What will happen to the 7 TDF wins..

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
A

Anonymous

Guest
JRTinMA said:
That was precisely my point. It seems you are the one who didn't get my point. Oh and TFF, good company.

Oh, and JRTinMA, making coherent statements is beneficial to communication. You know, since we are going steady and all...<kiss><kiss><fondle>
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
JRTinMA said:
Also not my point. The casual observer would never see the asterisk. The well educated like yourself already knew. The official site is asterisk free so most will never know.

The 'Offical LeTour" website is not asterisk free- I am not interested in your point - Riis name has an asterisk after it, simple.
 
Aug 3, 2009
169
0
0
Nobody is going to like it, but those wins were probably just as legit as any going back to Lemond. Lance can (and will) be hated infinitely, but I don't see how you can retroactively dismiss his riding.

Awarding his wins to the other gentlemen on the podiums from '99-'05 would be laughable, so le Tour would have to either suck it up and leave Armstrong on the books or vacate the string. Vacating the string would be an impressive message to send to all future cheats, so it is very unlikely they will do it.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
The 'Offical LeTour" website is not asterisk free- I am not interested in your point - Riis name has an asterisk after it, simple.

Yes you are, this is why you keep commenting. Its several pages in and only in French. I believe I linked it earlier. The main page is translated and asterisk free. You can cut the bs now, my point was its not there on the main page so move on.
 
sagard said:
Nobody is going to like it, but those wins were probably just as legit as any going back to Lemond. Lance can (and will) be hated infinitely, but I don't see how you can retroactively dismiss his riding.

Awarding his wins to the other gentlemen on the podiums from '99-'05 would be laughable, so le Tour would have to either suck it up and leave Armstrong on the books or vacate the string. Vacating the string would be an impressive message to send to all future cheats, so it is very unlikely they will do it.

Good point, even on this site I doubt anybody thought in 96 Ullrich or Pantani were clean. You would have to go pretty deep to find a clean rider.
 
sagard said:
Nobody is going to like it, but those wins were probably just as legit as any going back to Lemond. Lance can (and will) be hated infinitely, but I don't see how you can retroactively dismiss his riding.

Awarding his wins to the other gentlemen on the podiums from '99-'05 would be laughable, so le Tour would have to either suck it up and leave Armstrong on the books or vacate the string. Vacating the string would be an impressive message to send to all future cheats, so it is very unlikely they will do it.

If they can take away Landis' title and give it to the second place finisher then I don't see a problem with doing the same to Armstrong.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
BroDeal said:
If they can take away Landis' title and give it to the second place finisher then I don't see a problem with doing the same to Armstrong.
Landis was bagged in a control during the tour he won. This seems like apples and oranges.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
JRTinMA said:
Yes you are, this is why you keep commenting. Its several pages in and only in French. I believe I linked it earlier. The main page is translated and asterisk free. You can cut the bs now, my point was its not there on the main page so move on.

No-one cares about your point.

The fact is there is an asterisk after Riis name for his 1996 'win'- and the only reason I responded to your last post was because you said "the official site is asterisks free" -it is not, as you confirmed in the above response.
 
Jan 27, 2010
921
0
0
scribe said:
Landis was bagged in a control during the tour he won. This seems like apples and oranges.

True but Basso never tested positive and neither did Ullrich and prior to any investigation they were 'removed' from the TdF. Also, Valverde was thought to have the same association as Basso and Ullrich in OP and how long did that take? But in the end they proved it, and removed UCI points...

LA tested positive in 1999 (6 times) now possibly in 2001 TdSuisse...he could request to have those '99 samples retested and prove his innocence? But he hasn't has he. He's guilty full stop. Remove the historical data, and remove it from anyone else who cheats, I'm not selective.

NW
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,020
0
0
BroDeal said:
If they can take away Landis' title and give it to the second place finisher then I don't see a problem with doing the same to Armstrong.

it would be more akin to the sanctioning valvarde received and he never tested positive to any test and especially not in a race like landis was.

he only lost his current seasons worth of results and not all the results from 2006 onwards. he kept his vuelta win and all his other wins up to the end of 2009.

besides... all the ppl in 2nd were dopers anyway
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,020
0
0
Neworld said:
True but Basso never tested positive and neither did Ullrich and prior to any investigation they were 'removed' from the TdF. Also, Valverde was thought to have the same association as Basso and Ullrich in OP and how long did that take? But in the end they proved it, and removed UCI points...

LA tested positive in 1999 (6 times) now possibly in 2001 TdSuisse...he could request to have those '99 samples retested and prove his innocence? But he hasn't has he. He's guilty full stop. Remove the historical data, and remove it from anyone else who cheats, I'm not selective.

NW

basso didnt have any results stripped and neither did ulrich.

retesting 1999 samples wont help as it's past the 8 years now so at the most they could strip 2003-2005 results. no way they'd award to 2nd place even if they did cause they were all dopers too. if anything they'll leave them there with the same references riis has on his "win"
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Neworld said:
True but Basso never tested positive and neither did Ullrich and prior to any investigation they were 'removed' from the TdF. Also, Valverde was thought to have the same association as Basso and Ullrich in OP and how long did that take? But in the end they proved it, and removed UCI points...

LA tested positive in 1999 (6 times) now possibly in 2001 TdSuisse...he could request to have those '99 samples retested and prove his innocence? But he hasn't has he. He's guilty full stop. Remove the historical data, and remove it from anyone else who cheats, I'm not selective.

NW
let's set aside the incredibly likely fact that lance raced as dirty as anyone at the top of the peloton. Those '99 samples were administered by a journalist. They might as well had epo turds floating in the tubes, it just isn't gonna hold enough weight for anything actionable.
 
scribe said:
let's set aside the incredibly likely fact that lance raced as dirty as anyone at the top of the peloton. Those '99 samples were administered by a journalist. They might as well had epo turds floating in the tubes, it just isn't gonna hold enough weight for anything actionable.

Administered by a journalist? Have you not read anything? Please after all this time do not go Full genius just because the noose is closing around your boy's neck. You are better than that.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Hugh Januss said:
Administered by a journalist? Have you not read anything? Please after all this time do not go Full genius just because the noose is closing around your boy's neck. You are better than that.
yeah. Some French chick to boot. Her and mr controls should just take over uci, maybe they could get some of these cheats in real time instead of 10 years after the fact
 
Mar 10, 2009
341
0
0
Neworld said:
True but Basso never tested positive and neither did Ullrich and prior to any investigation they were 'removed' from the TdF. Also, Valverde was thought to have the same association as Basso and Ullrich in OP and how long did that take? But in the end they proved it, and removed UCI points...

LA tested positive in 1999 (6 times) now possibly in 2001 TdSuisse...he could request to have those '99 samples retested and prove his innocence? But he hasn't has he. He's guilty full stop. Remove the historical data, and remove it from anyone else who cheats, I'm not selective.

NW

weren't Basso and Ullrich pulled before the tour started and Ullrich still has his TdF win and podiums so he hasn't been removed from the TdF.

I could be wrong here but when you give a sample, one of them is stored for future testing. That sample has already been tested and is now destroyed. There is no way to have a B sample tested from that and so you can't get the two positives needed to prove doping.
 
Jul 25, 2009
1,072
0
0
Kender said:
basso didnt have any results stripped and neither did ulrich.

But in those cases the specific dates when they would definitely have had an advantage from PEDs is not known. The WADA rules seem to be based on the idea that results are removed for specific events, where athletes were known to have had a PED induced advantage, instead of general removal of results.

So for example, if a bunch of former LA team mates say "yeah I saw him get a mid-tour transfusion on the bus in 04" it would make it very difficult for UCI and USAcycling to let that result stand, however incestuous their relationship with Lance is.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,086
1
0
sherer said:
weren't Basso and Ullrich pulled before the tour started and Ullrich still has his TdF win and podiums so he hasn't been removed from the TdF.

I could be wrong here but when you give a sample, one of them is stored for future testing. That sample has already been tested and is now destroyed. There is no way to have a B sample tested from that and so you can't get the two positives needed to prove doping.

The B sample can be split to provide a new A and B sample. I think the athlete has to agree to this, however.
 
Mar 10, 2009
341
0
0
Cobber said:
The B sample can be split to provide a new A and B sample. I think the athlete has to agree to this, however.

It's already been tested once though so was it split then ? If not then a second test can't be done.

If this was every tested again I would imagine a new A and B test would be requested as well rather than go on results from a test of a few years ago
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
I don't see the Feds or USADA requesting samples.

There is no test for autologous blood doping,and from the Actovegin inquiry and Manzano confession it is likely that masking agents were used for other products.

The Feds are out to expose a doping network and not necessarily individual athletes. They will concentrate on the funding and the paper-trail.

USADA have a more difficult task to prove individual doping and might have to rely solely on evidence released by the Feds investigation.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
I don't see the Feds or USADA requesting samples.
i'd agree that the massive retesting of all remaining samples is highly unlike. but a selective, well targeted one is more than likely. and not only for armstrong.

if catlin who's advising novitzky sees a good probability for a catch, the re-testing may commence as the need for a corroborative evidence (that's the maximum a frozen b-sample is worth) may arise.

some situation for retesting may include:

-arrival of a new test that became available AFTER a sample was given. for ex, there are 2 totally useless tests for hgh in current use. few months ago a new far more effective hgh test was introduced.

-if anabolic-androgenic steroid use was suspected and the approximate administration schedule is known, retesting some samples may point to a t/e ratio (or metabolites concentration) swings not previously suspected or explored.

-records of already existing (negative) test results may acquire a look of a strong corroborative evidence if juxtaposed with other tests. for ex, a stand alone negative irms (a test for exogenous testo) becomes suspicious if it was "just below the threashold' and was connected to another marginal irms test or a suspicious t/e trend. (btw, this is the main reason i have no no doubt whatsoever that floyd used steroids or testo in 2006)

ps the main limitation of retesting is that there probably are very few remaining samples and the blood samples are very likely gone. hence the brilliancy of lance dumping catlin who insisted on storing his blood.
 
Don't they have the results of all the general blood tests performed before the start of the TdF? Shouldn't those from 1999 and some other years show close to 50% hematocrit for virtually everyone, which would be at odds with the results of the same tests in later Tours and especially with the biopassport data? Basically, isn't there enough data to suggest rather conclusively whether or not most riders used blood doping?

I'm not sure when viable EPO tests were introduced. 2001?
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
the use of blood doping by most riders/'the peloton' and the distinct periods of transition from epo alone then to epo/blood transfusions combinations is well documented.

it was posted 1000 plus 1 time all over internet.
 
I know, but I don't recall anyone using the data to point at specific riders. I find it amazing that someone could get away with pointing out his "compelling" hematocrit figures one year without someone checking the data and calling him out on it.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
data's worth is in the eyes of the beholder..

rasmussen published his low crit and was challenged by damsgaard who incidentally defended a hightly suspicious (and much richer) blood parameters for texas who also incidentally had gusev fired by the hog on the basis of inconclusive blood values that were swept aside/disredited by the highest sporting authority cas.

this example of just one 'blood expert' damsgaard (incidentally working for the uci now) should indicate how useless it is to swing around blood data that's isolated from other evidence.