USADA - Armstrong

[Dr. Maserati]

Doc "no room for error" Maserati,
let's go back for a sec, shall we?

you said:


but what I had actually posted was:


realizing you were off and wrong, your temperature must have risen dramatically (because docs are flawless), so in a moment of panic you decided to spin it, now suddenly claiming:



whatever makes you happy.

And as I said you don't understand the difference - as you had to add "still in force". When I highlighted the difference between the 90s and now you have gone off on some tangent.

 

[Polish]

And as I said you don't understand the difference - as you had to add "still in force". When I highlighted the difference between the 90s and now you have gone off on some tangent.

Going off on a tangent is advisable if you find yourself in a vortex.

Similiar to what any tri-geek worth his salt will tell you, do NOT try to swim against a riptide. Do NOT try to swim towards shore against the riptide. You will only tire yourself out and perish.

Go off on a tangent. Perpendicular to the riptide is best. Once you swim out of the riptide in this manner - then start swimming towards shore.

Just some helpful advice.

 

[sniper]

And as I said you don't understand the difference - as you had to add "still in force". When I highlighted the difference between the 90s and now you have gone off on some tangent.

no tangent. just pointing out you were wrong, since you seemed unable to establish that yourself (or perhaps establish it, yes, but admit it, no)

for what it's worth, doc, you're still among my favorite posters -- and that is a select group --

 

[red_flanders]

The topic is USADA - Armstrong, not others' posting styles. Handle it in PM or not at all. Thank you for staying on topic. This is for everyone. Much appreciated all, I know it's hard with a hot-button topic, but you're a bunch of pretty intelligent folks, let's get it done.

 

[formerlyfastfreddyp]

Has anyone looked at Lance's tweets lately? Yesterday he tweeted:

Came across 2 articles that contradict @usantidoping's false claim that I doped n 09. Pls read.

The articles are:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/analysis-armstrongs-tour-blood-levels-debated

and

http://velonews.competitor.com/2009...out-lance-armstrongs-tour-blood-samples_97468

These articles don't contradict the USADA's claim.

I think Lance is high or grasping at straws. Maybe both.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Has anyone looked at Lance's tweets lately? Yesterday he tweeted:

Came across 2 articles that contradict @usantidoping's false claim that I doped n 09. Pls read.

The articles are:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/analysis-armstrongs-tour-blood-levels-debated

and

http://velonews.competitor.com/2009...out-lance-armstrongs-tour-blood-samples_97468

These articles don't contradict the USADA's claim.

I think Lance is high or grasping at straws. Maybe both.

Seriously, I think he is coming unraveled here recently. Spinning around and around trying to wrap his pea sized brain around the fact that the jig actually might be up this time. Pretty soon, I think something like this could very well play out in Austin, or is it Aspen? Notice the pile of cocaine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_z4IuxAqpE

 

[Race Radio]

Has anyone looked at Lance's tweets lately? Yesterday he tweeted:

Came across 2 articles that contradict @usantidoping's false claim that I doped n 09. Pls read.

The articles are:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/analysis-armstrongs-tour-blood-levels-debated

and

http://velonews.competitor.com/2009...out-lance-armstrongs-tour-blood-samples_97468

These articles don't contradict the USADA's claim.

I think Lance is high or grasping at straws. Maybe both.

They only enhance USADA's position. They also only cover the 2009 Tour, USADA said in BOTH 2009 and 2010 his values were wacky. He never released his 2010 numbers. If he really wanted to slam USADA he would release his 2010 number

I wonder why he is scared to do that?

 

[MarkvW]

Has anyone looked at Lance's tweets lately? Yesterday he tweeted:

Came across 2 articles that contradict @usantidoping's false claim that I doped n 09. Pls read.

The articles are:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/analysis-armstrongs-tour-blood-levels-debated

and

http://velonews.competitor.com/2009...out-lance-armstrongs-tour-blood-samples_97468

These articles don't contradict the USADA's claim.

I think Lance is high or grasping at straws. Maybe both.

He is certainly not responding in the businesslike way of a lawyer-advised client preparing for a long, very expensive legal proceeding.

I would think that fighting this would be way more expensive than anything that has gone before.

 

[cleanmarine]

Has anyone looked at Lance's tweets lately? Yesterday he tweeted:

Came across 2 articles that contradict @usantidoping's false claim that I doped n 09. Pls read.

The articles are:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/analysis-armstrongs-tour-blood-levels-debated

and

http://velonews.competitor.com/2009...out-lance-armstrongs-tour-blood-samples_97468

These articles don't contradict the USADA's claim.

I think Lance is high or grasping at straws. Maybe both.

As Tony Montana: I always tell the truth... Even when I lie.

 

[Nick777]

Can we scratch the NYC Marathon results?

I liked it...

I wonder if the results of his triathlon 'wins' will be changed?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I liked it...

I wonder if the results of his triathlon 'wins' will be changed?

That would be awesome if they stripped his Hawaii half win. I would love that as much as them stripping his TdF wins.

 

[thehog]

“So far, as legal challenges are concerned, we’re not scared of them,” Howman said. “The system is robust and we have confidence in it.”

Tygart responded in a statement: “Any suggestion that the Usada process is unfair is a blatant distortion of the truth. The truth is this arbitration process is grounded in a federal statute and contains all of the safeguards to ensure a fair hearing.”

Its review board — which is where Armstrong’s case is headed now — is like a grand jury, but does not have any investigative or subpoena power. It consists of technical, legal and medical experts who examine the evidence and see if the case is strong enough for the athlete to charged with breaking antidoping rules.

Armstrong had 10 days, until June 22, to file a written submission to that review board. If he had failed a drug test, he would have received the laboratory documentation of that failed test. But he did not, according to a letter the antidoping agency sent to him last week that listed the charges against him.

The agency said only that data from blood collections obtained by the International Cycling Union from Armstrong in 2009 and 2010 is “fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions.”

If the review board finds enough evidence to charge Armstrong, then the antidoping agency will charge him with a doping violation. If he does not accept the charges, the next step for him would be to proceed to a hearing, which is mandated by the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act.

A three-person arbitration panel that would eventually rule on the case is convened in advance of that hearing. That panel determines when the antidoping agency gives Armstrong the evidence it has against him, the antidoping agency said.

But to get to that point might take a while.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/s...e-in-lance-armstrong-case.html?pagewanted=all

 

[Race Radio]

Remember this?

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=2006/epo_protease

 

[thehog]

Remember this?

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=2006/epo_protease

There's that guy Saugy again.

Scientists in Switzerland suspect that the latest method to elude the test involves the use of a powder that destroys all traces of EPO, natural or synthetic. Martial Saugy, head of the Swiss anti-doping laboratory said "There has been a significant increase in the number of samples in which there is no EPO detected at all, leading us to believe they are being manipulated. We have no proof so far, but there are indications that a powder exists."

 

[fishtacos]

Clearly the most important result that could be stripped would be his 23rd in the XTerra World Championship last year. Oh, the humanity!

 

[Epicycle]

Remember this?

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=2006/epo_protease

Interesting. Around that time Ullrich reportedly had multiple samples that showed no natural EPO as well.

 

[BotanyBay]

There's that guy Saugy again.

Scientists in Switzerland suspect that the latest method to elude the test involves the use of a powder that destroys all traces of EPO, natural or synthetic. Martial Saugy, head of the Swiss anti-doping laboratory said "There has been a significant increase in the number of samples in which there is no EPO detected at all, leading us to believe they are being manipulated. We have no proof so far, but there are indications that a powder exists."

Yep, the "oh crap, I'm being tested" powder.

 

[Anonymous]

Clearly the most important result that could be stripped would be his 23rd in the XTerra World Championship last year. Oh, the humanity!

Dude, c'mon. Lance 2.0 was all about Nevada City.

Mission accomplished.

Wipe that result away and he as good as ruined.

 

[BotanyBay]

“Tygart responded in a statement: “Any suggestion that the Usada process is unfair is a blatant distortion of the truth. The truth is this arbitration process is grounded in a federal statute and contains all of the safeguards to ensure a fair hearing.”

It's fairly well known that Floyd almost bankrupted USADA. So Lance is probably aiming to finish the job.

 

[MarkvW]

It's fairly well known that Floyd almost bankrupted USADA. So Lance is probably aiming to finish the job.

Look at the reasoning for the costs imposed on Floyd. Some of the costs were imposed for unreasonably jerking around USADA's witnesses.

 

[rhubroma]

I'm not at all sure Indurain was clean, and I know Anquetil wasn't (and Anquetil made the point that doping was necessary for the Tour). Anquetil thus , by his own admission, did dope his way to multiple Tour wins.

And your argument that Armstrong is alone at the top of organized dopers is only valid if you talk about riders. Saiz and Pevenage are at least as bad as Armstrong, and IMO Saiz is worse.

And before you go accusing, in advance, those who disagree with you of being fanboys, what's this with your "just a few pills" statement? Is 'pot belge' just a few pills? Is amphetamine abuse insignificant? You are minimizing the seriousness of past doping abuse. It was a huge problem back then, both with riders' health and with getting broader public acceptance for such a filthy sport.

There are a lot of aggravators, and Lance deserves a lifetime ban for them.

But ask yourself this: How in the world is Lance going to compete and win against Saiz and Pevenage unless he has a more effective doping organization? The answer is obvious.

Anybody who thinks Lance is an aberration is an [fill in the blank--you apparently like that style of argument]. Take out Lance's multiple doped TdF wins, and what do you get? You get Ullrich's multiple doped TdF wins. You get Ivan Basso.

Lance is a weed. He was one of the biggest weeds. He thrived because nobody tends the garden. Now, belatedly, that weed may be pulled out by the roots. But there are lots more weeds, and the garden still isn't being tended adequately.

Gag me with all this talk of how Lance ruined pro cycling. The sport was a going brothel long before Lance and it will be a going brothel long after Lance.

In terms of the sheer size of the fraud, which must be calculated in terms of the amount of profit and fame made on it, nobody even comes close to Lance in the business. If all the accusations being brought to bear against him, furthermore, are verified, then he is also right on par with Saiz.

As per your last statement, we know this; however, none of the other dopers behaved like Napoleonic psychopaths, and who hoodwinked an entire nation of the faithful which simple demands that he crash in exemplary fashion. While the others you mentioned have, at least, been exposed and punished.

 

[frenchfry]

“So far, as legal challenges are concerned, we’re not scared of them,” Howman said. “The system is robust and we have confidence in it.”

Tygart responded in a statement: “Any suggestion that the Usada process is unfair is a blatant distortion of the truth. The truth is this arbitration process is grounded in a federal statute and contains all of the safeguards to ensure a fair hearing.”

Its review board — which is where Armstrong’s case is headed now — is like a grand jury, but does not have any investigative or subpoena power. It consists of technical, legal and medical experts who examine the evidence and see if the case is strong enough for the athlete to charged with breaking antidoping rules.

Armstrong had 10 days, until June 22, to file a written submission to that review board. If he had failed a drug test, he would have received the laboratory documentation of that failed test. But he did not, according to a letter the antidoping agency sent to him last week that listed the charges against him.

The agency said only that data from blood collections obtained by the International Cycling Union from Armstrong in 2009 and 2010 is “fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions.”

If the review board finds enough evidence to charge Armstrong, then the antidoping agency will charge him with a doping violation. If he does not accept the charges, the next step for him would be to proceed to a hearing, which is mandated by the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act.

A three-person arbitration panel that would eventually rule on the case is convened in advance of that hearing. That panel determines when the antidoping agency gives Armstrong the evidence it has against him, the antidoping agency said.

But to get to that point might take a while.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/s...e-in-lance-armstrong-case.html?pagewanted=all

This article confirms a point that RR has already made - Armstrong's agent and go to guy Bill Stapleton was on the commitee that established the rules under which USADA operates. In fact he was the chairman. Just another inconvenient truth that will be trampelled in the PR campaign to discredit anyone who dares oppose the myth.

There is little doubt that Armstrong will attempt to run USADA out of funds before they can confirm the truth. Will he succeed?

 

[MacRoadie]

We can always start the Tygart Truth Treasury to help keep USADA in the black. Plus, "TTT" has a nice, familiar cycling ring to it...

 

[Dallas_]

Trust Travis

Since 2000, 58 cases have been contested.

USADA lost 2

PS Tygart cannot be bought or intimidated

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/s...lance-armstrong-case.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
.

 

[Maxiton]

Maybe this has been asked and answered, but I don't see it. Can we guess who the ten cyclists are? Should we?

01) Landis
02) Hamilton
03) Zabriskie
04) Vande Velde
05) Leipheimer
06) Hincapie
07) Vaughters
08) Andreu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryder_Hesjedal
(Not sure about Hincapie.) Any guesses as to the other two? Hesjedal? Livingston? O'Bee? McCarty? Ventura?