USADA - Armstrong

[frenchfry]

Whatever happened to Fabiani? Was he only useful for his access to Birotte (good investment that turned out to be) but doesn't have any pull with USADA so he was expendable?

 

[MarkvW]

Whatever happened to Fabiani? Was he only useful for his access to Birotte (good investment that turned out to be) but doesn't have any pull with USADA so he was expendable?

The best PR man is the one you don't see.

 

[ChrisE]

But you haven't responded to my thoughts.

I responded to your question about "condeming". Then you wrote I was depraved in a rambling post.

Perhaps within that rambling post I should have responded about why others got sanctioned and LA has not? I have stated my opinion before about OP, but to rehash I was not a fan of sanctions because of it. Neither was I a fan of Valverde getting universally canned due to CONI.

If people get caught by AAF's, or others witness doping real time and report it then I am all for it. That is pie-in-the-sky but this all falls down to the riders.

Face it, most riders have no problem with doping and entered the pro ranks with their eyes wide open, and benefitted from it. Recall the remarks of TH about the sadness and sense of cooperation to circle the wagons within the peloton when somebody got caught. Now, those that have gotten caught admit years later under desperate circumstances, and the jury is out on whether or not others that have implicated LA will ever get sanctioned in return for their cooperation. As I wrote upthread this stinks to me.

Because the people in this mindset, that chose to actively participate in and benefit from doping, got caught means all that have doped should have the same fate retroactively? And, the fact that I blame the system and the riders themselves instead of one individual means I am depraved? C'mon rubarb, you can do better than this.

 

[MarkvW]

I responded to your question about "condeming". Then you wrote I was depraved in a rambling post.

Perhaps within that rambling post I should have responded about why others got sanctioned and LA has not? I have stated my opinion before about OP, but to rehash I was not a fan of sanctions because of it. Neither was I a fan of Valverde getting universally canned due to CONI.

If people get caught by AAF's, or others witness doping real time and report it then I am all for it. That is pie-in-the-sky but this all falls down to the riders.

Face it, most riders have no problem with doping and entered the pro ranks with their eyes wide open, and benefitted from it. Recall the remarks of TH about the sadness and sense of cooperation to circle the wagons within the peloton when somebody got caught. Now, those that have gotten caught admit years later under desperate circumstances, and the jury is out on whether or not others that have implicated LA will ever get sanctioned in return for their cooperation. As I wrote upthread this stinks to me.

Because the people in this mindset, that chose to actively participate in and benefit from doping, got caught means all that have doped should have the same fate retroactively? And, the fact that I blame the system and the riders themselves instead of one individual means I am depraved? C'mon rubarb, you can do better than this.

I don't like the idea of riders like Manzano being recruited, doped up, cast off, and left to fend for themselves when dealing with health issues that may plague them for the remainder of their lives.

Not everybody has the bargaining power of an Armstrong, Ullrich, Basso, Valverde or Virenque.

 

[Race Radio]

Whatever happened to Fabiani? Was he only useful for his access to Birotte (good investment that turned out to be) but doesn't have any pull with USADA so he was expendable?

He is little help now. Chris is not friends with Travis like he was Lanny. Now he is just paid to think up nicknames like Mafia Don

 

[ChrisE]

I don't like the idea of riders like Manzano being recruited, doped up, cast off, and left to fend for themselves when dealing with health issues that may plague them for the remainder of their lives.

Not everybody has the bargaining power of an Armstrong, Ullrich, Basso, Valverde or Virenque.

Spare the victim crap. Manzano knew full well there was doping in the pro peleton. The fact he chose to take it to some extreme does not mean he was a victim.

At least there is progress here. I thought only LA had bargaining power???

 

[thehog]

Spare the victim crap. Manzano knew full well there was doping in the pro peleton. The fact he chose to take it to some extreme does not mean he was a victim.

At least there is progress here. I thought only LA had bargaining power???

I'm looking forward to Lance paying back his victims. Be good if he could get ahead of the curve and start now. But its ok if the courts force him to do so.

Start with SCA. A sweet $7.5m then some change for the fraud.

Countless others. Maybe some people we don't know about who've been locked in the eye and told he never doped.

Lance should just create a website: Victimstrong. And allow people to line up and collect all the money he defrauded.

Lance. What a sorry mess he is. How does he look his family in the eye.

 

[MarkvW]

Spare the victim crap. Manzano knew full well there was doping in the pro peleton. The fact he chose to take it to some extreme does not mean he was a victim.

At least there is progress here. I thought only LA had bargaining power???

You're unfamiliar with Manzano's situation. He was doing what he was told. He wasn't choosing to take anything to an extreme--a team doctor was making the choice for him.

 

[131313]

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.

Please, don't put words in my mouth while constructing your straw man. I made no "assurances", I simply asked why you think they aren't being sanctioned? Though I also did suggest that I think they'll play it straight and sanction those guys according to their own rules. Their past history suggests so. If they don't, I certainly say "I was wrong", right after I get done e-mailing my displeasure to T Tygart.

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.

It doesn't seem funny to me at all. What are they going to do, release the names before Armstrong's case is even heard? So, confirm to the defendant as to identity of the witnesses (a defendant with a history of alleged witness intimidation).

Then what? Release a finding of fact against the sanctioned riders, including their testimony along with the reasons for the reduced sanction? So, that testimony gets into the public domain. Then LA and Co. (along with the nuthuggers) complain about how unfair the process is, releasing this testimony to the public and all in an attempt to shape public opinion. Sorry, but they're conducting business in a way that makes sense and follows their own protocol. There's absolutely nothing they could do that wouldn't draw criticism from the faithful, besides not charging him at all. Sorry, but too bad.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Spare the victim crap. Manzano knew full well there was doping in the pro peleton. The fact he chose to take it to some extreme does not mean he was a victim.

At least there is progress here. I thought only LA had bargaining power???

Ah, so much empathy oozing for the riders in the peloton.
I ,for one, am glad he did not die...I'm sure he has a family that thinks he is pretty special.

Harsh....
actually it would be a great thing if you would remind Lance of this phrase as he has acted kind of whiney about his USADA treatment.

 

[ChrisE]

You're unfamiliar with Manzano's situation. He was doing what he was told. He wasn't choosing to take anything to an extreme--a team doctor was making the choice for him.

I'm very familiar with his situation, and unlike you I got into the sport following Lemond's exploits and raced for many years, and still follow the sport to this day. I didn't just show up on a forum when LA got in trouble, fence sitting with my finger in the air testing the wind. FYI the cult still makes fun of you in the background even though you try to endear yourself with your "moderation" lol.

That 25 years of following the sport is not reqd to say you're nuts. Somebody tells you to do something in a job you choose to do and you must do it. Right. There are victims, and then there are people that cheapen their victimization by applying it to a situation such as this.

 

[thehog]

I'm very familiar with his situation, and unlike you I got into the sport following Lemond's exploits and raced for many years, and still follow the sport to this day. I didn't just show up on a forum when LA got in trouble, fence sitting with my finger in the air testing the wind. FYI the cult still makes fun of you in the background even though you try to endear yourself with your "moderation" lol.

That 25 years of following the sport is not reqd to say you're nuts. Somebody tells you to do something in a job you choose to do and you must do it. Right. There are victims, and then there are people that cheapen their victimization by applying it to a situation such as this.

Chris I can see you at home. Flip the calendar to July 2002. Put Bon Jovi on the cassette player. Fix the Trek to the wind trainer. Position the full CRT TV in front of the bike. Place in a VHS of Lance's greatest hits 1999-2002. Phil and Paul giving it, Bon Jovi cranking it up and Chris spinning in full USPS gear on the home trainer. Heck even got the helmet on. Throw in a Go Lance Go because in your world its 2002 and who's going to see you all the way down there in the basement.

Go Lance Go!

Go Chris! Champion on wheels!

 

[ChrisE]

Please, don't put words in my mouth while constructing your straw man. I made no "assurances", I simply asked why you think they aren't being sanctioned? Though I also did suggest that I think they'll play it straight and sanction those guys according to their own rules. Their past history suggests so. If they don't, I certainly say "I was wrong", right after I get done e-mailing my displeasure to T Tygart.



It doesn't seem funny to me at all. What are they going to do, release the names before Armstrong's case is even heard? So, confirm to the defendant as to identity of the witnesses (a defendant with a history of alleged witness intimidation).

Then what? Release a finding of fact against the sanctioned riders, including their testimony along with the reasons for the reduced sanction? So, that testimony gets into the public domain. Then LA and Co. (along with the nuthuggers) complain about how unfair the process is, releasing this testimony to the public and all in an attempt to shape public opinion. Sorry, but they're conducting business in a way that makes sense and follows their own protocol. There's absolutely nothing they could do that wouldn't draw criticism from the faithful, besides not charging him at all. Sorry, but too bad.

There is no strawman.

You wrote the dopers whose testimony is used to nail LA would be sanctioned "in accordance with USADA stated procedures" in response to my assertion they would not. So what is your problem? You had no qualifiers in that statement. If you wish to back off then do so straight up, instead of with the meandering BS you just posted. Good for you that you will email Tygart if that happens. I bet he really gives a ****.

The rest of your post is random babble. I never suggested they should release the names (as if they are unknown lol) and I agreed with Spetsa's post about LA would get his time to cross examine later.

You are hung up on PR BS about the "faithful" and smearing. I really don't care about it, and have never suggested it should play a part in this ordeal, but if it helps you figure out a way to argue with me then be my guest. Like I wrote above, if somebody is slandered during this then they have recourse.

Is GL paying for FL's lawyer fees still? Just toss in a slander case against LA when he slams FL in the press, then the winnings can pay for all of the righteousness that would result.

Why is the cult so scared of smearing in this sense? Probably because of the ethical duplicity they are hitched to.

 

[MarkvW]

I'm very familiar with his situation, and unlike you I got into the sport following Lemond's exploits and raced for many years, and still follow the sport to this day. I didn't just show up on a forum when LA got in trouble, fence sitting with my finger in the air testing the wind. FYI the cult still makes fun of you in the background even though you try to endear yourself with your "moderation" lol.

That 25 years of following the sport is not reqd to say you're nuts. Somebody tells you to do something in a job you choose to do and you must do it. Right. There are victims, and then there are people that cheapen their victimization by applying it to a situation such as this.

I really thought you would consider Manzano a victim, once you knew the circumstances of his case. Turns out you knew the circumstances of his case, and you don't consider him a victim. Thanks for sharing.

 

[eleven]

It doesn't seem funny to me at all. What are they going to do, release the names before Armstrong's case is even heard?

It's called discovery and in a regular legal setting it's standard procedure.

 

[thehog]

It's called discovery and in a regular legal setting it's standard procedure.

No it's not. Not until charges are filed.

 

[131313]

There is no strawman.

You wrote the dopers whose testimony is used to nail LA would be sanctioned "in accordance with USADA stated procedures" in response to my assertion they would not. So what is your problem? You had no qualifiers in that statement.

My problem is your selective quoting of what I wrote. I said "I expect they'll be sanctioned in accordante with USADA's stated procedures". I'm sorry you consider that to be "making assurances".

The rest of your post is random babble. I never suggested they should release the names (as if they are unknown lol)

You questioned why the riders haven't been sanctioned; pretty difficult to sanction riders without naming names.

You seem really angry. You should probably work on that. Best of luck.

 

[mewmewmew13]

There is no strawman.

You wrote the dopers whose testimony is used to nail LA would be sanctioned "in accordance with USADA stated procedures" in response to my assertion they would not. So what is your problem? You had no qualifiers in that statement. If you wish to back off then do so straight up, instead of with the meandering BS you just posted. Good for you that you will email Tygart if that happens. I bet he really gives a ****.

The rest of your post is random babble. I never suggested they should release the names (as if they are unknown lol) and I agreed with Spetsa's post about LA would get his time to cross examine later.

You are hung up on PR BS about the "faithful" and smearing. I really don't care about it, and have never suggested it should play a part in this ordeal, but if it helps you figure out a way to argue with me then be my guest. Like I wrote above, if somebody is slandered during this then they have recourse.

Is GL paying for FL's lawyer fees still? Just toss in a slander case against LA when he slams FL in the press, then the winnings can pay for all of the righteousness that would result.

Why is the cult so scared of smearing in this sense? Probably because of the ethical duplicity they are hitched to.

Why do you even bother coming on here?
These 'arguments' sound like an angry teen.

attack the poster....make a belligerent boast
"but if it helps you figure out a way to argue with me then be my guest"
Superiority complex...
Even if you had a valid point somewhere it vaporizes in the anger

I see a lot of differing views here and some very good points made, but the ones that make the most sense are made without this type of BS.

 

[MD FACG FACP]

No it's not. Not until charges are filed.[/

 

[red_flanders]

Infractions are being handed out for unnecessarily rude and antagonistic posts in this thread. If you want to keep participating, dial it back please. Thanks.

 

[python]

Why do you even bother coming on here?
These 'arguments' sound like an angry teen.

attack the poster....make a belligerent boast
"but if it helps you figure out a way to argue with me then be my guest"
Superiority complex...
Even if you had a valid point somewhere it vaporizes in the anger

I see a lot of differing views here and some very good points made, but the ones that make the most sense are made without this type of BS.

bravo mew ! you hit the nail on the head.

chris e is the armstrong apologist who is so upset with the developments that he has completely lost count of his own thoroughly debunked arguments.

to justify his boy's doping he is ready for much

 

[MarkvW]

Please, don't put words in my mouth while constructing your straw man. I made no "assurances", I simply asked why you think they aren't being sanctioned? Though I also did suggest that I think they'll play it straight and sanction those guys according to their own rules. Their past history suggests so. If they don't, I certainly say "I was wrong", right after I get done e-mailing my displeasure to T Tygart.



It doesn't seem funny to me at all. What are they going to do, release the names before Armstrong's case is even heard? So, confirm to the defendant as to identity of the witnesses (a defendant with a history of alleged witness intimidation).

Then what? Release a finding of fact against the sanctioned riders, including their testimony along with the reasons for the reduced sanction? So, that testimony gets into the public domain. Then LA and Co. (along with the nuthuggers) complain about how unfair the process is, releasing this testimony to the public and all in an attempt to shape public opinion. Sorry, but they're conducting business in a way that makes sense and follows their own protocol. There's absolutely nothing they could do that wouldn't draw criticism from the faithful, besides not charging him at all. Sorry, but too bad.

If you go to the American Arbitration Association and go to their "Rules" link, you can search and find the "American Arbitration Association Supplementary Procedures for the Arbitration of Olympic Sport Doping Disputes." I think they're the ones referred to at http://www.usada.org/faq. They say:

R-18. Exchange of Information
a. At the request of any party or at the discretion of the arbitrator, consistent with the expedited nature of arbitration, the arbitrator may direct (i) the production of documents and other information, and (ii) the identification of any witnesses to be called.

Lance will get his chance to examine the witnesses. Dopestrong is just blowing smoke on the issue.

 

[mewmewmew13]

If you go to the American Arbitration Association and go to their "Rules" link, you can search and find the "American Arbitration Association Supplementary Procedures for the Arbitration of Olympic Sport Doping Disputes." I think they're the ones referred to at http://www.usada.org/faq. They say:

R-18. Exchange of Information
a. At the request of any party or at the discretion of the arbitrator, consistent with the expedited nature of arbitration, the arbitrator may direct (i) the production of documents and other information, and (ii) the identification of any witnesses to be called.

Lance will get his chance to examine the witnesses. Dopestrong is just blowing smoke on the issue.

Yes they are. Big time.
The USADA website is also very user friendly and Travis himself will prolly respond to your emails if you are polite.
They will help you find any document or rule that you are looking for.
Extremely accessible.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

It's called discovery and in a regular legal setting it's standard procedure.

Your knowledge of what discovery is, and when it takes place is poor to none. Try again, you and Wonderboy are missing badly.

 

[BotanyBay]

Also, Friday's response is the only procedural communication Armstrong's team has made in the matter. I don't recall even seeing them "ask" for the evidence yet.

Also, the NY Daily news just made a great point in regards to Clemens. Fear not the verdict. Fear the evidence and testimony. Big deal that he was "not guilty". Even he admitted to being one heck of a *** along the way.

We can rejoice now, as we know we're going to hear "most" of the story.

Matter of fact, Lance, keep the stupid jerseys as a lifelong reminder of your publicly confirmed fraud. The best asterisks are the ones no one can see in print, but we all know they're there.