USADA - Armstrong

[Anonymous]

This shows just how absurd this whole case is. If anyone should know how much an athlete is tested it's the USADA. They have the information, why would they request it from Armstrong's lawyers?

This is from the article just posted on CyclingNews about USADA requesting LA's suit be dismissed:

Tygart said in a statement released following the filing of the motion - "Were we not to bring this case, we would be complicit in covering up evidence of doping, and failing to do our job on behalf of those we are charged with protecting."

Talk about CYA - what was their job for the last 10 years?? LA's lawyers will have a field day with this statement. They will show how inefficient and incompetent USADA is and create tremendous doubt in the agency itself!

Hmmm, why do you think the USADA asked?

Maybe they actually do have a good idea how many dope tests LA has been subjected to and maybe just maybe they are increasingly sick of the Liar Boy?

Just a thought...

 

[eyemgh]

This shows just how absurd this whole case is. If anyone should know how much an athlete is tested it's the USADA. They have the information, why would they request it from Armstrong's lawyers?

This is from the article just posted on CyclingNews about USADA requesting LA's suit be dismissed:

Tygart said in a statement released following the filing of the motion - "Were we not to bring this case, we would be complicit in covering up evidence of doping, and failing to do our job on behalf of those we are charged with protecting."

Talk about CYA - what was their job for the last 10 years?? LA's lawyers will have a field day with this statement. They will show how inefficient and incompetent USADA is and create tremendous doubt in the agency itself!

They are requesting the information because they know the claim is BS. They will show the judge LA's team is FOS.

As for USADA failing in the past, typical fanboy ploy. USADA didn't do the direct testing. In this case they analyze information. If a man convicted of murder is later exhonerated by DNA evidence should we kill him anyway because under the best possible system in the past got it wrong?

Puhleeeze!!!

M

 

[poupou]

This shows just how absurd this whole case is. If anyone should know how much an athlete is tested it's the USADA. They have the information, why would they request it from Armstrong's lawyers?

USADA is playing with Lance, maybe Lance had been 300 times tested by Daamsgard while he has been tested less than 200 times by officials

 

[ManInFull]

This shows just how absurd this whole case is. If anyone should know how much an athlete is tested it's the USADA. They have the information, why would they request it from Armstrong's lawyers?

You clearly miss the point or refuse to acknowledge it. My take is that USADA doesn't believe the 500-600 number and they want Armstrong to provide documentation for his claim. There's been some outside analysis done to determine what the real number is and it's much less than what Armstrong is claiming. The 500-600 number is an example of what happens when a lie is constantly repeated--it becomes the truth for many.

 

[thehog]

You clearly miss the point or refuse to acknowledge it. My take is that USADA doesn't believe the 500-600 number and they want Armstrong to provide documentation for his claim. There's been some outside analysis done to determine what the real number is and it's much less than what Armstrong is claiming. The 500-600 number is an example of what happens when a lie is constantly repeated--it becomes the truth for many.

If you read the documents they state that the health checks for 50% are not tested for EPO etc.

My suspion is Armstromg will attempt to include these. But good luck finding the documentation.

He'll be lucky to even get to 300 even when including the health tests.

Be interesting to see the next move. I'm not sure what he will do. I think just disappearing would be advised.

 

[Turner29]

Thats is my biggest hope from this.

Doping is bigger than the UCI and cycling, it is everywhere in professional sports. And it is fraud in every way. Unfairly depriving others of prizes by cheating.

It is very, very rare that powerful people are convicted for any crime. Barry Bonds received a slap on the wrist. Roger Clemens was found not guilty. Beyond sports, the utterly despicable John Edwards -- not guilty. For all the trillions lost in various Wall Street scandals, only a handful were ever prosecuted. The Catholic Church has been involved with Penn State University cover-ups of child sexual abuse on an international scale.

Thus, the very fact that USADA chose to go after Lance Armstrong, to me is a sparkle of light in an otherwise dark cave.

 

[mwbyrd]

Hmmm, why do you think the USADA asked?

Maybe they actually do have a good idea how many dope tests LA has been subjected to and maybe just maybe they are increasingly sick of the Liar Boy?

Just a thought...

They are requesting the information because they know the claim is BS. They will show the judge LA's team is FOS.

As for USADA failing in the past, typical fanboy ploy. USADA didn't do the direct testing. In this case they analyze information. If a man convicted of murder is later exhonerated by DNA evidence should we kill him anyway because under the best possible system in the past got it wrong?

Puhleeeze!!!

M

Nice, comparing Murder to Lance's doping issues. I don't think that's a good analogy. Hmm...what if USADA loses the arbitration, will you still consider LA a doper?

You clearly miss the point or refuse to acknowledge it. My take is that USADA doesn't believe the 500-600 number and they want Armstrong to provide documentation for his claim. There's been some outside analysis done to determine what the real number is and it's much less than what Armstrong is claiming. The 500-600 number is an example of what happens when a lie is constantly repeated--it becomes the truth for many.

It's interesting how most replies are taking USADA's side of the argument. If they know the real number, why not go ahead and get the real number out in public and prove LA wrong. Stop the non-sense. And if they know they number, why would they let it leak to the public that they've asked LA to prove it. Why not wait until they get into arbitration?

Also, if USADA is so sure they are in the 'right', why would they ask that LA's case be dismissed? Sweaty palms maybe?

 

[D-Queued]

...

It's interesting how most replies are taking USADA's side of the argument. If they know the real number, why not go ahead and get the real number out in public and prove LA wrong. Stop the non-sense. And if they know they number, why would they let it leak to the public that they've asked LA to prove it. Why not wait until they get into arbitration?

Also, if USADA is so sure they are in the 'right', why would they ask that LA's case be dismissed? Sweaty palms maybe?

1. Lance has made the # of tests allegation, not USADA. They are asking him to back up his assertion.

2. Why would they file a Motion to Dismiss? Hello? The alternative would be to provide no argument and let the judge accept Lance's complaint?

Dave.

 

[Mr.DNA]

Tygert’s mantra is he is pursing Armstrong on behalf of those he is charged with protecting. Who is he protecting by pursing Armstrong? Ulrich, Basso and Mancebo (see 2005 Tour results)? Armstrong rode in an era when the use of performance enhancing drugs was systemic at the top echelons of our sport. Athletes had a choice, get on the program or you cannot compete. With increased awareness, testing and pressure to be clean, cycling is becoming one of the cleanest professional sports in the world. Cyclist should no longer have to make the choice – dope or you don’t get a contract. Tygert is doing nothing for CURRENT athletes he is charged to protect. He is wasting taxpayer money to make a name for himself, to stroke his own ego, at the expense of current athletes and the taxpayers. Instead of wasting money to pursue Armstrong, USADA should be devoting its budget to testing at more races, and leveling the playing field for current athletes and our children so they do not have to face the difficult decision dedicated athletes faced over the previous two decades. Armstrong, with or without drugs, was the greatest Tour de France rider of his time, did more for American cycling than anyone else has ever come close to doing, and has inspired and assisted millions with his foundation. Tygert, not Armstrong, should be the subject of our ire. A government employee, wasting taxpayer money for his own personal gain - ego.

Man you guys are getting too easy to plonk.

PLONK.

 

[ManInFull]

N

It's interesting how most replies are taking USADA's side of the argument. If they know the real number, why not go ahead and get the real number out in public and prove LA wrong. Stop the non-sense. And if they know they number, why would they let it leak to the public that they've asked LA to prove it. Why not wait until they get into arbitration?

Also, if USADA is so sure they are in the 'right', why would they ask that LA's case be dismissed? Sweaty palms maybe?

You arguments are for simpletons. We could say something as simple-minded like "Why did Lance file a lawsuit instead of simply facing USADA in arbitration? Sweaty palms maybe?"

The reality is that the number is irrelevant. We all know that Lance is claiming this high number of non-positive tests to reinforce his "purity" and to have simpletons repeat it constantly. Yet, a number of athletes have never had a positive, but eventually admitted to doping.

 

[Race Radio]

Nice, comparing Murder to Lance's doping issues. I don't think that's a good analogy. Hmm...what if USADA loses the arbitration, will you still consider LA a doper?





It's interesting how most replies are taking USADA's side of the argument. If they know the real number, why not go ahead and get the real number out in public and prove LA wrong. Stop the non-sense. And if they know they number, why would they let it leak to the public that they've asked LA to prove it. Why not wait until they get into arbitration?

Also, if USADA is so sure they are in the 'right', why would they ask that LA's case be dismissed? Sweaty palms maybe?

You are confused.

WADA only tested Armstrong for 3 years of his career, Prior to that it was the UCI's job. The UCI refused to give them years of testing results, including the Biopassport test, until earlier this year.

Armstrong made a ridiculous claim of 600 tests. This is a key part of his defense, but there is nothing that backs up this claim. It is normal for USADA to ask for supporting evidence......which Lance is unable to provide because it is nothing more then a lie invented for the media

 

[jseibert]

You are 100% correct, and I have no argument with you. During Lance's career, doping was systemic in the pro peloton in Europe.

If your allegations are correct, then Danny was clearly part of the systemic doping that took place.

This is a Lance Armstrong thread.

If you want to argue that Danny was a doper, you should start another thread.

Dave.

Dave - You are misrepresenting what I said. I did not say or imply Danny Pate is a doper. I have the utmost respect for Danny Pate and riders like him. I responded to someone else, who stated he could not believe Danny would fall into the doper category, using him as an example that not all riders in the last decade gave in to the doping culture. I am with that guy. My point is, and was, I do not see how spending money to sanction a retired LA will improve our sport. Millions that will be spent on attorneys and arbitration would be better spent on more testing and research, so CURRENT riders riders of Danny Pate's character will have a level playing field. I am guessing USADA could get a testing truck out to hundreds of races and test for an amount equivalent to what it will spend on the LA battle. What company will sponsor a pro cycling team when its all done? How does this help the sport? Is USADA using its money responsibly to engage in a battle with the LA machine to protect current athletes from dopers? Perhaps there is a good reason out there, but I have not heard it.

 

[Franklin]

Perhaps there is a good reason out there, but I have not heard it.

How about showing that you can't simply run away with millions after doping to the gills and abusing the sport?

But hey, who wants to hear that message?

 

[131313]

This shows just how absurd this whole case is. If anyone should know how much an athlete is tested it's the USADA. They have the information, why would they request it from Armstrong's lawyers?

This is from the article just posted on CyclingNews about USADA requesting LA's suit be dismissed:

Tygart said in a statement released following the filing of the motion - "Were we not to bring this case, we would be complicit in covering up evidence of doping, and failing to do our job on behalf of those we are charged with protecting."

Talk about CYA - what was their job for the last 10 years?? LA's lawyers will have a field day with this statement. They will show how inefficient and incompetent USADA is and create tremendous doubt in the agency itself!

you forgot "which hunt" and "waste of taxpayer dollars". keep trying...

 

[131313]

I did not say everyone cheated, but you can't deny doping was systemic in the pro peloton in Europe. Guys like Danny Pate got robbed by dopers, but how does going after Lance help the Danny Pate's of today? Wouldn't resources be better spent testing? I am tired of reading about Lance Armstrong.

seriously, wake the hell up. did you actually watch the Tour of Cal in 2011? how many people where cheated in that race? Guess what? Bruyneel and Armstrong are still actively involved in cycling to this day. Of all of the apologist nonsense, this line of reasoning is the dumbest.

 

[poupou]

Dave - You are misrepresenting what I said. I did not say or imply Danny Pate is a doper. I have the utmost respect for Danny Pate and riders like him. I responded to someone else, who stated he could not believe Danny would fall into the doper category, using him as an example that not all riders in the last decade gave in to the doping culture. I am with that guy. My point is, and was, I do not see how spending money to sanction a retired LA will improve our sport. Millions that will be spent on attorneys and arbitration would be better spent on more testing and research, so CURRENT riders riders of Danny Pate's character will have a level playing field. I am guessing USADA could get a testing truck out to hundreds of races and test for an amount equivalent to what it will spend on the LA battle. What company will sponsor a pro cycling team when its all done? How does this help the sport? Is USADA using its money responsibly to engage in a battle with the LA machine to protect current athletes from dopers? Perhaps there is a good reason out there, but I have not heard it.

Assumptions.

I do believe that money is much better used on Lance's doping case that will be the best deterrent for other riders and athletes.
WADA will never have enough money to fight new drugs, so it's better to go after dopers a few years later with less expensive methods.

 

[Race Radio]

Dave - You are misrepresenting what I said. I did not say or imply Danny Pate is a doper. I have the utmost respect for Danny Pate and riders like him. I responded to someone else, who stated he could not believe Danny would fall into the doper category, using him as an example that not all riders in the last decade gave in to the doping culture. I am with that guy. My point is, and was, I do not see how spending money to sanction a retired LA will improve our sport. Millions that will be spent on attorneys and arbitration would be better spent on more testing and research, so CURRENT riders riders of Danny Pate's character will have a level playing field. I am guessing USADA could get a testing truck out to hundreds of races and test for an amount equivalent to what it will spend on the LA battle. What company will sponsor a pro cycling team when its all done? How does this help the sport? Is USADA using its money responsibly to engage in a battle with the LA machine to protect current athletes from dopers? Perhaps there is a good reason out there, but I have not heard it.

USADA ignoring the testimony of over a dozen witnesses would do far more damage then the costs of pursuing lance.

If you are concerned about costs I suggest you start crying for Lance's paid liars to drop their obfuscation campaign. They are wasting taxpayer funds with all these silly filings

 

[Kennf1]

Also, if USADA is so sure they are in the 'right', why would they ask that LA's case be dismissed? Sweaty palms maybe?

I don't think you have any idea what LA's lawsuit is about. He's trying to stop the USADA process, period, not move the arbitration to federal court. USADA wants the process to go forward.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Hi guys,
I'm a massive lurker of this thread, and I've got strange question for you.

I occasionally come across people who think Lance is innocent. They have a strong opinion on the matter, however they have very little knowledge on the subect.

Unfortunately my head is usually just BURSTING with information on the subject, and I find it hard to articulate the million reasons as to how I can convince them that he's a cheat, and a terrible person.

So my question to you guys: How do I convince an uneducated Lance follower, in less than 60 seconds that he's a cheat and not the great guy he has convinced so many people he is?
Their common defenses are:
- those that testify are all doing it in self interest
- he never tested positive
- LIVESTRONG. It's a witch hunt that will cause more harm than good!!!

These people are generally rational and educated - so by quickly pointing out to them how much they don't know about the subject, and giving good arguments - it should be a rather easy thing to do.

I rarely discuss Armstrong with friends, but recently met a few people who know I follow the sport - I think they were expecting me to defend LA, but yes I got all the usual questions.

Here is roughly how it went:
So, do you think Armstrong doped?
Yes.
What, but he had cancer.
So, many people who have had cancer continue to smoke.
But he had all those tests, never failed one.
Neither did Marion Jones - the current case is charging a conspiracy, basically having Doctors and others to avoid positive tests.
But why did the others not talk sooner, sounds like they are conspiring against him.
Those who remained silent were scared of retribution from Lance, he is quite litigatious. But they were more scared of the Feds
But he has done so much for cancer.
Ok, what is the name of his charity.
Am, Livestrong.
Nope, its the Lance Armstrong Foundation - Livestrong is a brand name, and one he profits from.
Well, it doesn't matter, they all doped.
No, they didn't. Sure, many who finished high up with him at the Tour did, but many others left the sport disillusioned.
It was a long time ago.
2010 is not a long time ago - and it shows that bullying and bribing others shouldn't be rewarded.
Bullying? Bribing? What do you mean?

(now you have them...)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Dave - You are misrepresenting what I said. I did not say or imply Danny Pate is a doper. I have the utmost respect for Danny Pate and riders like him. I responded to someone else, who stated he could not believe Danny would fall into the doper category, using him as an example that not all riders in the last decade gave in to the doping culture. I am with that guy. My point is, and was, I do not see how spending money to sanction a retired LA will improve our sport. Millions that will be spent on attorneys and arbitration would be better spent on more testing and research, so CURRENT riders riders of Danny Pate's character will have a level playing field. I am guessing USADA could get a testing truck out to hundreds of races and test for an amount equivalent to what it will spend on the LA battle. What company will sponsor a pro cycling team when its all done? How does this help the sport? Is USADA using its money responsibly to engage in a battle with the LA machine to protect current athletes from dopers? Perhaps there is a good reason out there, but I have not heard it.

Ah, I forgot the "how does it help the sport" squeal.

Let me ask you - how does letting a cheat and fraud cheat and fraud help the sport?

As for - are USADA using their funds responsibly - do you want me to spell out what USADA stands for?

 

[D-Queued]

Dave - You are misrepresenting what I said. I did not say or imply Danny Pate is a doper. I have the utmost respect for Danny Pate and riders like him. I responded to someone else, who stated he could not believe Danny would fall into the doper category, using him as an example that not all riders in the last decade gave in to the doping culture. I am with that guy. My point is, and was, I do not see how spending money to sanction a retired LA will improve our sport. Millions that will be spent on attorneys and arbitration would be better spent on more testing and research, so CURRENT riders riders of Danny Pate's character will have a level playing field. I am guessing USADA could get a testing truck out to hundreds of races and test for an amount equivalent to what it will spend on the LA battle. What company will sponsor a pro cycling team when its all done? How does this help the sport? Is USADA using its money responsibly to engage in a battle with the LA machine to protect current athletes from dopers? Perhaps there is a good reason out there, but I have not heard it.

I am not misrepresenting what you said, merely agreeing with your strongest argument.

Go ahead and review your post to confirm.

Yours is the latest example of doping apologist argument #46: they all did it.

If so, then Danny did too.

If he didn't, then we should go after all dopers without exception.

Your second argument, Doping Apologist #64, is 'he is retired', leave him alone.

Okay, then what about:
1. Hope returns - and has done so again in triathlon

What do you do about dopers that make comebacks? How do you avoid the use of an obvious loophole? How do you feel about Riis admitting that he doped when he won?

Are you suggesting a rule change that provides immunity for any doped found positive or otherwise found guilty of doping after announcing their retirement?

If so, go ahead and submit your idea to WADA.

I expect that you may hear the laughter all the way from their offices in Montreal, though.

Dave.

 

[Turner29]

I rarely discuss Armstrong with friends, but recently met a few people who know I follow the sport - I think they were expecting me to defend LA, but yes I got all the usual questions.

Here is roughly how it went:
So, do you think Armstrong doped?
Yes.
What, but he had cancer.
So, many people who have had cancer continue to smoke.
But he had all those tests, never failed one.
Neither did Marion Jones - the current case is charging a conspiracy, basically having Doctors and others to avoid positive tests.
But why did the others not talk sooner, sounds like they are conspiring against him.
Those who remained silent were scared of retribution from Lance, he is quite litigatious. But they were more scared of the Feds
But he has done so much for cancer.
Ok, what is the name of his charity.
Am, Livestrong.
Nope, its the Lance Armstrong Foundation - Livestrong is a brand name, and one he profits from.
Well, it doesn't matter, they all doped.
No, they didn't. Sure, many who finished high up with him at the Tour did, but many others left the sport disillusioned.
It was a long time ago.
2010 is not a long time ago - and it shows that bullying and bribing others shouldn't be rewarded.
Bullying? Bribing? What do you mean?

(now you have them...)

If only that simple. What galls me the most about Lance Armstrong supporters is that they rely mostly on "hearsay" evidence, the same type of evidence that Lance Armstrong falsely claims the USADA's case is based upon.

 

[MarkvW]

Ah, I forgot the "how does it help the sport" squeal.

Let me ask you - how does letting a cheat and fraud cheat and fraud help the sport?

As for - are USADA using their funds responsibly - do you want me to spell out what USADA stands for?

USADA couldn't just walk away from the evidence. If they did, the next doper caught would scream bloody murder.

Besides, we've seen the horrible example of Spain. Who wants that?

 

[alberto.legstrong]

Ah, I forgot the "how does it help the sport" squeal.

Let me ask you - how does letting a cheat and fraud cheat and fraud help the sport?

As for - are USADA using their funds responsibly - do you want me to spell out what USADA stands for?

Yeah! I think I had this same argument for most of my childhood : Hey loser-son, go make your bed and take a shower and do your homework.
Hey Mom, how's that going to change anything?

Seriously, we should send a giant signal out to everyone, go ahead, cheat all you want, we prosecute no one, especially if you can sell yourself as cancer jesus. Catching you changes nothing. The people who came in behind you that were clean are just a bunch of rubes all hung up on fairness, integrity and sportsmanship. Just go out and win, who cares how you did it? Well, unless you can't sell yourself as a savior, then you are the devil. But we'll we're worry about that when you're positive for clen.

 

[MarkvW]

If only that simple. What galls me the most about Lance Armstrong supporters is that they rely mostly on "hearsay" evidence, the same type of evidence that Lance Armstrong falsely claims the USADA's case is based upon.

Nothing galls me about innocent dupes. When the tide turns against Armstrong, they'll turn right with it. No reason to hold anything against people whose only error is believing a liar.