USADA - Armstrong

[Anonymous]

The timing of Hincapie's retirement is interesting. If he is a central witness in the case, it's plausible that USADA informed him that the charges were about to be released as a courtesy, so Hincapie could announce his retirement before it got tangled up in this case. There are at least 10 teammates who testified, but Hincapie is likely the central focus. He's been around Armstrong forever and has no motives against Armstrong. If he came clean and told a highly detailed account of team involvement since before 1996, that's going to be devastating testimony.

Yep. And nothing much is likely to happen before GH is to retire from racing.

At the moment the witnesses are anonymous to the public. It won't be that way for for long.

 

[Big Doopie]

48 pages of posts already? Wow.

I prefer to focus on the issue from the what's good for cycling angle. Forget the fan boys. Forget the haters. Forget what you think of Lance Armstrong personally. I know that many here want to see Armstrong stripped of his 7 TdF wins.

My first thought there is simple: Then give them to whom? Every single podium finisher except one during Armstrong's TdF years has been suspended for doping or otherwise convincingly linked to doping scandals. Just to name one of them, Ullrich was 2nd to Armstrong three times. Should he be awarded 3 more TdF wins? How would that be justice?

Stripping Armstrong's titles would just mean passing the wins from one doper to another. Some want to see that anyway because of personal dislike, but what does that really accomplish?

Let the USADA have their case. Let them hand down a suspension or whatever if that's what their case concludes is appropriate. For pro cycling to go back and award the wins to someone else is pointless though. How far back should we go? Is there Indurain blood somewhere we could get tested for EPO? It's almost certainly in there.

The early to mid '90s through much of the 2000s was a dirty era in cycling, unfortunately, but the sport desperately needs to move on. Cycling has stricter testing and harsher penalties than I've heard of in any other sport. Good.

unfortunately, you miss the point. it is absolutely imperative for the future of cycling that armstrong be stripped of all his titles and that the doctors and bruyneel be forever banished.

it is vital because it is the only way that today's cyclists, doctors, team managers may see that it is not worth the risk.

by all means don't give the titles to another doper but demonstrate that -- no matter what -- cheating will eventually get uncovered.

brushing it all under the rug and saying "ah, it was all part of a doping era" basically let's everyone get away with it. if there is no punishment. What lesson will today's peloton gather from that...?

and ultimately the criminal organization that is the uci has to be pressured to be completely gutted and revamped.

 

[Benotti69]

if people keep responding to trolls this thread will get messy and derailed.

 

[Jeremiah]

Not just that, Race Radio says on twitter the criminal investigation should be reopened as well!
Very good points. This is exactly the I feel about it. I think this is what people who actually work in the sport, trying to make it clean, would feel about the situation as well. It's bonkers to go back and wipe out a whole set of tours and make one rider of the era out to be worse than anyone else.

Some of the more excited people should be careful what they wish for.

So you suggest letting armstrong get away with trafficking?

 

[Big Doopie]

As for who should get the wins - I would be impressed if you had chimed in with this when Landis or Contador were caught and had their wins removed - but as you say the era was dirty, then give it to no-one, they are worthless anyway.
Let it be reminder that what went on was meaningless - that is a perfect way for cycling to move on.

precisely.

isn't that what lemond said about riis' confession? that riis had come to realize that his win was meaningless.

ultimately, this is probably what will anger armstrong the most -- all that work, all the lying and concealment, all the efforts spent cheating -- all that racing in the mountains in july...

all rendered meaningless.

his entire life.

meaningless.

 

[MarkvW]

USADA has really good evidence of a conspiracy to dope. And they'll be able to prove the conspiracy.

But conspiracy to dope is not, itself, a violation that is alleged. The letter alleges acts that were actually done (use, possess, traffic, administer, attempt to administer, assist, encourage, aid, abet, cover-up, complicity, and aggravating factors . . .), but it is not seeking to sanction the dopers because of a conspiracy. Before you flame me, read the rule violations alleged against Armstrong on page 11.

USADA is seeking to bring the old Postie stuff in under two theories (page 14).

The first theory is that the old Postie and Disco doping is evidence of the doping that happened within the most recent 8 years. (Page 14). Under this theory, Lance's results of more than 8 years ago are not at risk. But this also means that the show is going to be really good (and really expensive for Lance to defend, if he chooses to do so). The ongoing conspiracy evidence is used to prove the doping within the 8 year limitation period. Still, that puts 2 TdF wins in grave jeopardy.

The other theory is a bold attempt to use the Hellebuyck decision to hold the dopers accountable for the ongoing cover-up. Hellebuyck lied at an antidoping hearing and Armstrong did not, so (for at least that reason) the Hellebucyk case is not a perfect fit for this case. USADA is arguing that Armstrong "waived" the limitation period by "false statements, fraudulent concealment, and other wrongful conduct." USADA is keeping its cards very close to the chest on this issue. To me, it seems like this issue is the one hot issue of the case and nobody can say for sure what the outcome on this issue will be. If USADA wins on this, then Armstrong loses all results. On all the other issues, Armstrong gets slaughtered.

Lance appears to be doomed with regards to the ultimate finding of violations. The only real question is whether or not the first five cases were brought within the limitation period.

Is Lance going to spend millions to salvage five Tour wins, when, no matter what, he is likely to lose his reputation and two Tour wins? That's the ten million dollar question. Lance may now be much more focused on trying to protect the pot of gold he already has than about trying to get more money.

I also reckon that the floodgates are now wide open. The media is not going to be afraid of a Lance Armstrong lawsuit any more. I expect much more critical coverage.

This will be so fun to watch! I fully expect intimidation from Armstrong and his coconspirators. I hope it backfires! Extortion is a serious crime!

And Johan is out of cycling! Amen to that!

 

[LaFlorecita]

And that wouldn't have anything to do with the teamwide and organised doping in, say, 2007-2009?

No not at all.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Not trying to pick a fight... but AC being implicated in this is not out of the realm of possibility.

That would be a second strike.

Does it count as a second strike if it happened before the first strike?

 

[VeloCity]

48 pages of posts already? Wow.

I prefer to focus on the issue from the what's good for cycling angle. Forget the fan boys. Forget the haters. Forget what you think of Lance Armstrong personally. I know that many here want to see Armstrong stripped of his 7 TdF wins.

My first thought there is simple: Then give them to whom? Every single podium finisher except one during Armstrong's TdF years has been suspended for doping or otherwise convincingly linked to doping scandals. Just to name one of them, Ullrich was 2nd to Armstrong three times. Should he be awarded 3 more TdF wins? How would that be justice?

Stripping Armstrong's titles would just mean passing the wins from one doper to another. Some want to see that anyway because of personal dislike, but what does that really accomplish?

Let the USADA have their case. Let them hand down a suspension or whatever if that's what their case concludes is appropriate. For pro cycling to go back and award the wins to someone else is pointless though. How far back should we go? Is there Indurain blood somewhere we could get tested for EPO? It's almost certainly in there.

The early to mid '90s through much of the 2000s was a dirty era in cycling, unfortunately, but the sport desperately needs to move on. Cycling has stricter testing and harsher penalties than I've heard of in any other sport. Good.

Why so complicated? The USADA is acting on evidence that an American cyclist was doping. That's pretty much all there is to it. Who gets the TdF titles, what impact it'll have on cycling, etc isn't their concern or responsibility - they're doing the job they're supposed to be doing, and that it's a big name like Armstrong is largely irrelevant. He gets the same treatment as any rider, like Leogrande for eg. Ullrich, for eg, is Germany's/the UCI's concern, not the USADA's. I'd be far more concerned about what it meant for cycling if the USADA gave Armstrong a pass just cause he is Armstrong.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Not a LA fan at all but this doesn't feel right.

Pepe Marti is named and shamed as a co-conspirator employed by Saxo Bank during Contador's time there. It's clear you haven't read the letter or are just in full denial. The guy is so legitimate that USADA sent Mr. Marti's copy of the letter to the UCI in Lausanne because they couldn't find him.

For all you deniers wanting to use the "It was bad then. It's better now." excuse, none of you would mind backdated testing 3-5 years then... Right? It's better now so a little backdated testing will prove your case! Ohhhh, except it won't.

 

[BroDeal]

if people keep responding to trolls this thread will get messy and derailed.

The chief mod has made it clear that she does not care. The mods do not even care that BPC is back and stinkin' up the joint.

Slowtwitch is where it's all heppening these days. That place is hilarious. Here there are a bunch of trolls who know Armstrong is a doper but are just here to troll. Slowtwtich has the true believers.

 

[WinterRider]

Lance made front page of New York Post today with the headline: Drug Pedaler.

Beautiful!

 

[thehog]

USADA has really good evidence of a conspiracy to dope. And they'll be able to prove the conspiracy.

But conspiracy to dope is not, itself, a violation that is alleged. The letter alleges acts that were actually done (use, possess, traffic, administer, attempt to administer, assist, encourage, aid, abet, cover-up, complicity, and aggravating factors . . .), but it is not seeking to sanction the dopers because of a conspiracy. Before you flame me, read the rule violations alleged against Armstrong on page 11.

USADA is seeking to bring the old Postie stuff in under two theories (page 14).

The first theory is that the old Postie and Disco doping is evidence of the doping that happened within the most recent 8 years. (Page 14). Under this theory, Lance's results of more than 8 years ago are not at risk. But this also means that the show is going to be really good (and really expensive for Lance to defend, if he chooses to do so). The ongoing conspiracy evidence is used to prove the doping within the 8 year limitation period. Still, that puts 2 TdF wins in grave jeopardy.

The other theory is a bold attempt to use the Hellebuyck decision to hold the dopers accountable for the ongoing cover-up. Hellebuyck lied at an antidoping hearing and Armstrong did not, so (for at least that reason) the Hellebucyk case is not a perfect fit for this case. USADA is arguing that Armstrong "waived" the limitation period by "false statements, fraudulent concealment, and other wrongful conduct." USADA is keeping its cards very close to the chest on this issue. To me, it seems like this issue is the one hot issue of the case and nobody can say for sure what the outcome on this issue will be. If USADA wins on this, then Armstrong loses all results. On all the other issues, Armstrong gets slaughtered.

Lance appears to be doomed with regards to the ultimate finding of violations. The only real question is whether or not the first five cases were brought within the limitation period.

Is Lance going to spend millions to salvage five Tour wins, when, no matter what, he is likely to lose his reputation and two Tour wins? That's the ten million dollar question. Lance may now be much more focused on trying to protect the pot of gold he already has than about trying to get more money.

I also reckon that the floodgates are now wide open. The media is not going to be afraid of a Lance Armstrong lawsuit any more. I expect much more critical coverage.

This will be so fun to watch! I fully expect intimidation from Armstrong and his coconspirators. I hope it backfires! Extortion is a serious crime!

And Johan is out of cycling! Amen to that!

You've changed.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

The chief mod has made it clear that she does not care. The mods do not even care that BPC is back and stinkin' up the joint.

The chief mod says you have no idea.

Why is it so difficult for some users to accept that other users have different viewpoints? You may not like them nor like their style, but that it just too bad for you.

Susan

 

[Escarabajo]

The most difficult part of this process won't be stripping the Tours from Lance but awarding the new winners. LOL. That could take even longer than the Armstrong process.

 

[thehog]

Beautiful!

Nice big photo as well. For all to see. Branded!

 

[Jeremiah]

The chief mod has made it clear that she does not care. The mods do not even care that BPC is back and stinkin' up the joint.

Slowtwitch is where it's all heppening these days. That place is hilarious. Here there are a bunch of trolls who know Armstrong is a doper but are just here to troll. Slowtwtich has the true believers.

Slowtwitch must be great because the whole cult is on facebook.

You might not want to read facebook, it could shake your faith in mankind, I'm almost serious about that.

Jonestown, Heaven's Gate, David Koresh, Manson, all of these losers make complete sense after looking at the messages of support on facebook.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Pepe Marti is named and shamed as a co-conspirator employed by Saxo Bank during Contador's time there. It's clear you haven't read the letter or are just in full denial.

The guy is so legitimate that USADA sent Mr. Marti's copy of the letter to the UCI in Lausanne because they couldn't find him.

No, I haven't read letter. I couldn't care less. I just stated that what's happening doesn't feel right.

 

[TechnicalDescent]

The chief mod says you have no idea.

Why is it so difficult for some users to accept that other users have different viewpoints? You may not like them nor like their style, but that it just too bad for you.

Susan

Ironically he calls people trolls who have a different view point whilst proudly announcing he is trolling another forum.

Isn't Armstrong hated most for his hypocrisy?

 

[webvan]

The other theory is a bold attempt to use the Hellebuyck decision to hold the dopers accountable for the ongoing cover-up. Hellebuyck lied at an antidoping hearing and Armstrong did not, so (for at least that reason) the Hellebucyk case is not a perfect fit for this case. USADA is arguing that Armstrong "waived" the limitation period by "false statements, fraudulent concealment, and other wrongful conduct."

Not an anti-doping hearing but I wonder whether lying under oath during the SCA trial wouldn't count towards that?

 

[Benotti69]

The chief mod has made it clear that she does not care. The mods do not even care that BPC is back and stinkin' up the joint.

Slowtwitch is where it's all heppening these days. That place is hilarious. Here there are a bunch of trolls who know Armstrong is a doper but are just here to troll. Slowtwtich has the true believers.

Cheers BroD wil check out that asylum then.

 

[WinterRider]

In order for this thread not to go AWOL can posters please ignore the posts of known Trolls

Polish
HughMoore
Techical Descent
EusibioKing
ChrisE


to name but a few.

USADA operates differently to Feds and criminal investigations are therefore the burden of proof is different. It will be very hard for Armstrong to beat this considering the number of ex riders, 10 who have testified against him.
There is the possibility that those who have administered the EPO, HGH, Corticoids etc have testified, we dont know.

But that Armstrong is reduced to proclaiming tested X amount of times and never positive means nothing and Marion Jones fully agrees

Just to be clear, the letter from USADA states more than 10 cyclists plus cycling team employees.

That means at least 13 witnesses (minimum11 cyclists and two employees), and probably more than that.

 

[Escarabajo]

Does it count as a second strike if it happened before the first strike?

Yes.

....................

 

[MarkvW]

You've changed.

I saw the weaknesses in the fed case and got attacked for discussing them. This case is an entirely different kettle of fish.

You should have believed me when I said that I thought that Armstrong was revolting.

 

[Benotti69]

the whole 'Lance Armstrong' section has already been removed from ironman.com