USADA - Armstrong

[BroDeal]

From WSJ:

USADA questions Lance Armstrong's claim of "500 to 600" passed drug tests in court document filed tonight. Wants evidence from Lance counsel.

In court filing, USADA says "majority" of Armstrong blood and urine samples "unlikely to have been tested for EPO or anabolic steroids"

That is funny. Armstrong's public relation lies have been making their way into his legal documents, and now he is being called on it.

It sounds like he is getting legal advice from Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe.

 

[MarkvW]

Knight to E5
Is this where the USADA says "check"?

This is where USADA hits a deep forehand winner down the baseline opposite Lance.

 

[Turner29]

"The letter that Mr. Armstrong's attorneys drafted for Mr. Tygart to sign went into detail about USADA's process, including its arbitration system, which Mr. Armstrong's attorneys now refer to as a "kangaroo court."

 

[Turner29]

This is where USADA hits a deep forehand winner down the baseline opposite Lance.

Actually, it got him in the nut.

 

[MarkvW]

"The letter that Mr. Armstrong's attorneys drafted for Mr. Tygart to sign went into detail about USADA's process, including its arbitration system, which Mr. Armstrong's attorneys now refer to as a "kangaroo court."

I'd say this presents a pretty fine example of estoppel.

 

[Kretch]

Actually, it got him in the nut.

Thud...ouch

 

[Weapons of @ss Destruction]

This is where USADA hits a deep forehand winner down the baseline opposite Lance.

"Sideline" Mark, not "baseline". Since Roger Federer and tennis are now an integral part of this thread, we must strive to be accurate in nitty gritty details.

 

[red_flanders]

Many here believe such but I am amazed at the large numbers elsewhere who believe Armstrong is either clean, or the USADA is engaging in a witch-hunt.

I think it's worth considering that a great many of the comments you see to that effect are astroturfing forums, articles and such with pro Armstrong talking points. Reads that way to me anyway.

Beyond that people don't like being told they've been wrong about someone in whom they've invested themselves emotionally. Took me longer than it should have to figure out he was doping, and it was staring me in the face. He'd inspired me in '99 when I was going through some tough times, but the farce became too obvious for too long. Consider folks who are merely casual followers of the sport, and who regard Phil and Paul as honest brokers of information. My brother is in this camp. It's amazing.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

I'd say this presents a pretty fine example of estoppel.

Estoppel indeed. Also, Mr. Armstrong's attorneys need to be very careful in their answering papers lest they rin afoul of Rule 11.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Apparently the motion states that the 500-600 tests is not correct and requests Armstrong to prove he's had that many tests.

Oh boy I love this!

I think we owe some thanks to dim and RR and other contributors for that great test exposé.

 

[Turner29]

I think it's worth considering that a great many of the comments you see to that effect are astroturfing forums, articles and such with pro Armstrong talking points. Reads that way to me anyway.

Beyond that people don't like being told they've been wrong about someone in whom they've invested themselves emotionally. Took me longer than it should have to figure out he was doping, and it was staring me in the face. He'd inspired me in '99 when I was going through some tough times, but the farce became too obvious for too long. Consider folks who are merely casual followers of the sport, and who regard Phil and Paul as honest brokers of information. My brother is in this camp. It's amazing.

Very good points. I am a huge Indurain fan yet I am under no illusions as to where a good detail of his "super human" power comes from. Interestingly, his and Armstrong's career, save for cancer, are remarkably similar: years of a mediocre results, then suddenly, Tour de France Champion.

 

[luckyboy]

Exhibit 1 of the countersuit is great - just dismantling Lance's claims

Stuffs all here if it hasn't been linked - http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/2012/usada-filing

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I'd say this presents a pretty fine example of estoppel.

Fine legal point sir. Good show!

 

[Turner29]

I think it's worth considering that a great many of the comments you see to that effect are astroturfing forums, articles and such with pro Armstrong talking points. Reads that way to me anyway.

Or, those who accuse the USADA of relying on hearsay evidence are actually doing the same.

 

[BikeCentric]

In 1993 didn't Armstrong say his goal was to get close to Indurain one minute each year?

That rings a bell, and I'm pretty sure that was in that first interview that David Walsh did with him! Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[MacRoadie]

That is funny. Armstrong's public relation lies have been making their way into his legal documents, and now he is being called on it.

It sounds like he is getting legal advice from Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe.

More like Huey, Dewey and Louie...

 

[BroDeal]

More like Huey, Dewey and Louie...

 

[Iker_Baqueiro]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444330904577537673199762652.html

In a draft of a letter sent on April 28, 2005, and included in Thursday's court filing, a lawyer for Mr. Armstrong wrote that the U.S. Olympic Committee "has given USADA full authority to execute a comprehensive national anti-doping program encompassing testing, adjudication, education, and research, and to develop programs, policies, and procedures in each of those areas," he said.

USADA said in Thursday's motion that in Mr. Armstrong's current lawsuit against the group, the same attorneys involved in drafting the 2005 affidavit criticize USADA for ignoring "500 to 600" drug tests they say Mr. Armstrong has passed. The attorneys say USADA is instead bringing a case based on witness testimony, known as "nonanalytical" positive testing.

But in the 2005 letter, the attorneys point specifically to USADA's use of nonanalytical positives, USADA says, describing them in the following way: "In other words, an athlete may not test positive, but based on other compelling evidence, there is reason to believe the athlete is guilty of doping."

In editing notes sent via email, Mr. Armstrong's attorneys debated whether to use the sentence about nonanalytical testing in the in the letter.

"I don't know if we include this," an attorney for Mr. Armstrong wrote. "On the one hand, it shows that USADA is serious about doping and looks beyond just tests. On the other hand, it shows that sometimes athletes may pass drug tests but are still guilty of doping. What are your thoughts?"

Great !!! Way to go USADA !!!

You fight fire with fire !!!

 

[shawnrohrbach]

I think it's worth considering that a great many of the comments you see to that effect are astroturfing forums, articles and such with pro Armstrong talking points. Reads that way to me anyway.

Beyond that people don't like being told they've been wrong about someone in whom they've invested themselves emotionally. Took me longer than it should have to figure out he was doping, and it was staring me in the face. He'd inspired me in '99 when I was going through some tough times, but the farce became too obvious for too long. Consider folks who are merely casual followers of the sport, and who regard Phil and Paul as honest brokers of information. My brother is in this camp. It's amazing.

There is a good deal of emotion and honesty in your post and i appreciate that. However, you post under a pseudonym. I don't get the inside joke of your posting name I don't know who you are.

 

[jseibert]

Seibert

Tygert’s mantra is he is pursing Armstrong on behalf of those he is charged with protecting. Who is he protecting by pursing Armstrong? Ulrich, Basso and Mancebo (see 2005 Tour results)? Armstrong rode in an era when the use of performance enhancing drugs was systemic at the top echelons of our sport. Athletes had a choice, get on the program or you cannot compete. With increased awareness, testing and pressure to be clean, cycling is becoming one of the cleanest professional sports in the world. Cyclist should no longer have to make the choice – dope or you don’t get a contract. Tygert is doing nothing for CURRENT athletes he is charged to protect. He is wasting taxpayer money to make a name for himself, to stroke his own ego, at the expense of current athletes and the taxpayers. Instead of wasting money to pursue Armstrong, USADA should be devoting its budget to testing at more races, and leveling the playing field for current athletes and our children so they do not have to face the difficult decision dedicated athletes faced over the previous two decades. Armstrong, with or without drugs, was the greatest Tour de France rider of his time, did more for American cycling than anyone else has ever come close to doing, and has inspired and assisted millions with his foundation. Tygert, not Armstrong, should be the subject of our ire. A government employee, wasting taxpayer money for his own personal gain - ego.

 

[Cavalier]

One post, defending Armstrong, claiming a waste of taxpayer dollars. Did Lance post a link here or something? It's only missing #unconstitutional

 

[Turner29]

Tygert’s mantra is he is pursing Armstrong on behalf of those he is charged with protecting. Who is he protecting by pursing Armstrong? Ulrich, Basso and Mancebo (see 2005 Tour results)? Armstrong rode in an era when the use of performance enhancing drugs was systemic at the top echelons of our sport. Athletes had a choice, get on the program or you cannot compete. With increased awareness, testing and pressure to be clean, cycling is becoming one of the cleanest professional sports in the world. Cyclist should no longer have to make the choice – dope or you don’t get a contract. Tygert is doing nothing for CURRENT athletes he is charged to protect. He is wasting taxpayer money to make a name for himself, to stroke his own ego, at the expense of current athletes and the taxpayers. Instead of wasting money to pursue Armstrong, USADA should be devoting its budget to testing at more races, and leveling the playing field for current athletes and our children so they do not have to face the difficult decision dedicated athletes faced over the previous two decades. Armstrong, with or without drugs, was the greatest Tour de France rider of his time, did more for American cycling than anyone else has ever come close to doing, and has inspired and assisted millions with his foundation. Tygert, not Armstrong, should be the subject of our ire. A government employee, wasting taxpayer money for his own personal gain - ego.

You are factually incorrect on virtually every point. I will start with your contention that Tygert is a "government employee" as his is not.

Others here, my brain is fried at this hour, plus continue for me...

 

[MarkvW]

Tygert’s mantra is he is pursing Armstrong on behalf of those he is charged with protecting. Who is he protecting by pursing Armstrong? Ulrich, Basso and Mancebo (see 2005 Tour results)? Armstrong rode in an era when the use of performance enhancing drugs was systemic at the top echelons of our sport. Athletes had a choice, get on the program or you cannot compete. With increased awareness, testing and pressure to be clean, cycling is becoming one of the cleanest professional sports in the world. Cyclist should no longer have to make the choice – dope or you don’t get a contract. Tygert is doing nothing for CURRENT athletes he is charged to protect. He is wasting taxpayer money to make a name for himself, to stroke his own ego, at the expense of current athletes and the taxpayers. Instead of wasting money to pursue Armstrong, USADA should be devoting its budget to testing at more races, and leveling the playing field for current athletes and our children so they do not have to face the difficult decision dedicated athletes faced over the previous two decades. Armstrong, with or without drugs, was the greatest Tour de France rider of his time, did more for American cycling than anyone else has ever come close to doing, and has inspired and assisted millions with his foundation. Tygert, not Armstrong, should be the subject of our ire. A government employee, wasting taxpayer money for his own personal gain - ego.

Doesn't the truth sting?

 

[henryg]

A government employee, wasting taxpayer money for his own personal gain - ego.

Tygart is not a government employee and the USADA is not a government agency. All the parties accused in the USADA letter are still active in elite sports. So this is all about a doping network still in operation at the highest levels.

The USADA is doing what they are required to do according to their charter and following the procedures that Armstrong (and all pro cyclists, triathletes and olympic athletes) agreed to.

 

[sittingbison]

Tygert’s pursing Armstrong on behalf of those he is charged with protecting. With increased awareness, testing and pressure to be clean, cycling is becoming one of the cleanest professional sports in the world. Cyclist should no longer have to make the choice – dope or you don’t get a contract. USADA should be devoting its budget to testing at more races, and leveling the playing field for current athletes and our children so they do not have to face the difficult decision dedicated athletes faced over the previous two decades.

Armstrong? Ulrich, Basso and Mancebo (see 2005 Tour results)? Armstrong rode in an era when the use of performance enhancing drugs was systemic at the top echelons of our sport He is wasting taxpayer money to make a name for himself, to stroke his own ego, at the expense of current athletes and the taxpayers. Instead of wasting money Armstrong, should be testing at more races over the previous two decades. Armstrong, with or without drugs, should be the subject of our ire. wasting taxpayer money for his own personal gain - ego.

There you go, fixed.

And I'm an Aussie, not really proficient in US law despite watching all those TV shows