USADA - Armstrong

[ChewbaccaD]

But there were rumors of doping very early on, as there were with all the top cycling teams of the period. My reading of it is they used doping simply a straw man they could latch onto to get out of a deal they had made. I hope they don't get a penny of it back.

Or maybe, just maybe, they didn't want to pay out a bunch of money to a junkie freak like that absentee father Armstrong because people shouldn't profit from fraud. <- that was not a question.

 

[TechnicalDescent]

Or maybe, just maybe, they didn't want to pay out a bunch of money to a junkie freak like that absentee father Armstrong because people shouldn't profit from fraud. <- that was not a question.

Or they wanted more bonus money for the ol' boys and thought they'd screw over an incredibly hard working athlete at the top of his game.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Or they wanted more bonus money for the ol' boys and thought they'd screw over an incredibly hard working athlete at the top of his game.

And it is incredibly hard work to not only be on your bike 6 hours a day, to then have to keep track of which drugs to take when (after the trips to Tenerife to meet with your dope Dr.), and then there are the threats that have to be made, the bribe payments that must be current, all those $500K speaking engagements (all part of the war on cancer ) not to mention the showers and the other time spent hiding from the OOC dope testers that somehow sneaked in under UCI radar. Yes it takes an extraordinary man to accomplish all of that.

 

[TechnicalDescent]

And it is incredibly hard work to not only be on your bike 6 hours a day, to then have to keep track of which drugs to take when (after the trips to Tenerife to meet with your dope Dr.), and then there are the threats that have to be made, the bribe payments that must be current, all those $500K speaking engagements (all part of the war on cancer ) not to mention the showers and the other time spent hiding from the OOC dope testers that somehow sneaked in under UCI radar. Yes it takes an extraordinary man to accomplish all of that.

I think we should be careful not to lose sight of the fact Armstrong was one of the hardest working, most focused and intelligent pros of his era. That was the view inside the peloton where everything about dope was completely known about. I remember David Millar explaining how Armstrong was a complete one off. We can make all the snide remarks about doping and having too many girlfriends, but as fans of cycling, we should be the last people to writeoff all that work and talent simply because we don't like his general character and they way he rubs people up the wrong way. We need to put our love of cycling first. Greatness does demand at least some respect from true fans, even if you think the individual is an *******.

That's my view.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Or they wanted more bonus money for the ol' boys and thought they'd screw over an incredibly hard working athlete at the top of his game.

Which one?

 

[BotanyBay]

So you are suggesting that SCA were gambling that they would not have to pay as Armstrong was a drugs cheat.

Looks like they will collect.

Insurance companies are in the gambling biz. I think they made a calculated gamble to reneg on the bonus and see how things played out. I don't think they went in with a bunch of actual evidence. But as things played out, evidence emerged (obviously).

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I think we should be careful not to lose sight of the fact Armstrong was one of the hardest working, most focused and intelligent pros of his era. That was the view inside the peloton where everything about dope was completely known about. I remember David Millar explaining how Armstrong was a complete one off. We can make all the snide remarks about doping and having too many girlfriends, but as fans of cycling, we should be the last people to writeoff all that work and talent simply because we don't like his general character and they way he rubs people up the wrong way. We need to put our love of cycling first. Greatness does demand at least some respect from true fans, even if you think the individual is an *******.

That's my view.

Nah, I think writing him off is much more fun. Biggest fraud in sporting history. He worked really hard to accomplish that for sure. Steely focus to lie to little kids with cancer about how he was a hero because he was clean. Can't overcome that kind of slimy, disgusting lie with a normal conscience. Gotta be dedicated. Gotta double down. Lance should have taken up poker. I'd respect him if he played poker. But he made more money being a fraud to people with cancer.

Steely focus. Grrrr!!!!!

That's my view.

 

[TechnicalDescent]

Nah, I think writing him off is much more fun. Biggest fraud in sporting history. He worked really hard to accomplish that for sure. Steely focus to lie to little kids with cancer about how he was a hero because he was clean. Can't overcome that kind of slimy, disgusting lie with a normal conscience. Gotta be dedicated. Gotta double down. Lance should have taken up poker. I'd respect him if he played poker. But he made more money being a fraud to people with cancer.

Steely focus. Grrrr!!!!!

That's my view.

What if he's not the biggest sporting fraud in history and was simply on the same regime of drugs as most people of the era, as cited by former team mates Landis and Hamilton? And what if he actually has done a lot for cancer victims? It really troubles my conscience. I mean, yeah he's prickly and demands loyalty from people, but I come into contact with many people like that with complicated personalities. I work with one. Armstrong, at least, is self aware. We're supposed to write off a great of the sport for that? We pretend all those great wins during the tour - the hardest tour in the sport due to competition - didn't happen? I think I love the sport too much to do that. I'd put cycling over SCA or some personality conflict that has nothing to do with me, every time.

 

[TechnicalDescent]

At least we can discuss this now in a rational way without falling out. Great talking to you tonight, guys.

 

[Hugh Januss]

A wise man once said.......

Originally Posted by BroDeal
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC
Technical Descent = BPC

(Just to show it's all in fun LOL grrr.)

 

[Race Radio]

But there were rumors of doping very early on, as there were with all the top cycling teams of the period. My reading of it is they used doping simply as a straw man they could latch onto to get out of a deal they had made. I hope they don't get a penny of it back.

Good point. SCA should have known Lance was a doper. They should have known he was going to lie, cheat, pay off the UCI etc. It is there fault, everyone already knew Armstrong and his team were dopers.

 

[blackcat]

A wise man once said.......

(Just to show it's all in fun LOL grrr.)

BPC started out as Arbiter.

I assume it is a "he"

From this point, he has usually chosen handles, that are two words, and esoteric enough, that there begins a trend.

Like a little haiku, 2 words, 2 syllables per word (just an example, not a confirmation).

He then starts posting in the doping forum.

and immediately. Not lurking. He immediately takes aim at high profile posters like Race Radio.

Good to do a study on our friend arbiter. You dont need the ISP and the info like registration details that the mods have, and he will be using a proxy anyhow.

But peace be with you arbiter.

as Big Boat says, "no flames". and you did help me out in the Vandevelde thread when I was in the bind, so thanks.

 

[blackcat]

Good point. SCA should have known Lance was a doper. They should have known he was going to lie, cheat, pay off the UCI etc. It is there fault, everyone already knew Armstrong and his team were dopers.

Race, actually, BPC has a point, unlrelated to how ethically divorced StrongArm is.

SCA should have done their due dilligance. They were doing a william Hill or Paddy Palin and betting on the name of Princy Harry and Princess Catherine's first baby's name eh.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

What if he's not the biggest sporting fraud in history and was simply on the same regime of drugs as most people of the era, as cited by former team mates Landis and Hamilton? And what if he actually has done a lot for cancer victims? It really troubles my conscience. I mean, yeah he's prickly and demands loyalty from people, but I come into contact with many people like that with complicated personalities. I work with one. Armstrong, at least, is self aware. We're supposed to write off a great of the sport for that? We pretend all those great wins during the tour - the hardest tour in the sport due to competition - didn't happen? I think I love the sport too much to do that. I'd put cycling over SCA or some personality conflict that has nothing to do with me, every time.

What if I jump up real, real high. Can I touch the moon? He lied to kids with cancer. You can't get any lower than that. The will it takes to overcome the last vestiges of conscience a person has in order to lie to kids getting chemo is incomprehensible. You say you work with a sociopath like that? I'd keep my kids away from him. Seriously. Dangerous. Scary. Lying to kids is bad.

 

[Jeremiah]

And it is incredibly hard work to not only be on your bike 6 hours a day, to then have to keep track of which drugs to take when (after the trips to Tenerife to meet with your dope Dr.), and then there are the threats that have to be made, the bribe payments that must be current, all those $500K speaking engagements (all part of the war on cancer ) not to mention the showers and the other time spent hiding from the OOC dope testers that somehow sneaked in under UCI radar. Yes it takes an extraordinary man to accomplish all of that.

I think you forgot the skeezers? Time and money there too.

 

[JA.Tri]

Or they wanted more bonus money for the ol' boys and thought they'd screw over an incredibly hard working athlete at the top of his game.

OR

There was this incredibly enhanced athlete who thought he was a shoe in to meet requirements....so why not add a few million to the coffers. As if he really needed it!

Edit: After all, being the incredibly generous person he was(? ...is?) that additional money could go to his incredibly valuable LAF!

 

[Fatclimber]

Good point. SCA should have known Lance was a doper. They should have known he was going to lie, cheat, pay off the UCI etc. It is there fault, everyone already knew Armstrong and his team were dopers.

9.5 million dollars worth of bonuses and Hein and Pat only received a cut of $125,000(or whatever the payments totaled)? They gotta be feeling pretty cheap, especially since they had the most control over his test results. That's only 1/4 of what the good doctor got (at least the first time around).

 

[Maxiton]

What if he's not the biggest sporting fraud in history and was simply on the same regime of drugs as most people of the era, as cited by former team mates Landis and Hamilton? And what if he actually has done a lot for cancer victims? It really troubles my conscience. I mean, yeah he's prickly and demands loyalty from people, but I come into contact with many people like that with complicated personalities. I work with one. Armstrong, at least, is self aware. We're supposed to write off a great of the sport for that? We pretend all those great wins during the tour - the hardest tour in the sport due to competition - didn't happen? I think I love the sport too much to do that. I'd put cycling over SCA or some personality conflict that has nothing to do with me, every time.

I used to feel about him pretty much what you state here. Prickly and demands loyalty from people. What's the big deal, right? Lots of sporting champions are p ricks, maybe most of them. But as I've read more about it, I've come to a different conclusion. Maybe LA isn't as self aware as he thinks he is. There's nothing worse than looking in the mirror and one day realizing that your critics are right. Well, maybe there is something worse: never seeing they were right.

Up thread I wrote this:

LA & co. (including his pals in the UCI, and even ASO) needed pre-determined endings because, for them, it was never about the sport or the competition, it was about bringing home as much bank as possible.

What could be more valuable than a fair-haired American cancer boy? But he/it only has real value if he wins. When he then goes beyond winning, to dominate, the money for all concerned increases exponentially. As for cycling, well, they care about it only insofar as it is the vehicle for making bank - beyond that they have nothing but contempt, a contempt which is seen in their actions.

For me, this is the essential problem with Armstrong and his operation. Approaching the sport as a business thug, cynical by definition and absolutely not caring about how his scheme and the conspiracy he directs affects the sport or the people in it. It's all about money and power and the sport can go straight to h ell. This kind of thugishness destroys whole countries and cultures, so what chance does a minor sport have?

Bottom line: bad for cycling, bad for other riders, bad for fans; bad for everybody except the conspirators. And now, it's turning out to be bad for them, too.

 

[Fatclimber]

What if he's not the biggest sporting fraud in history and was simply on the same regime of drugs as most people of the era, as cited by former team mates Landis and Hamilton? And what if he actually has done a lot for cancer victims? It really troubles my conscience. I mean, yeah he's prickly and demands loyalty from people, but I come into contact with many people like that with complicated personalities. I work with one. Armstrong, at least, is self aware. We're supposed to write off a great of the sport for that? We pretend all those great wins during the tour - the hardest tour in the sport due to competition - didn't happen? I think I love the sport too much to do that. I'd put cycling over SCA or some personality conflict that has nothing to do with me, every time.

No, we're not supposed to write off a great of the sport for that, we're (hopefully) going to write off a great fraud of the sport for so much more.

If it was a simple choice of an insurance company or cycling, I may agree with you but of course it's not. You're much more sympathetic to the sport than I am. Why on earth should I have more respect for it than the riders themselves? Doping doesn't show much respect. Let the truth come out and let the cheaters pay. Many people overestimate the impact that LA losing all his titles would have. Basso, Ulrich, Valverde, Vino, Rebellin, Kohl, Mancebo, Contador, Di Luca, Ricco, ...etc, etc, etc, all got caught and the show goes on. Burn it down if that's what it takes. I'd rather watch some slow, suckie riders inch up The Alpe than a bunch of fabricated nonsense.

 

[TexPat]

No, we're not supposed to write off a great of the sport for that, we're (hopefully) going to write off a great fraud of the sport for so much more.

If it was a simple choice of an insurance company or cycling, I may agree with you but of course it's not. You're much more sympathetic to the sport than I am. Why on earth should I have more respect for it than the riders themselves? Doping doesn't show much respect. Let the truth come out and let the cheaters pay. Many people overestimate the impact that LA losing all his titles would have. Basso, Ulrich, Valverde, Vino, Rebellin, Kohl, Mancebo, Contador, Di Luca, Ricco, ...etc, etc, etc, all got caught and the show goes on. Burn it down if that's what it takes. I'd rather watch some slow, suckie riders inch up The Alpe than a bunch of fabricated nonsense.

I'm going to make it a point to quote this whenever the subject comes up---and boy, does it come up a lot lately. Hell, they even aired the McIlvain Tapes on the news in New Zealand last week.

 

[BotanyBay]

Btw, to suggest that SCA "should have known" he was doping is crazy. But it is not crazy to think that they simply came to feel that his many victories were merely improbable, prompting their decision to simply not pay and "see what happens". If he was a doper, they probably thought he'd just (very quietly) roll over and just let it lie (the non-payment).

But Lance is kinda like a pimp who says "where my money, beetch?"
His ego always gets in the way and F's it up for him.

Insurance companies have a long history of simply not paying claims and seein if you all have the pelotas to actually step up for yourselves. Cigna comes to mind as far as my own life experience goes (I had to hunt them down for thousands of dollars when I had surgery about ten years ago). This behavior is part of their business model. There is always a certain percentage of people who won't challenge them.

I think they were smart enough to know that if they depo'd a few people close to Lance, they'd stumble upon some truth. And whattaya know, they depo'd a husband and wife that had some big matzo balls hanging out there. Betsy will prove to be the smartest wife that ever lived by refusing to lie on a witness stand for some schmuck who never gave a damn back to anyone that helped him with his fraud in the first place.

 

[Big Doopie]

That's only 1/4 of what the good doctor got (at least the first time around).

it was reported in velo in the early 2000s that armstrong had an exclusive contract with ferrari and paid him $800,000 a year for that exclusivity. I believe the recently discovered payment is only an installment.

$800,000 a year for a hematologist to give you interval training advice.

 

[Microchip]

I just read the press release linked to by elizab.

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-re...rmstrong-by-sca-promotions-sca-154283185.html

Apparently it was a performance incentive policy purchased by his team after he'd won two Tours, to incentivise him to win six in a row. By the time he'd actually done that, there were so many rumors about his doping that the company was reluctant to cough up the millions.

I bet they'll be happy to get it back, with interest.

Recalling from the book Lance to Landis (and I think the interview with David Walsh on Competitor Radio), it was a sponsor that offered the bonuses; the sponsor then went to SCA to provide coverage for the bonus monies. SCA would have calculated the probability of his winning so-and-so number of Tours and then charged the sponsor the premium.

They did pay a couple of bonuses, then they got word that a book written in French by Walsh and someone else (Pierre, I think is the name) mentioned the Hospital Room Incident, so they got hold of the book and translated the appropriate portions. Based on that they decided to withhold payment.

 

[thehog]

Recalling from the book Lance to Landis (and I think the interview with David Walsh on Competitor Radio), it was a sponsor that offered the bonuses; the sponsor then went to SCA to provide coverage for the bonus monies. SCA would have calculated the probability of his winning so-and-so number of Tours and then charged the sponsor the premium.

They did pay a couple of bonuses, then they got word that a book written in French by Walsh and someone else (Pierre, I think is the name) mentioned the Hospital Room Incident, so they got hold of the book and translated the appropriate portions. Based on that they decided to withhold payment.

They didn't withhold payment. They asked for clarity from the Armstrong group on the doping. They wanted to know if they had entered into an agreement which was prejudice and if their risk had been adequately calculated.. After they started asking question in regards to the details from the book Armstrong took action against SCA. That’s the fact that most people miss that it wasn’t SCA whom took action but Armstrong. The contract stated that SCA could inquire to details on each victory and the terms of the contract at anytime. As soon as this right was executed the Armstrong camp took action which ended in arbitration. Armstrong was keen that SCA didn’t sniff around too much as they wanted to shut down their poking about.

 

[MarkvW]

They didn't withhold payment. They asked for clarity from the Armstrong group on the doping. They wanted to know if they had entered into an agreement which was prejudice and if their risk had been adequately calculated.. After they started asking question in regards to the details from the book Armstrong took action against SCA. That’s the fact that most people miss that it wasn’t SCA whom took action but Armstrong. The contract stated that SCA could inquire to details on each victory and the terms of the contract at anytime. As soon as this right was executed the Armstrong camp took action which ended in arbitration. Armstrong was keen that SCA didn’t sniff around too much as they wanted to shut down their poking about.

In other words, Armstrong sued because he wanted his money from SCA.