Jump to content
FatPom

USADA charges Armstrong

Recommended Posts

im not going down the naive path. if you look at the top10 in TDF from 1999-2005, about 50%+ has been found guilty of doping.

 

It's actually much higher than that.

I put up a list ages ago that showed who. I'll have to dig it up again and revise it as there has been more names added to the caught out list.

Pretty sure over those years it would average 70% of the top 10 being caught or admitting to PED's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lance didnt invent or pioneer doping. why do people think he did, or treat him as he did?

im not going down the naive path. if you look at the top10 in TDF from 1999-2005, about 50%+ has been found guilty of doping.

 

The fact that everyone (or 70% as Trev says :lol:) doped at the time can be reflected in the sanction handed down. I believe his palmares should remain as is but there is no justice without truth.

 

all it creates is one hell of a mess - i doubt this will go anywhere except costing losts of money & raising some dipshits profile

in the USADA .."hey look-at-me"

 

I believe it is more than that, it is politically motivated, the new guard distancing themselves from the old "corrupt" guard. Not only must justice be done, it must be seen to be done.

Edited by Slowman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually much higher than that.

I put up a list ages ago that showed who. I'll have to dig it up again and revise it as there has been more names added to the caught out list.

Pretty sure over those years it would average 70% of the top 10 being caught or admitting to PED's

 

 

So why should Lance be treated any different to all those people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their versions are weak at best as they were not believed by the grand jury who actually heard it.

 

 

How do you know this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He should be treated the same. That is the whole point.

 

 

Ullrich - banned (years after he finished

Basso - banned

Vino - banned

Virenque - banned

Zuelle - banned

Contador - banned

Rasmussen - banned

Lance - facing the music.

 

You got your wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ullrich - banned (years after he finished

Basso - banned

Vino - banned

Virenque - banned

Zuelle - banned

Contador - banned

Rasmussen - banned

Lance - facing the music.

 

You got your wish.

 

No problem for me. Like I said above, if we treat him like Conti then he can still do Kona (given the latest possible offence was the TdF just like Conti) :smile1:

 

I don't have a problem with the proposition that if he does the crime then he should do the time - just like everyone else.

 

Ok then - pop quiz seeing as how we are going to treat Lance the same as the people named above.

 

Which of the above people were banned for failing a drug test or confessing to drug use? 'Cause if we are going to treat Lance the same as those people then he has to either be banned for failing a drug test or confessing doesn't he?

 

So who of the above is like Lance - no confession and no ban for failing a drug test?

Edited by The Glycogen Lilo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would happen if Armstrong said 'stuff you all I'm racing in Nice and/or Hawaii?' can they physically stop him? Will the USADA send security guards? Would WTC face any implications if they allowed him to race? Happy to have him at Husky ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would happen if Armstrong said 'stuff you all I'm racing in Nice and/or Hawaii?' can they physically stop him? Will the USADA send security guards? Would WTC face any implications if they allowed him to race? Happy to have him at Husky ;)

 

If you believe the USADA letter charging Armstrong, the USADA can ban Lance from participating in sport for life (the exact words are "a lifetime period of ineligibility from participation in sport).

 

Any other cyclists get that sort of ban?

Edited by The Glycogen Lilo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im not going down the naive path. if you look at the top10 in TDF from 1999-2005, about 50%+ has been found guilty of doping.

 

Found it.

 

 

 

 

The ones marked in italics & greyed out are confirmed &/or admitted use.

 

 

2005

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) Discovery Channel

2 Ivan Basso (Ita) Team CSC

3 Jan Ullrich (Ger) T-Mobile Team

4 Francisco Mancebo (Spa) Illes Balears-Caisse d'Epargne

5 Alexandre Vinokourov (Kaz) T-Mobile Team

6 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Gerolsteiner ***

7 Michael Rasmussen (Den) Rabobank

8 Cadel Evans (Aus) Davitamon-Lotto

9 Floyd Landis (USA) Phonak Hearing Systems

10 Oscar Pereiro Sio (Spa) Phonak Hearing Systems ***

 

 

2004

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal p/b Berry Floor

2 Andreas Klöden (Ger) T-Mobile Team ***

3 Ivan Basso (Ita) Team CSC

4 Jan Ullrich (Ger) T-Mobile Team

5 Jose Azevedo (Por) US Postal p/b Berry Floor ***

6 Francisco Mancebo Pérez (Spa) Illes Balears - Banesto

7 Georg Totschnig (Aut) Gerolsteiner

8 Carlos Sastre (Spa) Team CSC

9 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Rabobank ***

10 Oscar Pereiro (Spa) Phonak Hearing Systems ***

 

 

2003

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal-Berry Floor

2 Jan Ullrich (Ger) Team Bianchi

3 Alexandre Vinokourov (Kaz) Team Telekom

4 Tyler Hamilton (USA) Team CSC

5 Haimar Zubeldia (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi

6 Iban Mayo (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi

7 Ivan Basso (Ita) Fassa Bortolo

8 Christophe Moreau (Fra) Credit Agricole

9 Carlos Sastre (Spa) Team CSC

10 Francisco Mancebo (Spa) iBanesto.com

 

 

2002

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal Service

2 Joseba Beloki (Spa) ONCE-Eroski

3 Raimondas Rumsas (Ltu) Lampre Daikin

4 Santiago Botero (Col) Kelme-Costa Blanca

5 Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano (Spa) ONCE-Eroski

6 José Azevedo (Por) ONCE-Eroski ***

7 Francisco Mancebo (Spa) iBanesto.com

8 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Rabobank ***

9 Roberto Heras Hernandez (Spa) US Postal Service

10 Carlos Sastre (Spa) CSC-Tiscali

 

 

2001

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal Service

2 Jan Ullrich (Ger) Telekom

3 Joseba Beloki (Spa) ONCE-Eroski

4 Andrei Kivilev (Kaz) Cofidis

5 Igor Gonzalez De Galdeano (Spa) ONCE-Eroski

6 Franois Simon (Fra) Bonjour

7 Oscar Sevilla (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca

8 Santiago Botero (Col) Kelme-Costa Blanca

9 Marcos Serrano (Spa) ONCE-Eroski

10 Michael Boogerd (Ned) Rabobank ***

 

2000

1 Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal Service

2 Jan Ullrich (Ger) Team Deutsche Telekom

3 Joseba Beloki (Spa) Festina

4 Christophe Moreau (Fra) Festina

5 Roberto Heras (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca

6 Richard Virenque (Fra) Team Polti

7 Santiago Botero (Col) Kelme-Costa Blanca

8 Fernando Escartin (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca ***

9 Francisco Mancebo (Spa) Banesto

10 Daniele Nardello (Ita) Mapei-Quick Step

 

 

1999

1. Lance Armstrong (USA) US Postal

2. Alex Zülle (Swi) Banesto

3. Fernando Escartin (Spa) Kelme-Costa Blanca ***

4. Laurent Dufaux (Swi) Saeco-Cannondale

5. Angel Casero (Spa) Vitalicio Seguros

6. Abraham Olano (Spa) ONCE-Deutsche Bank

7. Daniele Nardello (Ita) Mapei-Quick Step

8. Richard Virenque (Fra) Team Polti

9. Wladimir Belli (Ita) Festina

10. Andrea Peron (Ita) ONCE-Deutsche Bank

 

 

 

Andreas Klöden :- Allegation of using the Freiburg University Clinic for an illegal blood transfusion in 2006

Oscar Pereiro : - reported a positive test in 06 to salbutamol, but was given an exemption (TUE) on medical grounds, sufficient justification of use was given.

José Azevedo :- USPS rider and named along side others in Landis's testimony for doping on USPS

Levi Leipheimer :- Accused by former team manager for blood manipulation

Michael Boogerd :- Blood doping and plasma ring

Fernando Escarti :- In the Kelme team during the teams systematic doping years

Fernando Escartin :- In the Kelme team during the teams systematic doping years

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok then - pop quiz seeing as how we are going to treat Lance the same as the people named above.

 

Which of the above people were banned for failing a drug test or confessing to drug use? 'Cause if we are going to treat Lance the same as those people then he has to either be banned for failing a drug test or confessing doesn't he?

 

So who of the above is like Lance - no confession and no ban for failing a drug test?

 

Plenty have been suspended without a positive drug test.

Off the top of my head.

Ullrich, Basso, Rasmussen, Scarponi, Mancebo, Valverde, Sevilla, Jaksche

 

You don't have to test positive to be suspended, there are 8 basic rules to the code, where intention, import, distribution, possession, avoiding tests, where abouts etc. all come into play that can give you an equivalent result to positive test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest samuelEBrown

 

 

They will be relieved

 

I doubt TGE was even worried.

TPC....not so sure.

Jacobs, yes, a happy camper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty have been suspended without a positive drug test.

Off the top of my head.

Ullrich, Basso, Rasmussen, Scarponi, Mancebo, Valverde, Sevilla, Jaksche

 

You don't have to test positive to be suspended, there are 8 basic rules to the code, where intention, import, distribution, possession, avoiding tests, where abouts etc. all come into play that can give you an equivalent result to positive test.

 

Not to mention, eye witness testimony as well as confessions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 pages, over 3,300 views in less than 10 hours.

 

Is this bigger than a Kona thread?

 

Viewed by 206 members. (I can't tell how many guests view).

So each member has viewed this thread on average 16 times each. :P

But of course plenty of guests will have viewed and revisited the topic as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest samuelEBrown

And politically motivated YES.

 

Driven by tabaco companies wanting to crush proposition 29.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Viewed by 206 members. (I can't tell how many guests view).

So each member has viewed this thread on average 16 times each. :P

But of course plenty of guests will have viewed and revisited the topic as well.

 

I just went and checked SlowTwitch, can't believe it hasn't melted down yet. Their servers must be using like 2.21gigawatts right now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty have been suspended without a positive drug test.

Off the top of my head.

Ullrich, Basso, Rasmussen, Scarponi, Mancebo, Valverde, Sevilla, Jaksche

 

You don't have to test positive to be suspended, there are 8 basic rules to the code, where intention, import, distribution, possession, avoiding tests, where abouts etc. all come into play that can give you an equivalent result to positive test.

 

Well, let's deal with the list that Nick77 provided as that was the one that I quoted.

 

Ullrich failed a test and confessed (amphetamines)

Basso confessed

Vino failed a test

Virenque confessed to EPO (saying during the hearing that as a young man he "soon realised that I didn't have the brain to be anything but a racing cyclist")

Zuelle confessed to EPO

Conti failed a test

Rasmussen missed a test (so a deemed test failure)

 

So - lots of confessions and failures but no-one in Nick777's list getting treated like Lance (ie no confession and no failure) which was the point I was making.

Edited by The Glycogen Lilo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ullrich failed a test and confessed

Basso confessed

Virenque confessed to EPO (saying during the hearing that as a young man he "soon realised that I didn't have the brain to be anything but a racing cyclist")

 

So - lots of confessions and failures but no-one in Nick777's list getting treated like Lance (ie no confession and no failure) which was the point I was making.

 

 

Err, not quite.

 

Ullrich confessed after he was banned, a full 5 years after Puerto. Basso only confessed to "intending to dope" i.e: stored the blood but never used it, Virenque denied for ages before finally coming clean. Importantly, ALL only confessed AFTER charges were brought and the evidence against them was presented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, let's deal with the list that Nick77 provided as that was the one that I quoted.

 

Ullrich failed a test and confessed (amphetamines)

Basso confessed

Vino failed a test

Virenque confessed to EPO (saying during the hearing that as a young man he "soon realised that I didn't have the brain to be anything but a racing cyclist")

Zuelle confessed to EPO

Conti failed a test

Rasmussen missed a test (so a deemed test failure)

 

So - lots of confessions and failures but no-one in Nick777's list getting treated like Lance (ie no confession and no failure) which was the point I was making.

 

 

I agree that Lance should do the honorable thing & confess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Ullrich, Rasmussen never failed a test nor confessed.

 

Ullrich did however acknowledge it after his suspension penalty was handed out.

The German, who retired in 2007, said on his website he accepted the ban "not because I agree with every point in the reasoning for the ruling but because I finally want to put an end to the issue."

 

 

And today, he added: "I confirm that I had contact with Fuentes. I know that this was a big mistake, which I regret very much.

"In retrospect I would act differently in some situations during my career."

 

Rasmussen still denies any wrong doing. However it is correct (3)missed whereabouts is equivalent to a positive test.

 

As my additional names of Scarponi, Mancebo, Valverde, Sevilla, Jaksche non tested positive and only confessed or at best accepted it after a penalty was handed out.

 

Even for most there is only a confession after being caught. There is a big difference to confessing without forced reason.

Armstrong is being treated just as those before him have done so for PED use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not as big as Twitter-gate

 

Twitter-gate had

304 replies

12,507 views

147 users viewed

guests viewed - unknown

 

Bang for bucks that topic would rate pretty high I think.

It's always the drama filled ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can anyone answe my question, if Lance just decided to race triathlon, who will physically stop him? Can they physically stop him? What authority do these guys have now and also prior to a case? Why is he not innocent until THEY prove him guilty?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you know this?

 

 

 

A grand jury is a type of jury that determines whether a criminal indictment will be issued. Currently, only the United States retains grand juries, although some other common lawjurisdictions formerly employed them, and most other jurisdictions employ some other type of preliminary hearing. In Ireland, they also functioned as local government authorities.

 

A grand jury is so named because it has a greater number of jurors than a trial jury (also known as a petit jury, from the French for small).

 

 

 

 

 

Before a formal criminal trial may take place, the prosecution must either file a Bill of Information, or have the defendant indicted by a Grand Jury.

 

 

[/left]

The defendant has no right to confront witnesses at the Grand Jury hearing and the standard of proof to indict for trial is by a preponderance of evidence, or "more likely than not".

 

 

[/left]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So based on the above information the standard of proof required is the same as any CIVIL matter. (more likely to have occurred then not)

 

So the evidence in which Hamilton / Landis and the other so called 8 men has been presented to a Grand Jury. (we are all in agreement that they have presented their versions and there are numerous GOOGLE searches that can substantiate this)

This Jury decided that based on the evidence at hand there was insufficient standard of proof to even establish a case that should be committed to trial.

So to lock someone up (ban them / discredit them / etc, etc) based on testimonies alone is unjust.

Remember that he has never tested positive ever.

Edited by Harts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can anyone answe my question, if Lance just decided to race triathlon, who will physically stop him? Can they physically stop him? What authority do these guys have now and also prior to a case? Why is he not innocent until THEY prove him guilty?

 

I don't know if he can just front up and race, I would suspect the race management would lose out there and end up in the Court of Arbitration for going against the WADA code rules of which they agree to race by.

However unaffiliated privately run races that are not sanctioned and under nobodies jurisdiction barring the race organiser he would be able to (as has been done before with others under suspension).

 

Armstrong has been suspendend pending the USADA hearing set to be done before Nov 2012.

They will have sufficient evidence to do so.

 

No different from any other person having a positive test announced, immediate suspension follows until their hearing.

Then a ban limit is applied or innocence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can anyone answe my question, if Lance just decided to race triathlon, who will physically stop him? Can they physically stop him? What authority do these guys have now and also prior to a case? Why is he not innocent until THEY prove him guilty?

 

 

Wouldn't WTC be in breach of the WADA code if they let him race?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So just with the list of TdF results that Trev posted, do people think that Cadel must dope also? He's never tested positive, but he's able to compete against those that have. A lot of people seem to accept (?) that you have to be "on something" to be able to compete at this level....

 

 

For the record, I don't believe Cadel has partaken in drugs. I remember him as a junior and I remember the Physiologists raving about his lab results and what a freak he was!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A grand jury is a type of jury that determines whether a criminal indictment will be issued. Currently, only the United States retains grand juries, although some other common lawjurisdictions formerly employed them, and most other jurisdictions employ some other type of preliminary hearing. In Ireland, they also functioned as local government authorities.

 

A grand jury is so named because it has a greater number of jurors than a trial jury (also known as a petit jury, from the French for small).

 

 

 

 

 

Before a formal criminal trial may take place, the prosecution must either file a Bill of Information, or have the defendant indicted by a Grand Jury.

 

 

[/left]

The defendant has no right to confront witnesses at the Grand Jury hearing and the standard of proof to indict for trial is by a preponderance of evidence, or "more likely than not".

 

 

[/left]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So based on the above information the standard of proof required is the same as any CIVIL matter. (more likely to have occurred then not)

 

So the evidence in which Hamilton / Landis and the other so called 8 men has been presented to a Grand Jury. (we are all in agreement that they have presented their versions and there are numerous GOOGLE searches that can substantiate this)

This Jury decided that based on the evidence at hand there was insufficient standard of proof to even establish a case that should be committed to trial.

So to lock someone up (ban them / discredit them / etc, etc) based on testimonies alone is unjust.

Remember that he has never tested positive ever.

 

 

 

STOP saying that because he never tested positive means anything. I means jack sh*t, Marion Jones for one.... Secondly, the dopers will always be one step ahead of the testers....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Ullrich, Rasmussen never failed a test nor confessed.

 

Ullrich did however acknowledge it after his suspension penalty was handed out.

 

 

Rasmussen still denies any wrong doing. However it is correct (3)missed whereabouts is equivalent to a positive test.

 

As my additional names of Scarponi, Mancebo, Valverde, Sevilla, Jaksche non tested positive and only confessed or at best accepted it after a penalty was handed out.

 

Even for most there is only a confession after being caught. There is a big difference to confessing without forced reason.

Armstrong is being treated just as those before him have done so for PED use.

 

 

1. He has not ever missed a drug test.

 

2. He has not ever failed a drug test.

 

3. He has never been found in possession of drugs.

 

Apart from what others say outline what evidence there is??

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So just with the list of TdF results that Trev posted, do people think that Cadel must dope also? He's never tested positive, but he's able to compete against those that have. A lot of people seem to accept (?) that you have to be "on something" to be able to compete at this level....

 

 

For the record, I don't believe Cadel has partaken in drugs. I remember him as a junior and I remember the Physiologists raving about his lab results and what a freak he was!!!

 

I would say you would have to be pretty naive to think he hasn't......Its not the fact that lance doped, its all the BS that has come along with it over the last decade or so.... Its time for LA to confess....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. He has not ever missed a drug test.

 

2. He has not ever failed a drug test.

 

3. He has never been found in possession of drugs.

 

Apart from what others say outline what evidence there is??

 

 

Do you ride a Trek? Wear Livestrong Armbands (one on each wrist)? have livestrong.com as your homepage?. Yes, yes i think you do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you were to strip him of his wins.... dont have a problem with that, but it certainly makes the whole results list look shit. admitted, busted dopers still have their results, ie 2nds 3rds etc... so why is it so important to make a complete mess of the last decades results? he didnt have any positive results apart from 1999 which he was cleared of, any an insinuation of suspicious results made by some swiss guy who also added, that the results didnt prove anything - yet somehow people think thats a positive???

the rest is all heresay, and "eye-witness" accounts... and what does that actually prove? he wasnt caught.

 

now why does the USADA's own press statement say :

USADA are clear that their investigation has yet to prove guilt and that all parties are considered innocent.

Our duty on behalf of clean athletes and those that value the integrity of sport is to fairly and thoroughly evaluate all the evidence available and when there is credible evidence of doping, take action under the established rules

 

so there's them saying he should be considered innocent until proven guilty, but we dont think he is, so he cant race?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would say you would have to be pretty naive to think he hasn't......Its not the fact that lance doped, its all the BS that has come along with it over the last decade or so.... Its time for LA to confess....

 

And whilst it might seem bizarre, I actually respect your response for its internal consistency.

 

You will treat Cadel and Lance the same way. That is, they are successful pro cyclists and therefore must be using illegal drugs.

 

I don't subscribe to the theory that all successful pro cyclists use illegal drugs. But if I did then I would want to treat Cadel and Lance the same way.

Edited by The Glycogen Lilo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the evidence in which Hamilton / Landis and the other so called 8 men has been presented to a Grand Jury. (we are all in agreement that they have presented their versions and there are numerous GOOGLE searches that can substantiate this)

This Jury decided that based on the evidence at hand there was insufficient standard of proof to even establish a case that should be committed to trial.

So to lock someone up (ban them / discredit them / etc, etc) based on testimonies alone is unjust.

Remember that he has never tested positive ever.

 

My understanding is, It wasn't the jury that decided there was no evidence.

According to reports it was US attorney André Birotte (with no explanation as to why).

 

It was also a criminal case and nothing to do with PED use during sporting events.

However some of the PED's in use/possession/purchased/trafficked are illegal substances in the USA. Which was part of the case.

 

So again, having that case dropped has little to do with USADA's doping investigation.

They received the drug related information from the FBI to finalise their case against Armstrong.

 

Even if as you say 'not enough evidence' which was for fraud etc. the PED's related stuff can and no doubt is more than enough evidence for a Sporting verdict for USADA / WADA / CAS. Which is not a criminal investigation.

 

It's really not hard to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a sporting fan, I feel really cheated.

 

I've long suspected that lance was a doper and his whole defence and whiter thn white image was a fraud.

 

That said I was so excited about his come back to triathlon, not just as a participant, but a real professional player. Ther only remaining questions in the "what would happen if LA did Ironman" hypothetical that had been done to death on here, on slowtitts and in pub conversations for the past decade is (1) how he'd run the back half of an Ironman marathon and (2) how would he go in Kona, racing in those conditions, at his best agint the best in their best form. Now we will never know the answers to those questions because of the (dubious) timing of the charges. For f-ks sake, they have had about a decade to pull their fingers out about the rumors and over two years since he specific allegations were made and they choose now to lay the charges and ban Armstrong from competition... If he is cleared the damage is done - his triathlon career is over. I, for one, would have much rather he was brought to justice either before Panama 70.3 in Februrary this year, or after Kona in October...

 

While some have guested that this is a 'victory' for clean athletes racing in Kona this year, I reckon that most professionals will feel cheated of their opportunity to race Lance their this year...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some people still beleive in Santa Clause, tooth fairy and the easter bunny

 

I'm cool with that.

 

So long as each of them submit to the same drug test (have you ever thought about just how much territory Santa, Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy cover in such a short time?) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you ride a Trek? Wear Livestrong Armbands (one on each wrist)? have livestrong.com as your homepage?. Yes, yes i think you do...

 

 

Nope Ride a Cervelo. Never have worn a livestrong band, men don't wear bangles and have not even been to livestrong.com.

 

If you can offer any rebuttal that anything I have stated is false then anti-up. Simply saying "stop that" adds nothing to a debate.

 

If He is guilty then run the matter fair and square and let the evidence fall where it will. Then that way it will be put to bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some people still beleive in Santa Clause, tooth fairy and the easter bunny

 

 

Well the Tooth Fairy visited my 5yr old daughter on Tuesday night!! :)

 

I'm going back to ignoring drug threads. Cycling is shit, nothing has changed and it's depressing to read about!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a sporting fan, I feel really cheated.

 

I've long suspected that lance was a doper and his whole defence and whiter thn white image was a fraud.

 

That said I was so excited about his come back to triathlon, not just as a participant, but a real professional player. Ther only remaining questions in the "what would happen if LA did Ironman" hypothetical that had been done to death on here, on slowtitts and in pub conversations for the past decade is (1) how he'd run the back half of an Ironman marathon and (2) how would he go in Kona, racing in those conditions, at his best agint the best in their best form. Now we will never know the answers to those questions because of the (dubious) timing of the charges. For f-ks sake, they have had about a decade to pull their fingers out about the rumors and over two years since he specific allegations were made and they choose now to lay the charges and ban Armstrong from competition... If he is cleared the damage is done - his triathlon career is over. I, for one, would have much rather he was brought to justice either before Panama 70.3 in Februrary this year, or after Kona in October...

 

 

Was waiting for you to post :).

 

And am not surprised that irrespective as to whether you or I privately believe Lance doped or not, we both have our suspicions about the conduct of the USADA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I agree that Lance should do the honorable thing & confess.

 

So should Ivan Milat, but those types never will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well the Tooth Fairy visited my 5yr old daughter on Tuesday night!! :)

 

Was he wearing a red bikini?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nope Ride a Cervelo. Never have worn a livestrong band, men don't wear bangles and have not even been to livestrong.com.

 

If you can offer any rebuttal that anything I have stated is false then anti-up. Simply saying "stop that" adds nothing to a debate.

 

If He is guilty then run the matter fair and square and let the evidence fall where it will. Then that way it will be put to bed.

 

Why do you think other people would swear under oath to say he did? especially after what happened to marion when she did...

Why would you associate with known "Doping doctors"

The list goes on, believe what you want...

Edited by johnnyboy212

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a sporting fan, I feel really cheated.

 

I've long suspected that lance was a doper and his whole defence and whiter thn white image was a fraud.

 

That said I was so excited about his come back to triathlon, not just as a participant, but a real professional player. Ther only remaining questions in the "what would happen if LA did Ironman" hypothetical that had been done to death on here, on slowtitts and in pub conversations for the past decade is (1) how he'd run the back half of an Ironman marathon and (2) how would he go in Kona, racing in those conditions, at his best agint the best in their best form. Now we will never know the answers to those questions because of the (dubious) timing of the charges. For f-ks sake, they have had about a decade to pull their fingers out about the rumors and over two years since he specific allegations were made and they choose now to lay the charges and ban Armstrong from competition... If he is cleared the damage is done - his triathlon career is over. I, for one, would have much rather he was brought to justice either before Panama 70.3 in Februrary this year, or after Kona in October...

 

While some have guested that this is a 'victory' for clean athletes racing in Kona this year, I reckon that most professionals will feel cheated of their opportunity to race Lance their this year...

 

 

What if it had come out down the track instead of now that he is still charging now (which if by accounts from USADA he was in 2009-2011 is highly possible) and had corrupted the results of this years Kona 2012 race.

 

Why would Triathlon want to introduce that type of legacy into the sport. Look at cycling in the EPO era (1992-2009). It is an absolute joke and basket case of a sport results wise.

 

I say triathlon just dodged a massive bullet (assuming he stays banned).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So just with the list of TdF results that Trev posted, do people think that Cadel must dope also? He's never tested positive, but he's able to compete against those that have. A lot of people seem to accept (?) that you have to be "on something" to be able to compete at this level....

 

Given he couldn't keep up with them, particularly in the final week when extra performance and recovery is important and he has never had an inkling of question over his head, he'd be as clean as you'll ever see I'd say.

 

He did though have one very broad stretched visit though.

In 2000 his then manager Tony Rominger sent him to Dr Ferrari for a consultation test for his switch from mountain biking to road racing.

He then went to Aldo Sassi for training/coaching. Sassi was known for his anti doping stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the evidence in which Hamilton / Landis and the other so called 8 men has been presented to a Grand Jury. (we are all in agreement that they have presented their versions and there are numerous GOOGLE searches that can substantiate this)

 

This Jury decided that based on the evidence at hand there was insufficient standard of proof to even establish a case that should be committed to trial.

 

 

OK, this is the part I was confused about. It was my understanding that the prosecutor just decided to drop the case, i.e: the jury had nothing to do with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a legitimate counterpoint steathrider, no doubt. My post was an entirely personal perspective...

 

Mind you we are kidding ourselves if we think our sport is cleaner than driven snow. Bridget McMahon, Nina Kraft... Not to mention some stupifyingly fantastic male ironman performances from euro trash types in the mid 1990s...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...