USADA - Armstrong

[MarkvW]

What a specious argument. Condem the system but not Lance. You then attempt to enoble your position by saying he, Lance Armstrong, should not be condemned because everybody else was doing it. The glaring issue with your argument, however, is that Basso, Vino, Ullrich, Hereras, etc. and even Contador have all served their time. But not Wonderboy. Does this not smack of an affront to decency in your mind?

You only demonstrate the dimension of your rediculousness with each post.

In a world governed by a mafioso system, one has to make concessions to arrive at the boss. This, at least, we can't argue.

Being the true cynic that you are (and even more than me, which is difficult to surpass), you condem the hypocrisy of a system that requires a radical and earth shattering revolution. Minor revolts won't do. But since most people can't stomach such a fundamental change, we are forced to deal with reality.

The difference between your cynicism and mine is that you have given in totally to the depravity.

Blah, blah, blah. Lance is a really depraved human being . . . blah, blah blah.

This is not about moral depravity. This is about sports and sports only. It is about enforcing the contract that the athlete makes with the sport. Do we have to get all high and mighty here talking about moral absolutes and sport?

I'm sure ChrisE, like all of us, would like to see Lance get a fair and open hearing with all of the evidence against him on public display.

 

[MarkvW]

Probably worth remembering in all this that Armstrong is only one of several people facing sanctions.

Yeah! Several opportunities for more truth to get out!

 

[131313]

FL and TH have been punished. Who else? Others have testified, and presumably admitted, and I have heard of no punishment. GH, Levi, I have heard VdV, who else? Have you heard of any other punishment or was the letter to LA the only one that made the news?

I am not familiar with the "admit and you get no punishment" statute in any anti-doping institution, or the "don't admit and get punishment" statute.

Who said they weren't going to be sanctioned or receive no punishment? I mean, besides you and Lance? I fully expect they'll be punished in accordance with USADA's own stated procedures.

 

[rhubroma]

Blah, blah, blah. Lance is a really depraved human being . . . blah, blah blah.

This is not about moral depravity. This is about sports and sports only. It is about enforcing the contract that the athlete makes with the sport. Do we have to get all high and mighty here talking about moral absolutes and sport?

I'm sure ChrisE, like all of us, would like to see Lance get a fair and open hearing with all of the evidence against him on public display.

A fair and open hearing is promissed but not necessarilly delivered if Lance decides to close the hearing.

Sport and sport only really?

http://darien.patch.com/articles/why-doping-allegations-against-lance-armstrong-hurt-so-much

Other than "instilling values" in the country's youth.

Or this and sport:
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/college/joe-paterno-legacy-penn-state-tainted-late-coach-failed-power-stop-jerry-sandusky-crimes-article-1.1101354

 

[aphronesis]

As we all move along here, please be careful to debate the opinion, not the poster or whatever you assume is their motive.

Presenting your opinion is not only welcome, but the point of the forum. Trying to start conflicts and prodding people is trolling. It's up to the mod team which is which, so err on the side of caution please.

Respectful debate is the guideline here.

This is fine in so far as it goes. Welcome, actually, in terms of its tact, but when language like "victims, etc." comes in, the discussion is already deeply loaded. No doubt, mods can't police projection, but it is rampant on every other page.

 

[131313]

Blah, blah, blah. Lance is a really depraved human being . . . blah, blah blah.

This is not about moral depravity. This is about sports and sports only. It is about enforcing the contract that the athlete makes with the sport. Do we have to get all high and mighty here talking about moral absolutes and sport?

correction: it should be just about sporting fairness. Personally, I think Indurain is a bigger fraud than Armstrong, simply because the playing field was *less* level then, and Conconi probably did more to tilt the table than anyone.

That said, LA kinda opened the door with his "I've done too much good for people" line of defense. He and his camp are the ones who've wrapped the entire fraud in the flag of curing cancer, so I'm not surprised that folks want to grab the yoke and fly the whole thing into the sea.

 

[MarkvW]

Sport and sport only really?

http://darien.patch.com/articles/why-doping-allegations-against-lance-armstrong-hurt-so-much

Other than "instilling values" in the country's youth.

Yes, really. Enforcing the antidoping rules is USADA's only mandate.

 

[fatandfast]

Yeah! Several opportunities for more truth to get out!

the truth in a limited way comes out. Its quirky that the same psychology always plays out. When a rider is caught they try and keep it together for as long as possible. Then shift into the everybody is doing it phase and then compliment that with feeling picked on and singled out . Landis played out, in the end he said I did it, waited a little and then said why am I being punished when Lance is guilty also. Tyler same story,I am bad but so is Lance.Nobody wants to own bad only co-own it

Now Armstrong's lawyer follows in the long tradition. Why would Lance or his legal team mention that he is being picked on,singled out?. They say directly why is Lance the only rider named in the probe?
You can't have it both ways.
If I never doped and I wouldn't tolerate anybody that I knew was doping to be associated w me is to be a true statement, then why imply that other riders names should be included on the the hit list?

Putting yourself in the spotlight has downsides, Lance should know from bicycle forums that his fame has qualified him as subject matter for every level of detective pro and non pro alike.
If the USADA has data on other riders and are not currently using it,so what. Lance saying that all of us should be tried at the same time is dumb, even dumber if the charges are "unfounded".

 

[MarkvW]

correction: it should be just about sporting fairness. Personally, I think Indurain is a bigger fraud than Armstrong, simply because the playing field was *less* level then, and Conconi probably did more to tilt the table than anyone.

That said, LA kinda opened the door with his "I've done too much good for people" line of defense. He and his camp are the ones who've wrapped the entire fraud in the flag of curing cancer, so I'm not surprised that folks want to grab the yoke and fly the whole thing into the sea.

I don't disagree with you, but we're talking about the USADA proceedings here. And in those proceedings, what "should" be taking place really matters.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. We're seeing this get played out right now--with the drama amplified by Lance's overweening hubris. Should the facts of the USPS doping conspiracy be displayed for public view, Lance will face his greatest trial in the court of public opinion. In that proceeding, the full gamut of moral outlook will come into play!

You can't underestimate the fact that the media is no longer afraid of a Lance lawsuit.

 

[Jeremiah]

Yes,

Blah, blah, blah. Lance is a really depraved human being . . . blah, blah blah.
This is not about moral depravity. This is about sports and sports only. It is about enforcing the contract that the athlete makes with the sport. Do we have to get all high and mighty here talking about moral absolutes and sport?

I'm sure ChrisE, like all of us, would like to see Lance get a fair and open hearing with all of the evidence against him on public display.

A fair and open hearing is promissed but not necessarilly delivered if Lance decides to close the hearing.

Sport and sport only really?

http://darien.patch.com/articles/why-doping-allegations-against-lance-armstrong-hurt-so-much

Other than "instilling values" in the country's youth.

Or this and sport:
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/college/joe-paterno-legacy-penn-state-tainted-late-coach-failed-power-stop-jerry-sandusky-crimes-article-1.1101354

he is!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/socalcycling/sets/72157615010076100/

That was inspiring! I'm not the master of my domain. I'm out!

 

[131313]

I don't disagree with you, but we're talking about the USADA proceedings here. And in those proceedings, what "should" be taking place really matters.

Agreed. And in those proceedings, I just don't see LA's "character" being an issue. Frankly they seem to be proceeding the same as always. Everyone involved in the process liked Zirbel. They believe he consumed the banned substance without his knowledge. He still got 2 years, and didn't get it reduced until they could do it under their existing protocol. So, the USADA seems to be playing it straight, despite all of the whinging to the contrary from Camp LA.

I was really referring to the stuff outside of the USADA process. I get why folks want to burn LA at the stake while forgiving and forgetting about the humble man from Pamplona.

 

[red_flanders]

But who cares?

I find the overall conversation (not just this thread) way too Amstrong-centric, when it's clear that USADA is going after multiple enablers. Which I think is a great thing.

When others have been sanctioned. OR is this site conservative.

I don't know what that means and I by no means speak for the site when I post opinion on a thread. I know that's a hard line to walk so I don't mind pointing that out and staying out of the fray more than I would if I weren't a mod. Please give me the benefit of the doubt.

 

[rhubroma]

I find the overall conversation (not just this thread) way too Amstrong-centric, when it's clear that USADA is going after multiple enablers. Which I think is a great thing.



I don't know what that means and I by no means speak for the site when I post opinion on a thread. I know that's a hard line to walk so I don't mind pointing that out and staying out of the fray more than I would if I weren't a mod. Please give me the benefit of the doubt.

If you don't know what it means then who does?

 

[red_flanders]

This is fine in so far as it goes. Welcome, actually, in terms of its tact, but when language like "victims, etc." comes in, the discussion is already deeply loaded. No doubt, mods can't police projection, but it is rampant on every other page.

Didn't notice the "victims" reference so not sure I can help there. I'm glad you find the notification tactful, and glad some further moderation is appreciated.

I've left some thoughts on my focus as a mod in the welcome thread.

 

[ChrisE]

Stop your nonsense....

Show me one post where someone has claimed that the riders who confessed (as witnesses) are not going to be punished. WADA and USADA code clearly states that reduced suspensions can be given for cooperation in an investigation.

If in fact the witnesses who are currently on UCI teams do not serve a suspension of some sort, then I will myself agree that the process is need of drastic change. I understand that the USADA procedure cleary states that LA and his team are not entitled to the evidence until after the review board hears the evidence and determines if the case moves forward. If in fact this happens (making the witness list public) during the TDF, the teams of the named riders will have to be withdrawn form the race. In this regard, I believe that JV is playing with the future of his team by startiing them. I guess we will see.

I have no post showing those who have confessed will not/are not being sanctioned. Do you have one showing they will? I will not say your post is "nonsense" if you come up with something.

I am drawing a conclusion based upon no news as such. I am also drawing a conclusion, which may be wrong, that if they were going to be sanctioned anyway then why cooperate? Last time I checked Levi, GH, etal have no AAF's.

BTW, I omitted upthread in my reply to rubarb about TH and FL that they were already sanctioned. They suffer no sanctions from the testimony they gave afterwards to USADA implicating LA. Again, I ask what are others losing here, except their dignity when LA's lawyers get ahold of them after the review board?

I am in agreement with your second paragraph.

 

[ChrisE]

Who said they weren't going to be sanctioned or receive no punishment? I mean, besides you and Lance? I fully expect they'll be punished in accordance with USADA's own stated procedures.

Good, then at that time I will admit here on the forum that my recent posts were jumping the gun. Promise to do the same?

 

[ChrisE]

Perhaps you should go back and read the (multiple) references (with links) to the latitude allowed under the code re: sanction reduction for cooperation, and its codification under WADA.

You got me there Mac, as long as the reduction isn't to zero then it is all good. 131313 has assured me they will be sanctioned so there.

It sure is funny that the ones rumored to cooperate are racing at this time. Must be some type of incubation period before sanctions symptoms show themeselves, kinda like VD not popping up until a week or so later.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Agreed. And in those proceedings, I just don't see LA's "character" being an issue. Frankly they seem to be proceeding the same as always. Everyone involved in the process liked Zirbel. They believe he consumed the banned substance without his knowledge. He still got 2 years, and didn't get it reduced until they could do it under their existing protocol. So, the USADA seems to be playing it straight, despite all of the whinging to the contrary from Camp LA.

I was really referring to the stuff outside of the USADA process. I get why folks want to burn LA at the stake while forgiving and forgetting about the humble man from Pamplona.

You are right. USADA plays no favorites and are straight-shooters...they are totally fair and equal and above -board.

This is why it makes me so mad that Armstrong whines loudly and tries to make it look like he is a 'victim'.

What an @******

 

[rhubroma]

I find the overall conversation (not just this thread) way too Amstrong-centric, when it's clear that USADA is going after multiple enablers. Which I think is a great thing.



I don't know what that means and I by no means speak for the site when I post opinion on a thread. I know that's a hard line to walk so I don't mind pointing that out and staying out of the fray more than I would if I weren't a mod. Please give me the benefit of the doubt.

Though this is Armstrong centric because of the nature of this debate, indeed too, sport centic.

In the endemic sense.

 

[ChrisE]

I'm sure ChrisE, like all of us, would like to see Lance get a fair and open hearing with all of the evidence against him on public display.

Not sure what you mean here, but of course I would like this to be public and LA have a chance to defend himself publicly against his accusers. This has nothing to do with whether or not I think he doped. It is an inherent trait I have been afflicted with living in this country for so long. It's hard for me to undo believing the accused has rights, even somebody as seemingly evil to most of you as LA is. Understood this hearing will not be in a formal court of law per se, but my feelings remain.

I assume any questions to the witnesses will be kept along the lines of relavancy, so I don't share the cult's horror about smearing at the hearing. If they get smeared in the press then they can sue him for slander. It works both ways.

As a student of the American judicial system I am sure you would agree, or are you riding shotgun in the hatemobile this day?

 

[MarkvW]

Not sure what you mean here, but of course I would like this to be public and LA have a chance to defend himself publicly against his accusers. This has nothing to do with whether or not I think he doped. It is an inherent trait I have been afflicted with living in this country for so long. It's hard for me to undo believing the accused has rights, even somebody as seemingly evil to most of you as LA is. Understood this hearing will not be in a formal court of law per se, but my feelings remain.

I assume any questions to the witnesses will be kept along the lines of relavancy, so I don't share the cult's horror about smearing at the hearing. If they get smeared in the press then they can sue him for slander. It works both ways.

As a student of the American judicial system I am sure you would agree, or are you riding shotgun in the hatemobile this day?

Is there a problem with just letting the process play out?

 

[thehog]

You are right. USADA plays no favorites and are straight-shooters...they are totally fair and equal and above -board.

This is why it makes me so mad that Armstrong whines loudly and tries to make it look like he is a 'victim'.

What an @******

The silliness of it all is that the non-elected Birotte stopped the Federal investigation without due process. He also did so under pressure and lobbying from Fabani.

...and now he complains lack of process and its unconstitutional?

 

[rhubroma]

Not sure what you mean here, but of course I would like this to be public and LA have a chance to defend himself publicly against his accusers. This has nothing to do with whether or not I think he doped. It is an inherent trait I have been afflicted with living in this country for so long. It's hard for me to undo believing the accused has rights, even somebody as seemingly evil to most of you as LA is. Understood this hearing will not be in a formal court of law per se, but my feelings remain.

I assume any questions to the witnesses will be kept along the lines of relavancy, so I don't share the cult's horror about smearing at the hearing. If they get smeared in the press then they can sue him for slander. It works both ways.

As a student of the American judicial system I am sure you would agree, or are you riding shotgun in the hatemobile this day?

But you haven't responded to my thoughts.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Not sure what you mean here, but of course I would like this to be public and LA have a chance to defend himself publicly against his accusers. This has nothing to do with whether or not I think he doped. It is an inherent trait I have been afflicted with living in this country for so long. It's hard for me to undo believing the accused has rights, even somebody as seemingly evil to most of you as LA is. Understood this hearing will not be in a formal court of law per se, but my feelings remain.

I assume any questions to the witnesses will be kept along the lines of relavancy, so I don't share the cult's horror about smearing at the hearing. If they get smeared in the press then they can sue him for slander. It works both ways.

As a student of the American judicial system I am sure you would agree, or are you riding shotgun in the hatemobile this day?

I don't know why this would not happen as it is clearly stated that once the judicial hearing proceeds Armstrong would have the option of public or private hearing. Period.

Personally, I would be amazed if he would choose this to be public...but I may be totally wrong.
Hope you get your wish though....

 

[ChrisE]

Is there a problem with just letting the process play out?

No, I am all for it.

I don't think I am the one in here that doesn't want the process, a fair one, to play out. I obviously have a problem with how we got here but it is what it is.