Why is Lance Still Racing?

[krebs303]

I don't see it right away. Exactly what part, what statement, in the Code of Conduct prevents his participation?

USA Cycling Sanctioned Event
All LQS events are sanctioned by USA Cycling. Participants must have a current USA Cycling racing
license or buy a One-Day License on-site the day before the race. If you paid $10 for a USAC One-Day


Section 3. The following shall be considered violations of the USA Cycling Code of Conduct:
(a) Violation of anti-doping provisions as established by WADA (World Antidoping Agency)
(

 

[LauraLyn]

Assuming Lance actually has a "code of conduct" . . . .

I don't think any serious person runs the risk of making that assumption. The discussion refers to the USA Cycling Code of Conduct (maybe also a bit difficult to take seriously).

 

[LauraLyn]

Since it's no longer a sanctioned race, I don't know if he's technically violating any rules . . . .

What they can do is sanction any license holders who race with him, as they threatened to do when Tyler Hamilton was going to start his own crit series. Of course, Lance knows they won't do that, since it will make them appear like the bad guy and he'll cry "witch hunt". So, it's up to the registered participants to grow a backbone and tell the promoter to eff off.

USA Cycling Sanctioned Event
All LQS events are sanctioned by USA Cycling. Participants must have a current USA Cycling racing
license or buy a One-Day License on-site the day before the race. If you paid $10 for a USAC One-Day


Section 3. The following shall be considered violations of the USA Cycling Code of Conduct:
(a) Violation of anti-doping provisions as established by WADA (World Antidoping Agency)
(

Thanks Krebs. But I tend to go along with 131313 on this. The organizers deliberately "unsanctioned" the race so Lance could race. So I don't see a violation. I also don't see how they can sanction other riders for riding with him, since it is not longer a USA Cycling event. I just don't see it.

But even more, I don't think there is a need. Once people realize (and I believe they will) that the USADA sanctions are real, then silly people like those in Hoorn, are not going to invite this doper and cheater to their event. And athletes will hopefully someday get the point that racing against Lance Armstrong does not give you bragging rights.

 

[krebs303]

Thanks Krebs. But I tend to go along with 131313 on this. The organizers deliberately "unsanctioned" the race so Lance could race. So I don't see a violation. I also don't see how they can sanction other riders for riding with him, since it is not longer a USA Cycling event. I just don't see it.

But even more, I don't think there is a need. Once people realize (and I believe they will) that the USADA sanctions are real, then silly people like those in Hoorn, are not going to invite this doper and cheater to their event. And athletes will hopefully someday get the point that racing against Lance Armstrong does not give you bragging rights.

I missed where they unsanctioned the race. Have they unsanctioned the whole series then I would assume. Are the running portions to be unsanctioned as well?

 

[LauraLyn]

I missed where they unsanctioned the race. Have they unsanctioned the whole series then I would assume. Are the running portions to be unsanctioned as well?

My understanding is that only this race is run by this organizer in the series. And they only unsanctioned this race.

Of course, it is still a qualifier race for the Leadville 100, just unsanctioned.

To a normal human being like you or me, it appears confusing. But really in the world of Lance Armstrong and USA Cycling (and Leadville, which is somehow tied to Lance more intimately than I can still figure) it all makes perfect sense.

 

[biokemguy]

If they unsanctioned the race, what happens to the insurance that covered the participants through USAC?

I guess the organizer can get separate insurance and still turn a profit based on increased participation due to Lance.

 

[Jeremiah]

What a ***...

I'm having a hard time with this one: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/s...d-in-mountain-bike-race-in-colorado.html?_r=1

I mean, I know why; because he thinks he's completely above any and all authority. Also, since he's a pretty good at reading people (like most sociopaths), he realizes that USADA doesn't want to be seen as being any more "vindictive" than he's portrayed them to be. When Tyler Hamilton did some unsanctioned races, USADA and USAC threatened to sanction any license holders who showed up to a race in which he was participating (yes, they can do that). Why does the preferential treatment still continue? Why is still positioning himself to poison the next generation?

And by the Keegan Swirbel, time to grow up. Santa doesn't exist, either.

Swirbul, who said he sent a text message to Armstrong the night before just to make sure he was still racing, condemned the Usada case against Armstrong, saying it’s “ruining cycling.”

Good grief!

 

[mewmewmew13]

Swirbul, who said he sent a text message to Armstrong the night before just to make sure he was still racing, condemned the Usada case against Armstrong, saying it’s “ruining cycling.”

Good grief!

It sounds like the swirbul kid is the new little Lance-bot du jour.

 

[BroDeal]

This is a great thing. Race promoters have been part of the problem just as much as the riders, team management, sport management, and the media. Now we get to see which promoters facilitate doping. We need to keep a list.

As for Armstrong, it is funny and pathetic at the same time. His ego does not allow himself to take a break. He needs affirmation that he is still a great athlete, so he is pandering to fringe event promoters to let him race. How long will it last? Five years from now when he is a nobody will he still be calling race promoters and begging them to unsanction their events so he can race? It will get more pathetic the longer it goes on. The fringe events will become even fringier. (Yup, fringier is a word. It may not pass muster for Scrabble, but it sounds like it should.) There is a chance he will end up in a few way out of the mainstream events, like the Tour Divide race, in which he will undoubtedly cheat.

 

[aphronesis]

This is a great thing. Race promoters have been part of the problem just as much as the riders, team management, sport management, and the media. Now we get to see which promoters facilitate doping. We need to keep a list.

As for Armstrong, it is funny and pathetic at the same time. His ego does not allow himself to take a break. He needs affirmation that he is still a great athlete, so he is pandering to fringe event promoters to let him race. How long will it last? Five years from now when he is a nobody will he still be calling race promoters and begging them to unsanction their events so he can race? It will get more pathetic the longer it goes on. The fringe events will become even fringier. (Yup, fringier is a word. It may not pass muster for Scrabble, but it sounds like it should.) There is a chance he will end up in a few way out of the mainstream events, like the Tour Divide race, in which he will undoubtedly cheat.

I'm curious here. Are you saying that these promoters actually facilitate doping or that they're simply low-level commercial endeavors and, as a result, prone to mediocrity? You actually think the triathalons shut him out because they're antidoping? Or is it merely because they have a certain bureaucratic infrastructure in place that doesn't want to take on the negative publicity?

 

[ebandit]

tri

I'm curious here. Are you saying that these promoters actually facilitate doping or that they're simply low-level commercial endeavors and, as a result, prone to mediocrity? You actually think the triathalons shut him out because they're antidoping? Or is it merely because they have a certain bureaucratic infrastructure in place that doesn't want to take on the negative publicity?

triathlon banned lance for the betterment of their sport............
to remain an olympic sport under wada control

will unsanctioned events be a 'free for all' with zero testing

will a fueled lance trounce the field? an epic victory comparable with taking candy from a child

 

[babastooey]

Is there any way that USADA can punish the renegades who choose to compete in these events with Lance? Can they make racing with Lance akin to playing in unsanctioned cricket or soccer or rugby matches in South Africa under apartheid? In other words, can they issue short term bans or fines to the others who compete and then keep them out of sanctioned events?

 

[the big ring]

Is there any way that USADA can punish the renegades who choose to compete in these events with Lance? Can they make racing with Lance akin to playing in unsanctioned cricket or soccer or rugby matches in South Africa under apartheid? In other words, can they issue short term bans or fines to the others who compete and then keep them out of sanctioned events?

Only if they have jurisdiction - ie a UCI level USAC license. ie are professionals.

 

[babastooey]

So theoretically, anyone who has a USAC license and competes in a race with Lance could get whacked or fined by USADA? Could they do that?

 

[the big ring]

So theoretically, anyone who has a USAC license and competes in a race with Lance could get whacked or fined by USADA? Could they do that?

You're wording it wrong, or your logic processors are broken.

Anyone with a professional USAC license is not allowed to race non USAC-sanctioned races, and faces potential fines if they do.

Lance can only race non-USAC sanctioned races.

Anyone racing in the same race with Lance is therefore racing in a non-USAC sanctioned race and can face potential fines.

It's not about Lance. It's about USAC sanctioned or not races.

If you're trying to spin this into the USADA = bad guys, you are going to fail completely but you might be able to convince the Lance fanbois.

 

[AlpineClimbr]

So theoretically, anyone who has a USAC license and competes in a race with Lance could get whacked or fined by USADA? Could they do that?

Just to clarify, NO.

The USADA has no jurisdiction over non-UCI (non-USAC) cycling events.

 

[Boeing]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQsqS-mY3jI&feature=related

anyone remember him lowering a shoulder on a pedestrian with his back to Lance and then blaming the ped?

why is he still racing indeed

 

[Benotti69]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQsqS-mY3jI&feature=related

anyone remember him lowering a shoulder on a pedestrian with his back to Lance and then blaming the ped?

why is he still racing indeed

It is unforgettable. It shows his truly sociopathic persona. To pick on a innocent person to try and start a fight after assualting him proves what kind of white trash Armsrong is. The worst kind.

Why anyone would want this kind of loose cannon at their event is beyond comprehension? But humans are beyond comprehension most of the time.

 

[babastooey]

You're wording it wrong, or your logic processors are broken.

Anyone with a professional USAC license is not allowed to race non USAC-sanctioned races, and faces potential fines if they do.

If you're trying to spin this into the USADA = bad guys, you are going to fail completely but you might be able to convince the Lance fanbois.

My logic processors are not broken.

I lacked the information you have. I asked for it, and you just gave it to me. Therefore I should say thanks, but since you have an attitude towards me, I'm not really sure what to say.

I am not trying to spin this into anything. I asked for information, and I got the information. I never said USADA were the bad guys. I was asking whether or not USAC license holders could be sanctioned for racing with Lance. Following the logic that Lance can't race in a USAC race and that riders can be sanctioned for riding in a non-USAC race, that is all the information I need. Ummmm, thanks?

 

[babastooey]

Just to clarify, NO.

The USADA has no jurisdiction over non-UCI (non-USAC) cycling events.

Big Ring just said that they can. Which one of you is right?

 

[babastooey]

Anyone with a professional USAC license is not allowed to race non USAC-sanctioned races, and faces potential fines if they do.

Here is the part I am also a little confused about.

Lance and Levi previously raced the Leadville 100 back when Lance was a USAC license holder. If Leadville is non-USAC, does that mean that they should have been fined? Perhaps back then nobody cared?

I focus on your word "potential" fines. In other words, fining is a possibility but not an actuality. Therefore, USAC/USADA can use discretion when fining racers. In other words, in the case of this year's events (post-Lance-ban), will they fine USAC license holders for racing with Lance or won't they? Or, perhaps, should they or shouldn't they? This is the sort of discussion I am trying to get going.

Back in the 1970s and 1980s, athletes, especially in the sports of cricket, rugby, and cycling were suspended and/or fined if they competed with or against South African athletes. This was because the whole world was against the apartheid regime. It was somewhat effective at bringing about change, although it was perhaps only the 10th most important thing.

So the reasoning becomes, to eliminate doping and to hold that the ban on Lance should be a real ban, and not just a ban in name only, riders who race with Lance should be sanctioned. The rule you quoted me allows them to do this.

On the other hand, if Leadville is USAC, then why is Lance allowed to race? Therefore, if they allow Lance, they should be stripped of their ties to USAC and the USAC license holders who are entered in the competition should be informed beforehand that participation would result in bans and/or fines.

I think now is the time for USAC/USADA to get that information out, especially since Lance is more or less defying their ban against his ability to enter competitions. Otherwise, the wind is knocked out of their sails and they could be seen as a paper organization.

 

[the big ring]

Big Ring just said that they can. Which one of you is right?

Straight from the horse's mouth.

However USAC is clear that there could be consequences for certain classes of riders who compete in such races. “Many USA Cycling licensees are also licensed by UCI. UCI does have very clear rules that bar UCI licensees from riding in races that are not sanctioned by a national governing body,” it told VeloNation. “Because the Alpine Odyssey is not a sanctioned race, any UCI licensee who rides in the event (even if Lance Armstrong were not to ride) would be subject to fines and suspensions for violation of that UCI rule.”

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...g-Alpine-Odyssey-100k-race.aspx#ixzz26XeZNPei

UCI licensee is effectively what pros are.

 

[babastooey]

Once again I thank you for the info.

I am a little concerned that you guys assume that anyone here asking questions and looking for information must be a Lance honk or anti-USADA.

Good rule of thumb: when you don't know something, ask someone who does.

It is a good thing to ask questions and a good thing to want to know more.

The end.

 

[ChrisE]

Once again I thank you for the info.

I am a little concerned that you guys assume that anyone here asking questions and looking for information must be a Lance honk or anti-USADA.

Good rule of thumb: when you don't know something, ask someone who does.

It is a good thing to ask questions and a good thing to want to know more.

The end.

Don't be concerned, their attitude is apparently incurable.

 

[the big ring]

Don't be concerned, their attitude is apparently incurable.

There are none so blind as those who will not see. His subsequent post proves my point.