in urine over time.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

He's only different because he isn't the same. Otherwise, he isn't different at all.

Makes total sense, right?

Total sense! In fact, if I didn't hold different opinions about many different things I'm sure we'd get along beautifully.

Unfortunately, my differences don't coincide with his differences. Only because we're just a little a different. On most things we agree, but on many there are differences.

In the future I may want to retract that and say that many of our perceived differences were just that, and not actual differences.

If we can come to terms with those differences, find some common ground, and try to understand our collective differences then there may some room to accomodate our differences.

That being said, if we actually come to the point where we actually can accomodate our differences, we'd probably implode as that would be a factual example of dark-matter manifesting itself.

I beg to differ...

 

[Mambo95]

Jesus, buddy...

I really hope you're posting in english as a second language, because that opening phrase should have given it away. "Different because" does not exclude the fact that it's different. It's actually the entire foundation of two things being different, whether 'because' of something or not.

If two things aren't the same (regardless of why or how), they tend to be different. Hence their difference.

Sheesh! What a stump...

It was a typo. If typos are the best argument you have, it says a lot about your counter-argument.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

It was a typo. If typos are the best argument you have, it says a lot about your counter-argument.

Not only are your arguments weak, your jokes really suck...

Sorry. That was a typo.

 

[Mambo95]

Very, very few here seriously believe LA will do prison time - you see, you just made that up, and that questions your claimed 'objectivity'.

LA - like all the others you mentioned is a doper - and he should be sanctioned accordingly, and if its shown he trafficked etc then he needs to be punished accordingly.

If LA gets away with a two year ban and a $4000 fine, as seems standard for those crimes, let's see if this forum sees it as justice.

 

[Mambo95]

Not only are your arguments weak, your jokes really suck...

Sorry. That was a typo.

It wasn't a joke.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

It wasn't a joke.

Nor was it a typo...

 

[MacRoadie]

Ok, back on topic everyone.

Feel free to PM each other to death privately...

 

[Mambo95]

Nor was it a typo...

You're right. I seemed to think that I'd typed difference instead of different, but I didn't. It's your reasoning that's wrong.

You said - ""Different because" does not exclude the fact that it's different". That's right. In fact it explicitly includes the fact. So what was your point?

I was stating that the difference itself is not a 'crime'. (ie being better at cheating).

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

You're right. I seemed to think that I'd typed difference instead of different, but I didn't. It's your reasoning that's wrong.

You said - ""Different because" does not exclude the fact that it's different". That's right. In fact it explicitly includes the fact. So what was your point?

Sweet fancy Moses! You might be onto something there! Things being different because they aren't the same?

Hold on for a bit. I have to go do some research...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If LA gets away with a two year ban and a $4000 fine, as seems standard for those crimes, let's see if this forum sees it as justice.

What is the $4,000 fine that you mention?

 

[Mambo95]

What is the $4,000 fine that you mention?

It's what Willy Voet got for being caught red-handed trafficking (plus a suspended sentence). The best comparison I can find.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

It's what Willy Voet got for being caught red-handed trafficking (plus a suspended sentence).

He was riding for, and a corporate officer of, the USPS team at the time right?

Good ol' Willy V... I always had money on him for the classics, particularly KBK. That was his kind of course.

 

[SC1990]

Firstly - no idea where you got 2001 - except that it shows you have not really followed this case.

woah, no need to get offensive - I simply mixed up the year of the EPO test initiation with 2005. Leaping to radical conclusions on tiny errors hardly makes anything you right on here that credible if you apply it everywhere. As much as everyone seems to have forgotten, this is a forum, not a place to use faceless anonymity to insult others in an uncivilised manner.

 

[yourwelcome]

I don't mean to be excessively cynical, but if this ends up in front of a jury, even properly conducted tests run by normally trusted scientists are in danger of becoming 'tainted research by scientists with an agenda'.

The incredibly successful ideological campaign to discredit climate change science should warn of that, as an example.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I don't mean to be excessively cynical, but if this ends up in front of a jury, even properly conducted tests run by normally trusted scientists are in danger of becoming 'tainted research by scientists with an agenda'.

The incredibly successful ideological campaign to discredit climate change science should warn of that, as an example.

I thought I told you to keep my 'taint out of this...

 

[Mambo95]

He was riding for, and a corporate officer of, the USPS team at the time right?

No, but it serves as the best guideline we have as to what a sentence for trafficking drugs for a team across European borders is. And was the one actually doing the trafficking.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It's what Willy Voet got for being caught red-handed trafficking (plus a suspended sentence). The best comparison I can find.

Why use a case in France from 1998? Wouldn't it be more 'objective' to use a FDA case as a comparison?

The first one I checked for 'trafficking' had a fine of $250,000.

Zhou is charged with introduction and delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of unapproved new drugs, which carries a penalty of not more than 3 years imprisonment and up to a $250,000 fine; the importation of pharmaceutical drugs contrary to law, which carries a penalty of not more than 20 years in federal prison, and up to a $250,000 fine; the importation and distribution of schedule IV, non-narcotic controlled substances, which carries a penalty of not more than 5 years imprisonment and up to a $250,000 fine; and trafficking in counterfeit goods, which carries a penalty of not more than 10 years in federal prison and up to a $250,000 fine.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

No, but it serves as the best guideline we have as to what a sentence for trafficking drugs for a team across European borders is. And was the one actually doing the trafficking.

You're right. Almost exactly the same scenario. Only completely different.

I thought we went over this.