USADA - Armstrong

[Cancellator]

I am guessing that Mr Horner faces troubled waters a little way down the track.

Most probably he has a two-year ban waiting for him soon, if he doesn't wise up and retire after this season.

 

[Lajeretta4Ever]

Does this mean Levi's Gran Fondo is toast?

 

[RedheadDane]

Let's imagine he is found guilty for having doped during those seven Tour wins. What would happen then? I mean, come on; they're not going to hand out each win to the guys who placed second, right? It was ridiculously enough when Andy Schleck won the Tour two years ago. In some of these cases we're talking more than ten years ago.
Could you imagine UCI calling Alex Zülle?

UCI: Congrats! You've just won the Tour de France!
Zülle: Really? How? When?
UCI: 1999
Zülle: Yaaaaayyy...

 

[argyllflyer]

Let's imagine he is found guilty for having doped during those seven Tour wins. What would happen then? I mean, come on; they're not going to hand out each win to the guys who placed second, right? It was ridiculously enough when Andy Schleck won the Tour two years ago. In some of these cases we're talking more than ten years ago.
Could you imagine UCI calling Alex Zülle?

UCI: Congrats! You've just won the Tour de France!
Zülle: Really? How? When?
UCI: 1999
Zülle: Yaaaaayyy...

Surely simple way out is to say:

1999: withheld
2000: withheld
2001: withheld
2002: withheld
2003: withheld
2004: withheld
2005: withheld

 

[PCutter]

Horner is going to the Olympics, what will happen to him? I guess there are no charges against him, but why did the other riders admit to anything when nothing is going to happen to Horner, while they get 6 month bans.

Horner really would only know about the very end of LAs career, and I guess LA may have been a bit more discreet during the comeback than he may have been in 1999-2001 when the JV and CVV were riding for him. So he may never have seen anything - just a guess based on who was named, who wasn't

 

[BoxCoppi]

Let's imagine he is found guilty for having doped during those seven Tour wins. What would happen then? I mean, come on; they're not going to hand out each win to the guys who placed second, right? It was ridiculously enough when Andy Schleck won the Tour two years ago. In some of these cases we're talking more than ten years ago.
Could you imagine UCI calling Alex Zülle?

UCI: Congrats! You've just won the Tour de France!
Zülle: Really? How? When?
UCI: 1999
Zülle: Yaaaaayyy...

Don't think they'll give the Tour victories to somebody else. Wouldn't make any sense due to it being years back and the majority of the bunch being doped anyway.
I actually looked through the list of people behind Armstrong in his winning years for the first "never caught doping" guy. Some of the years it was number seven or eight who was first clean, i.e. never been caught...

They should erase #1 for those years and leave it blank.

 

[SilentAssassin]

If he doped in 2009 it makes absolutely no sense that he would not dope in 2010, since there is no way Armstrong would come back to the tour to do worse than he had in 2009. The fact that he rode more poorly in 2010 is weak evidence for "not doping". It is strong evidence that he was inadequately trained compared to 2009, or perhaps that he was trying a "new and improved" doping regimen that didn't work out as well as 2009's.

Or he just got a year older and if you watched theh 2010 tour, he was involved in a few accidents and bad luck flats.

So wait, more witnesses are from people that made deals with USADA?

It's going to be interesting when this whole case falls apart and this thread disappears just like the failed federal investigation.

 

[andy1234]

I am a fan of Vaughters stance in the sport, but Vaughters, and the riders named, should not have been allowed to participate in the tour.*
*If this report is accurate*

 

[RedheadDane]

Don't think they'll give the Tour victories to somebody else. Wouldn't make any sense due to it being years back and the majority of the bunch being doped anyway.
I actually looked through the list of people behind Armstrong in his winning years for the first "never caught doping" guy. Some of the years it was number seven or eight who was first clean, i.e. never been caught...

They should erase #1 for those years and leave it blank.

Yeah... my point exactly. If they were to try and give the wins to the first clean guy it seems like they'd risk having to give the wins to some guys who didn't even finish.

I honestly don't even care if he, or those other guys, were doped or not. Sure; doping is a bad thing which unfortunately has ruined the reputation of this sport, but starting to rip up year old cases ain't exactly doing wonders for the reputaion either...

 

[Frosty]

Vaughters says that no-one from Slipstream Sports has been given a 6 month ban

http://twitter.com/#!/Vaughters

'Regarding the Dutch media report: No 6mos suspensions have been given to any member of Slipstream Sports. Today or at any future date.'

 

[poupou]

Let's imagine he is found guilty for having doped during those seven Tour wins. What would happen then? I mean, come on; they're not going to hand out each win to the guys who placed second, right? It was ridiculously enough when Andy Schleck won the Tour two years ago. In some of these cases we're talking more than ten years ago.
Could you imagine UCI calling Alex Zülle?

UCI: Congrats! You've just won the Tour de France!
Zülle: Really? How? When?
UCI: 1999
Zülle: Yaaaaayyy...

It's not more stupid to have let Lance on palmares since 1999!
That was obvious too.

 

[Bavarianrider]

Game over Lance!!!!!

 

[Fidolix]

Or he just got a year older and if you watched theh 2010 tour, he was involved in a few accidents and bad luck flats.

So wait, more witnesses are from people that made deals with USADA?

It's going to be interesting when this whole case falls apart and this thread disappears just like the failed federal investigation.

Yes you right, Armstrong have always been clean... I´m missing a smilie here but wtf this will do instead:

 

[Fidolix]

Yeah... my point exactly. If they were to try and give the wins to the first clean guy it seems like they'd risk having to give the wins to some guys who didn't even finish.

I honestly don't even care if he, or those other guys, were doped or not. Sure; doping is a bad thing which unfortunately has ruined the reputation of this sport, but starting to rip up year old cases ain't exactly doing wonders for the reputaion either...

Please go back to feltet.dk debate forum, please!!

 

[classicomano]

Vaughters is more or less confirming the story (except for the 6 month ban) with all those tweets.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Enough with the face-palm photos.

Susan

 

[Bavarianrider]

Enough with the face-palm photos.

Susan

photos deleted by mod

 

[hrotha]

Wooo, Bavarian Hardcore Rebel

Anyway, good for them. Also, even if they got a suspension, it was still worth it and the right thing to do (this goes for JV and co., not for those who would rather not have said anything at all).

 

[frenchfry]

No big surprise here, and it will be difficult to attack the credibility of these 4 (or 5 including Vaughters).

I can imagine that Lancey-poo is in big trouble, his best bet is to continue to attack from a procedural point of view which isn't exactly the direction a truly innocent person would concentrate on. After his ex-teamates tell their stories the accused will be cooked. I just can see that Armstrong would want this to go to an arbitration hearing as it will be impossible to discredit what will come out.

November will be an interesting month.

 

[Zarvinov]

Just an opinion. Whether anybody agrees with it or not. The chances that Armstrong doped in 2009 and 2010 are highly likely when You take his past into consideration.

 

[python]

No big surprise here, and it will be difficult to attack the credibility of these 4 (or 5 including Vaughters).

I can imagine that Lancey-poo is in big trouble, his best bet is to continue to attack from a procedural point of view which isn't exactly the direction a truly innocent person would concentrate on. After his ex-teamates tell their stories the accused will be cooked. I just can see that Armstrong would want this to go to an arbitration hearing as it will be impossible to discredit what will come out.

November will be an interesting month.

agree, no big surprise at all, just another confirmation of the names this board has figured long ago.

the surprise to me is 6 month deal which is probably somewhere in the rules but not directly in the wada code which referes to 1/2 of a 2 year suspension...

whatever, i am absolutely confident that the usada has obtained wada's legal opinion and concurrence to the deal. i am also confident that the uci were against the deal but faced with the odds, relinquished.

here's to sweeping cycling of the biggest fraud that exploited it !!!!

 

[Euskaltel!]

Kudos to Vaughters, Hincapie, Leipheimer, CVV and DZ - that's a strong set of people to admit to doping and have against you, I really can't see Lance with any other foot left to stand on

 

[Benotti69]

I have to wonder at the mindset of Bottle, GH, CVV and DZ that they are able to ride at the highest level after talking to USADA about Armstrong!

 

[webvan]

Vaughters says that no-one from Slipstream Sports has been given a 6 month ban

http://twitter.com/#!/Vaughters

'Regarding the Dutch media report: No 6mos suspensions have been given to any member of Slipstream Sports. Today or at any future date.'

He can't be lying, so what's the story? DZ and CVV to be fired before the suspension goes into effect, unlikely...JV doesn't consider this to be a SSports related suspension since it was before they joined and they were encouraged to talk without to fear being fired? Odd...

 

[TheEnoculator]

I just woke up to this wonderful news! Thank you George, Levi, Dave, Chris, and Jon. Your courage and sense of duty have to be commanded. Everybody makes mistakes, and you all did the right thing in admitting it. Most importantly, you all help expose the biggest drug kingpin in the history of professional sports.

THANK YOU!