USADA - Armstrong

[MarkvW]

At the end of the day assuming the USADA fries LA who are they going to give the Tour crowns to? Also Marion Jones ended up in prison and Bonds got awful close (both on perjury charges which is what the LA case would turn into). I do feel like at the end of the day the USADA has not done a very good job with drugs in sports and has been very inconsistent (if this was Spain nothing would have happened). Look at the NFL. Their league of super humans has had like one suspension in the 5+ years they have had drug testing.

Marion Jones went to prison because of the check fraud she committed. But for that, she'd have been treated like Tammy Thomas.

Bonds lied to a Grand Jury. That's intolerable.

USADA has nothing to do with the NFL (which polices itself). If anything, the NFL is a classic argument for why agencies like USADA are needed. An NFL freak cuts years off his life, not just through his own doping but by subjecting himself to the freak speed and power of chemically-enhanced behemoths.

Lance Armstrong's allleged doping is MASSIVE. His is the worst possible type of case for presenting the 'system failed' argument. He doped for years and he led an organization that doped for years and intimidated and covered up. It doesn't get much worse than that. Cases like his can't be swept under the rug (ironically, that may have already happened at least once in Lance's case).

Sure, Lance is the filthy product of a filthy system. But now Lance and his coconspirators are major players in that system. If we ignore them, we just concede that cycling is and always will be a cesspool.

Besides, the running of Lance to ground is major entertainment.

 

[Kennf1]

At the end of the day assuming the USADA fries LA who are they going to give the Tour crowns to? Also Marion Jones ended up in prison and Bonds got awful close (both on perjury charges which is what the LA case would turn into). I do feel like at the end of the day the USADA has not done a very good job with drugs in sports and has been very inconsistent (if this was Spain nothing would have happened). Look at the NFL. Their league of super humans has had like one suspension in the 5+ years they have had drug testing.

Good god you're confused. As far as we know, Armstrong hasn't lied to federal investigators (since he hasn't spoken to them). Why are you convinced the Armstrong case will turn into a perjury case? And if it does, USADA won't be prosecuting it. USADA has NOTHING to do with the NFL, NBA, or baseball, none of which are signatories to the WADA code. How has USADA been inconsistent?

Oops: MarkvW beat me to it.

 

[MarkvW]

Why nothing? I see it as a result that could potentially feed back into their own investigation and be part of their basket of evidence. The Feds case didn't hinge on Armstrong being a proven/sanctioned doper, it's true, but it's something that wouldn't hurt their case, no?



It wasn't my intention to re-open that debate. My only thinking (and it was purely speculative) was that it might have been expedient for the feds to officially 'close', or park, their investigation to see what fell out of the USADA action - though I accept the issue with SOL.

The feds have compelled process, sworn testimony under penalty of perjury, and the power to grant immunity. If they want knowledge from USADA, all they have to do is ask (or subpoena). Knowledge flow with the feds is a one-way street (unless they want to share). I don't see any potential strategy in letting USADA investigate in the hope of aiding a federal case. If something fortuitous happens, sure... But I can't see any grand strategy in play.

 

[Kennf1]

I know this is a side note but what percentage of this banned stuff can be bought at GNC? For example I know I use cortisone cream all of the time to treat rashes and the stuff works great and has never had any negative effect on my body. I know that cortisone is banned by the UCI because you get a supposed performance boost off of it.

The last time I was at a GNC, they did not offer EPO, Testosterone, HGH, or bags of blood.

 

[Muriel]

I don't see any potential strategy in letting USADA investigate in the hope of aiding a federal case. If something fortuitous happens, sure... But I can't see any grand strategy in play.

Ok. I can see that. Just a thought that a suspect with previous is easier to convict than one without, if you follow my drift. But, yes, I accept it'd be a bit of an overwrought strategy to secure a perhaps comparatively minor piece of additional evidence.

 

[joe_papp]

The last time I was at a GNC, they did not offer EPO, Testosterone, HGH, or bags of blood.

+1,000,000,000 lmfao

nor Synacthen nor Synacthen Depot lol

 

[JA.Tri]

@Clemson Cycling "Witch hunt"!!!

Any time I hear the USADA vs Lance et al action characterized as such...My Favourite Martian antennae go up. Big time!

If the profferer of such, then backs up the characterization with sound reasons then I am prepared to listen...otherwise it just gets my back up and I switch off.

 

[henryg]

THIS ^ seems so obvious and it is frustrating than not everyone can see it.

It seems that even when they know that the myth they believed in is a total fraud some people are so personally invested in the myth that they want to continue to be allowed to maintain the fantasy. If all the evidence comes out and Lance gets sanctioned they can't even pretend anymore. I guess the personal loss would be to much to bear.

The 3 stages of grief. Denial - anger - acceptance. Right now most seem to have moved from the denial stage to anger. From he never doped (he had a unique metabolism) to maybe he did, but so did everyone else and its a witch-hunt, he's being singled out, it's ancient history, waste of taxpayer money, Floyd sucks, etc., etc.,...

Next stage: acceptance.

 

[MarkvW]

It seems that even when they know that the myth they believed in is a total fraud some people are so personally invested in the myth that they want to continue to be allowed to maintain the fantasy. If all the evidence comes out and Lance gets sanctioned they can't even pretend anymore. I guess the personal loss would be to much to bear.

The 3 stages of grief. Denial - anger - acceptance. Right now most seem to have moved from the denial stage to anger. From he never doped (he had a unique metabolism) to maybe he did, but so did everyone else and its a witch-hunt, he's being singled out, it's ancient history, waste of taxpayer money, Floyd sucks, etc., etc.,...

Next stage: acceptance.

Don't forget the bargaining stage!

 

[Deagol]

Armstrong himself seems to be stuck in denial and anger. I don't see him ever getting to acceptence. He doesn't seem to have the capacity.

 

[thehog]

For the period 1999 -2004, UCI datas:

* 1999 : 15 contrôles urinaires conventionnels (1 positif à la triamcinolone acétonide - corticoïdes)
* 2000 : 12 contrôles urinaires conventionnels
* 2001 : 10 contrôles urinaires conventionnels, dont 5 avec détection de l'EPO
* 2002 : 9 contrôles urinaires conventionnels incluant la recherche d'HES, dont 8 avec détection de l'EPO
* 2003 : 9 contrôles urinaires conventionnels incluant la recherche d'HES, dont 6 avec détection de l'EPO
* 2004 : 8 contrôles urinaires conventionnels incluant la recherche d'HES, dont 7 avec détection de l'EPO . 1 contrôle sanguin de détection des hémoglobines de synthèse .

Thank-you. No where near 500 let alone 300 or even 200!

 

[eleven]

For the period 1999 -2004, UCI datas:

Isn't a rider automatically tested after a stage win in the TdF? IF that's the case, and if the UCI leads that test (or did during the relevant time period), then many of the tests you listed would simply be the stage victory tests - meaning he was even more rarely "organically" or randomly tested.

 

[MarkvW]

For the period 1999 -2004, UCI datas:

Only one blood test in all those years? Is that right?

 

[Race Radio]

Isn't a rider automatically tested after a stage win in the TdF? IF that's the case, and if the UCI leads that test (or did during the relevant time period), then many of the tests you listed would simply be the stage victory tests - meaning he was even more rarely "organically" or randomly tested.

Mike Anderson was his mechanic/assistent for many of those years said that he was never tested OOC when he was with him.....and they lived a traveled together 24/7

 

[D-Queued]

Only one blood test in all those years? Is that right?

Apparently.

This is the one I like the most, though:

1 positif à la triamcinolone acétonide - corticoïdes

You don't need a French - English translation or the Mythbusters to spot the Lance lie.

500 Tests - Busted
No Positives - Busted

Moving on to the next myth, how about:

Billions raised for cancer research?

Commenting on the USADA decision to move forward with doping violations, Lance Armstrong Foundation President and CEO Doug Ullman said.

"He has been instrumental in securing billions of dollars for cancer research..."

Smells like another enormous lie in the USADA PR defense strategy. Goodness, the foundation hasn't even raised a single billion.

What is the truth?

As Bill Gifford observed in Outside Magazine, the truth is that:

"If Lance Armstrong went to jail and Livestrong went away, that would be a huge setback in our war against cancer, right? Not exactly, because the famous nonprofit donates almost *nothing to scientific research...

...the Foundation gave out a total of $20m in research grants between 1998 and 2005, the year it began phasing out its support of hard science. A note on the Foundation's website informs visitors that, as of 2010, it no longer even accepts research proposals."

Busted.

Hiding behind the protective shield of cancer victims with bogus claims about protecting them.

Sounds like something out of Southern Sudan.

Dave.

 

[D-Queued]

Oh yeah,

Would someone please put the above post on Doug Ullman's Facebook page?

He has egg all over his face on that one.

Dave.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Plus - If Lance hadn't lied and cheated - the Government wouldn't have had to spend a cent proving that he did.

If you're concerned about taxpayers money being misused, please blame him.

+1000
Lance's fault this entire thing.
He is wasting everyone time and money for his ego.

 

[MrRoboto]

For the period 1999 -2004, UCI datas:

But he would have been tested more these years, right?

These are tests conducted at UCI races or something?

Sorry for the stupid question.

 

[TubularBills]

Thanks rr. Your answer neatly leads to the reason for my question.

I'd wondered if the federal case was deliberately parked, allowing the USADA investigation to come out from under the feds' wings; the 2 having gone along in tandem until then.

WADA states that the feds haven't given any information to USADA, I'm sure that's strictly speaking accurate. USADA conducted the interviews etc and the feds sat in - certain information was shared from day 1.

I'm wondering if the federal and USADA investigations were ever totally separate? I'm wondering if maybe the federal investigation reached a point where it couldn't continue without evidence (or, shall we say, was better able to continue with evidence) that only USADA could get - that is, admission of guilt of doping OR a sanction for doping. Once achieved, the federal case could re-start and be back on the road. I'm wondering if that was always the plan.

If it was it's a brilliant strategy; we can only hope that this is exactly what happens... it will be interesting to watch this unfold.

 

[TubularBills]

Apparently.

This is the one I like the most, though:

1 positif à la triamcinolone acétonide - corticoïdes

You don't need a French - English translation or the Mythbusters to spot the Lance lie.

500 Tests - Busted
No Positives - Busted

Moving on to the next myth, how about:

Billions raised for cancer research?

Commenting on the USADA decision to move forward with doping violations, Lance Armstrong Foundation President and CEO Doug Ullman said.

"He has been instrumental in securing billions of dollars for cancer research..."

Smells like another enormous lie in the USADA PR defense strategy. Goodness, the foundation hasn't even raised a single billion.

What is the truth?

As Bill Gifford observed in Outside Magazine, the truth is that:

"If Lance Armstrong went to jail and Livestrong went away, that would be a huge setback in our war against cancer, right? Not exactly, because the famous nonprofit donates almost *nothing to scientific research...

...the Foundation gave out a total of $20m in research grants between 1998 and 2005, the year it began phasing out its support of hard science. A note on the Foundation's website informs visitors that, as of 2010, it no longer even accepts research proposals."

Busted.

Hiding behind the protective shield of cancer victims with bogus claims about protecting them.

Sounds like something out of Southern Sudan.

Dave.

Bravo! Busted.

 

[D-Queued]

But he would have been tested more these years, right?

These are tests conducted at UCI races or something?

Sorry for the stupid question.

Yes, he was tested more than this. Like all athletes, his National Association is responsible for his OOC testing. In his case, this is the USADA.

The USADA has a record of 29 tests on Lance from 2000 to date. These can be added to the 64 UCI tests from 1999-2004. Combined, we have a total of 93 tests.

He may have broken the 100 test barrier with 2005 Tour and the UCI-administered Passport tests.

Passport tests are/were conducted ~ quarterly. But, this Passport program is NOT recognized by WADA and does not count as a doping test.

If you feel generous, perhaps you can go as high as 110 or even 120 official doping tests throughout his career. This would be less than 1/4 than what is claimed.

The only other tests not included here are the lactate pinpricks and whatever tests Ferrari did to 'monitor his health'. If so, then Ferrari must charge at least $1,000 per test.

Dave.

 

[MrRoboto]

Ok, thanks.

Also, from the SI article:

"From 1990 to 2000, Armstrong was tested more than two dozen times by Catlin's UCLA lab, according to Catlin's estimate"

 

[thehog]

Ok, thanks.

Also, from the SI article:

"From 1990 to 2000, Armstrong was tested more than two dozen times by Catlin's UCLA lab, according to Catlin's estimate"

The Catlin testing was private not anti-doping tests.

 

[Oldman]

The Catlin testing was private not anti-doping tests.

...and tend to be for the entirely opposite purpose.

 

[D-Queued]

Actually, some clarification of the Caitlin tests may be warranted.

If these tests were 1990-2000, then they were not the 'special program' ruse 'to prove his innocence' that was was a part of the great comeback nonsense. Caitlin embarrassed by showing that he is not immune to believing that 'hope' could return.

As Lance's results proved to anyone not understanding his true nature, hope lost.

If these tests were 1990-2000, though, and part of an official OOC or in-competition testing, then Caitlin would not know who the athlete was. Not unless all US cyclist tests were run through his UCLA lab - which is possible.

Dave.