USADA - Armstrong

[henryg]

Now people are pretending that pro racing was clean and now Armstrong upset everything,completely untrue.

The people pretending that Lance is the cause of everything just don't want to look at the sport.

Those statements are complete nonsense. The role of doping in cycling throughout its history is widely known and acknowledged but has no bearing on any cyclist who may get sanctioned today wether it's Contador, Basso, Vino, Ricco, Valverde.. or Armstrong. "everybody does it" is not a defense in a doping hearing. Try telling the cop writing your speeding ticket "everyone else is speeding do you can't give me a ticket" -good luck with that.

The sort of doping that was available pre-EPO was not effective enough to determine the outcome of a stage race. Blood doping changed that and suddenly doping became central to winning and who was on top in the rankings. That makes doping a much bigger concern today then it was pre-EPO.

Doping existed pre-Lance and will exist post Lance. Again that has no bearing on Lance getting sanctioned (if that in fact is the outcome). The fact that the USADA case includes not just a pro athlete but also doctors, managers and coaching staff means finally some of the key enablers and not just the athlete will pay a price, which is a very good thing for deterrence.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Wrong.

That's all he has as the truth is working against him.

Does he behave as an innocent person would?

This pretty much says it all doesn't it?

Why would anyone try to smear and bring down an anti-doping body that is trying to keep sport clean? One that Armstrong signed a contract promising to uphold as a rider?

 

[MarkvW]

The sort of doping that was available pre-EPO was not effective enough to determine the outcome of a stage race.

If you believe Anquetil, that statement is a myth. He said you can't win the Tour de France on mineral water. In other words you need to dope to win the Tour. If that doesn't say that doping was outcome-determinative in the pre-EPO era, I don't know what ever could.

In the EPO era, you could narrow Anquetil's argument down to 'you can't win the TdF if you don't dope with EPO or some other oxygen vector," but I don't see how that matters. In either Era, it was: Dope or Lose.

Once that myth is discarded, then we're just back to the "donkey vs. stage race podium man" debate, and that has been done to unresolved death.

 

[TexPat]

I'm also expecting the smear campaign to get worse....as desperation escalates.
Money does not buy good taste and we will hopefully see the true Armstrong emerge more as this rolls along.

That is a given.

 

[TexPat]

With Contador the sanction was given by CAS because the Spanish Fed did not follow the rules.

As I understand it Armstrong now has to respond to USADA's decision by July 9th. After that they either sanction him or take him to AAA?

I should have all the answers on this by Monday.

My birthday is coming this month. Let's hope for a quick resolution (though I doubt it).

 

[MarkvW]

That is a given.

It does appear that Mr. Armstrong is incapable of a modulated or nuanced response.

Kinda reminds me of that knothead Pete Rose in that way.

 

[fatandfast]

Those statements are complete nonsense. The role of doping in cycling throughout its history is widely known and acknowledged but has no bearing on any cyclist who may get sanctioned today wether it's Contador, Basso, Vino, Ricco, Valverde.. or Armstrong. "everybody does it" is not a defense in a doping hearing. Try telling the cop writing your speeding ticket "everyone else is speeding do you can't give me a ticket" -good luck with that.

The sort of doping that was available pre-EPO was not effective enough to determine the outcome of a stage race. Blood doping changed that and suddenly doping became central to winning and who was on top in the rankings. That makes doping a much bigger concern today then it was pre-EPO.

Doping existed pre-Lance and will exist post Lance. Again that has no bearing on Lance getting sanctioned (if that in fact is the outcome). The fact that the USADA case includes not just a pro athlete but also doctors, managers and coaching staff means finally some of the key enablers and not just the athlete will pay a price, which is a very good thing for deterrence.

wow.one for one without even trying. Yes the kind of dope that Coppi,Bartali,Binda,Merckx,Kelly,Delgado,Museeuw,The Planckaerts,Andersen took did influence the outcome of races.You may even get some feedback here from a doper who used,sold and was convicted of all, and all done from tiny spaces,like basement apartments. You have some grand idea that cycling has quantumly leaped.
The intent is the same only the substances have changed. The fact that more cyclists are not included is telling. It's like Papp getting pumped, he turned over names that deserve investigation but the will to do so doesn't exist within the office,from local to federal. The USADA is getting busy to get press not to catch all,or even the majority,or even a bunch of dopers,just a select bunch of famous ones. Uneven application of the law,period.
When they give a yellow jersey to Jan or Ivan cycling will be more confusing than it currently is to you. The doping and dopers are there you just need to look. The ability to voice outrage via the interweb is the main difference

 

[mewmewmew13]

wow.one for one without even trying. Yes the kind of dope that Coppi,Bartali,Binda,Merckx,Kelly,Delgado,Museeuw,The Planckaerts,Andersen took did influence the outcome of races.You may even get some feedback here from a doper who used,sold and was convicted of all, and all done from tiny spaces,like basement apartments. You have some grand idea that cycling has quantumly leaped.
The intent is the same only the substances have changed. The fact that more cyclists are not included is telling. It's like Papp getting pumped, he turned over names that deserve investigation but the will to do so doesn't exist within the office,from local to federal. The USADA is getting busy to get press not to catch all,or even the majority,or even a bunch of dopers,just a select bunch of famous ones. Uneven application of the law,period.
When they give a yellow jersey to Jan or Ivan cycling will be more confusing than it currently is to you. The doping and dopers are there you just need to look. The ability to voice outrage via the interweb is the main difference

The first comment "The USADA is getting busy to get press not to catch all,or even the majority,or even a bunch of dopers,just a select bunch of famous ones." is utter BS and it is just a spew-type of statement that you throw at the wall and hope that it will stick.

The second " When they give a yellow jersey to Jan or Ivan cycling will be more confusing than it currently is to you." also that is totally off the point of what this is about. They are not 'trying to figure out who to give the jersey to' . The USADA is trying to expose those who have perpetrated a large-scale cheating scandal . That is their job and the reason for their creation---vetted by Lance himself and his flunkies.

You will see many more than just Armstrong sanctioned.

It seems pointless to regurgitate this doesn't it?

 

[thorny59]

Has Lance ever made negative comments on..

has lance ever made public negative comments on any confirmed doper like contador or others that he raced against? just seems odd he is so quiet on the ones who are caught. speaks volumes.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Reading the idiocy regurgitated by fatandfast and college gets old. The "uneven application of the law" comment is especially stupid. As though federal agencies don't try to get underlings to testify against the heads of crime families. This whole "uneven application of the law" argument is unbelievably moronic. How devoid of any tether to reality does one have to be to write this stuff?

 

[Berzin]

Reading the idiocy regurgitated by fatandfast and college gets old. The "uneven application of the law" comment is especially stupid. As though federal agencies don't try to get underlings to testify against the heads of crime families. This whole "uneven application of the law" argument is unbelievably moronic. How devoid of any tether to reality does one have to be to write this stuff?

Heroes die hard, Moose.

What I would like to know is how and why the level of teenage infatuation and unquestioning hero worship leads grown men to grovel at the alter of Saint Lance to the point where his lying, intimidation and bullying become positive character traits.

Really shows the lack of character and displaced moral compass of his fanboys, and would lead me to believe they would behave exactly as Armstrong has if faced with the same dilemma.

 

[Cal_Joe]

has lance ever made public negative comments on any confirmed doper like contador or others that he raced against? just seems odd he is so quiet on the ones who are caught. speaks volumes.

I beleive he had a few choice words about Mr. Landis and Mr. Hamilton.

 

[MarkvW]

Heroes die hard, Moose.

What I would like to know is how and why the level of teenage infatuation and unquestioning hero worship leads grown men to grovel at the alter of Saint Lance to the point where his lying, intimidation and bullying become positive character traits.

Really shows the lack of character and displaced moral compass of his fanboys, and would lead me to believe they would behave exactly as Armstrong has if faced with the same dilemma.

Maybe you should start a separate fanboy hater thread.

Personal attacks on the character of the fanboys just start flame wars and end up making the thread stupid. Of course, If I was Lance Armstrong, that's exactly what I'd like to see forums critical of me devolve into.

 

[Cal_Joe]

As I recall the 4 yr minimum is a fairly recent rule change.

Question(s) for RR or others with some insight on the technicalities:

Depending upon how far back they go, what rule set applies? Are older rules grandfathered and applied? Will the rule set of the most recent infraction apply? Or, will today's rule set apply because this is when this action has been initiated?

Dave.

Found a paper copy of a 2004 protocol in my files - section 10.4.2 of that version has the 4 years to life ineligibility period for trafficking.

As far as your other questions go, I think we are on new ground here and any issues about protocol changes/dates may not have ever been a previous issue.

If there have been rule changes that might come into play during the periods USADA is hinting at, I expect the LA team will press that quite hard.

 

[thehog]

I'm also expecting the smear campaign to get worse....as desperation escalates.
Money does not buy good taste and we will hopefully see the true Armstrong emerge more as this rolls along.

Lance is going to start his own Tri series! He might start his own version of the Tour then win those 7 titles back! Look out!

They're going to be dope testing free events. Going to be awesome! Can't wait!

 

[Big Doopie]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/lance-arms...y-starts-formal-proceedings/story?id=16682619

Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!

Armstrong's private investigators are not being discreet.
He is spending mega-money. If Floyd went full ***, Lance has gone thermonuclear ***!

remember when many said betsy andreu was nuts for saying that armstrong was hacking into her computer...?

the guy is a sociopathic criminal and i hope the very worst comes to him from the usada action. the very worst possible.

 

[thehog]

remember when many said betsy andreu was nuts for saying that armstrong was hacking into her computer...?

the guy is a sociopathic criminal and i hope the very worst comes to him from the usada action. the very worst possible.

I have it under good authority that USADA personal prior to the original letter being sent informed the police and federal government that they were concerned over intimidation. If Armstromg or his henchmen over step the line they will be arrested.

Lance should play fair.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Lance is going to start his own Tri series! He might start his own version of the Tour then win those 7 titles back! Look out!

They're going to be dope testing free events. Going to be awesome! Can't wait!

Just think, if he started his own Tour then he could also be in charge of doping controls (as in anything goes ,' level field').... wow.

 

[thehog]

Just think, if he started his own Tour then he could also be in charge of doping controls (as in anything goes ,' level field').... wow.

It would be awesome. Ferrari would set up a blood bank on wheels and transfusions could be done at ease. No more broken down buses. No more taping up holes in hotel rooms. Free and easy.

Lance would have to win though. No Spanish riders allowed.

They would still dope test and if they find your hemocrit under 60% you get thrown out of the race.

 

[MarkvW]

It would be awesome. Ferrari would set up a blood bank on wheels and transfusions could be done at ease. No more broken down buses. No more taping up holes in hotel rooms. Free and easy.

Lance would have to win though. No Spanish riders allowed.

They would still dope test and if they find your hemocrit under 60% you get thrown out of the race.

I can see it now. "Lance Armstrong presents the Tour de Belarus."

 

[henryg]

If you believe Anquetil, that statement is a myth. He said you can't win the Tour de France on mineral water.

That was an off the cuff quip not scientific analysis. There have been studies on the effects of blood doping. Compare that to amphetamines. Not even on the same planet.

 

[MarkvW]

That was an off the cuff quip not scientific analysis. There have been studies on the effects of blood doping. Compare that to amphetamines. Not even on the same planet.

I agree that they're not on the same planet. But you still needed to dope to win in Anquetil's era.

 

[simo1733]

That was an off the cuff quip not scientific analysis. There have been studies on the effects of blood doping. Compare that to amphetamines. Not even on the same planet.

Yes,Anquetil believed the drugs were essential but it doesn't make it true.
This is how young riders are persuaded to dope in the first place.

 

[henryg]

I agree that they're not on the same planet. But you still needed to dope to win in Anquetil's era.

That I do not think is true. All though back then you could pay off your competition to let you win. Although that was probably not done in a major grand tour.

However whether everyone doped then or now has zero bearing on whether Armstrong, Vino, Basso, Contador or any other cyclist should get sanctioned. "Everyone does it" is not a defense.

 

[MarkvW]

That I do not think is true. All though back then you could pay off your competition to let you win. Although that was probably not done in a major grand tour.

However whether everyone doped then or now has zero bearing on whether Armstrong, Vino, Basso, Contador or any other cyclist should get sanctioned. "Everyone does it" is not a defense.

I'm a very firm believer in testing samples years afterward. If the dopers are always ahead of the science, it's the only way for the science to catch up.