Jump to content

USADA charges Armstrong


Recommended Posts

Here's an article relating to the biological passport anomalies from 2010.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wada-voices-concerns-on-uci-biological-passport

 

From my understanding it's the UCI that has control over the values/findings and action them or pass the info on to appropriate anit-doping bodies.

WADA were concerned they are not receiving the data. 8 riders were suspect, 3 had cases bought against them and were suspended. No follow ups were done on the remaining 5 who remained anonymous.

I also read elsewhere that 2 of those remaining 5 were taken off the suspect list, not sure how right that is though.

 

Apparently (according to the Wall street Journal who original wrote of the story) 2 members of the biological committee were concerned that the UCI may be shielding riders.

 

Does this relate to the apparent anomaly of Armstrongs blood, was he even one of the 8? The timing of his blood anomaly covers it at least and worthy of a question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I dont for one minute think they ALL doped, but the reality is is that the ones who didnt dope dont rate a mention as they were unable to compete, and would be ralatively unknown. That is what is disp

This whole thread has left me feeling a bit flat. Not becuase of what Lance did, but the fact that there are soo many people for whom the fact that something is wrong/ illegal/ immoral/ unsportmanlike

I'm a Twisties man AP. Besides, if it was raining fannies I'd get hit in the eye by a cock. I'm the unluckiest tryhard alive!

Well there you go, I've not clicked on that before.

Which part are you calling rubbish though?

The (no tool for post count, being my error) post count o the number of views by people?

viewing and posting are two different things.

eg: I have now viewed this thread 146 times and you have viewed it 89 times

 

Just calling the bit about no easy stat for number of posts as rubbish :P

 

Yes, I have spent waaaay too much time reading this thread. Just like a car crash or train wreck , I cant look away!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like LA says..."“This is my body, and I can do whatever I want to it. I can push it; Study it; Tweak it; Listen to it. Everybody wants to know what I am on. What am I on? I am on my bike busting my ass six hours a day; What are YOU on?”

― Lance Armstrong

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an article relating to the biological passport anomalies from 2010.

http://www.cyclingne...ogical-passport

 

From my understanding it's the UCI that has control over the values/findings and action them or pass the info on to appropriate anit-doping bodies.

WADA were concerned they are not receiving the data. 8 riders were suspect, 3 had cases bought against them and were suspended. No follow ups were done on the remaining 5 who remained anonymous.

I also read elsewhere that 2 of those remaining 5 were taken off the suspect list, not sure how right that is though.

 

Apparently (according to the Wall street Journal who original wrote of the story) 2 members of the biological committee were concerned that the UCI may be shielding riders.

 

Does this relate to the apparent anomaly of Armstrongs blood, was he even one of the 8? The timing of his blood anomaly covers it at least and worthy of a question.

 

 

Trev, I went to that article and read it through twice. Couldn't find any mention of Armstrong so speculating that there's a link is about as relevant that suggesting Evans might be suspect. Hell, Elvis might've been on the list along with Eddie the Eagle and Eric the Eel!

 

Lance's last Tour d'France was 2005. Seven years have past. I throw out my tax records after seven years. If he doped, it should've been dealt with back then. What has made it so difficult that 7 years have past and they finally decide to act on 'evidence' now a month out from the Olympics and during Armstrongs qualification period for Kona?

 

In an Olympic year don't USADA have anything more important to do?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I ask the question since Armstrong has blood anomalies from the 2010 Tour (according to USADA's letter).

The UCI had 8 people listed from the same Tour. 3 were eventually suspended (Pellizotti, Valjavec & Prado). Was Armstrong one of the remaining 5 if he does have suspect blood values from the same race?

 

 

EDIT :- Correction,

I was wrong the UCI list of 8 wasn't from the Tour but in 2010 in general.

Those 3 riders listed weren't in the 2010 Tour (should have picked that one earlier).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Trev, I went to that article and read it through twice. Couldn't find any mention of Armstrong so speculating that there's a link is about as relevant that suggesting Evans might be suspect. Hell, Elvis might've been on the list along with Eddie the Eagle and Eric the Eel!

 

Lance's last Tour d'France was 2005. Seven years have past. I throw out my tax records after seven years. If he doped, it should've been dealt with back then. What has made it so difficult that 7 years have past and they finally decide to act on 'evidence' now a month out from the Olympics and during Armstrongs qualification period for Kona?

 

In an Olympic year don't USADA have anything more important to do?

 

 

2005..?

 

Did I dream that he rode in 2009/2010?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trev, I went to that article and read it through twice. Couldn't find any mention of Armstrong so speculating that there's a link is about as relevant that suggesting Evans might be suspect. Hell, Elvis might've been on the list along with Eddie the Eagle and Eric the Eel!

 

See what he actually said, not speculate...

Does this relate to the apparent anomaly of Armstrongs blood, was he even one of the 8? The timing of his blood anomaly covers it at least and worthy of a question.

 

.....it is a question given that Armstrong not Eric the Eel , Elvis or Evans are under investigation for that specifioc time.

 

Lance's last Tour d'France was 2005. Seven years have past.

 

Get your facts right if you want to disagree with someone who knows what he is posting and has a cycling background/interest...2010 is 2 yrs ago.

 

Who would you be listening to on this thread?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest samuelEBrown

 

Rubbish!

Go to the trichat page and click on the number of replies and up pops a list of everyone that posted and the number of posts.

 

The Glycogen Lilo 69 TrevS 62 Harts 56 Nick777 48 Donncha 40 johnnyboy212 32 MountainMan 29 Andrew #1 20 TUv5.0 18 samuelEBrown 16 BarryBevan 16 Stikman 16 nealo 13 FatPom 13 AP 12 hotdogs 12 The Customer 11 roxii 11 gluteus 11 mhvh 9 Rog 9 KAM 8 staelthrider 7 Coach@triathlon 7 Ex-Hasbeen 7 Formerly known as BOTP II 7 mack-daddy 6 Mr Tinman 6 hooleydooley 6 IronmanFoz 6 Tyno 6 sme1414 5 IronJimbo 5 niseko 5 yoyo 5 Jimmy C 5 Quack 4 Steno 4 TristanP 4 GlennC 4 goughy 4 louey 4 kal 3 Emo 3 hanging lake 3 Bored@work 3 Abby 3 C.C 3 DingoDave 3 DoctorM 3 Arpit 2 1q2w3e4r 2 Slowman 2 Rocket Salad 2 PeePee 2 TrevorMullins 2 Aidan 2 catvet 2 chris 2 GSP 2 slice 2 Will 2 duffs 2 dazaau 2 garf 2 tonic 2 Ronnie 2 Sticks 2 Clown Boy 2 jv911 1 BattleOn 1 ironpo 1 kamalarrowsmith 1 Catty 1 Clydesdale 1 symo 1 Roman 1 lawman 1 Guacamole 1 Merv 1 deadcat 1 downesy68 1 softy 1 guzzle 1 -H- 1 JGF 1 longshot 1 trinube 1 Pete 1 TheCam 1 AA7 1 Rob 1 smiffy 1 alchemy 1 Riddos 1 vo2max 1 bretto 1 lucky7 1 Parkside 1 Struggla 1

 

Yay, top ten!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I do understand this.

 

I'm referring to the idea that USADA seem to want to strip all his TDF titles off him - the last of the 7 titles was won in 2005.

 

 

I think the reason they want to do this has been spelled out many times..

 

 

I reckon it's nearly time to lock this thread - I can't see what else needs to be asked or answered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I ask the question since Armstrong has blood anomalies from the 2010 Tour (according to USADA's letter).

The UCI had 8 people listed from the same Tour. 3 were eventually suspended (Pellizotti, Valjavec & Prado). Was Armstrong one of the remaining 5 if he does have suspect blood values from the same race?

 

Correction,

I was wrong the list of 8 wasn't from the Tour but in 2010 in general.

Those 3 riders listed weren't in the 2010 Tour (should have picked that one earlier).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I reckon it's nearly time to lock this thread - I can't see what else needs to be asked or answered.

 

I am definitely with the Customer on this one - why lock the thread?

 

Unless Lance becomes a Trannie of course and then he can not only get the thread locked but get it removed if I recall correctly? :smile1:

Edited by The Glycogen Lilo
Link to post
Share on other sites
But you've gotta feel for the guy. What with chicks throwing themselves at him whilst he is trying to abstain from sex and stuff leading up to big races.........

 

http://www.cyclingne...d-championships

 

And do you see what sort of car he drives?

 

A Ferrari :smile1:

 

So when he was talking about going to see Ferrari maybe he was really talking about showing his tattoo to his car.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Armstrong had 10 days, until June 22, to file a written submission to that review board. If he had failed a drug test, he would have received the laboratory documentation of that failed test. But he did not, according to a letter the antidoping agency sent to him last week that listed the charges against him" todays New York Times

 

USADA admits that Lance has not failed a drug test.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/sports/cycling/us-anti-doping-agency-braces-for-legal-battle-in-lance-armstrong-case.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

 

Exactly the Argument I have been running in relation to the process. Outlines that USADA obtains the majority of its funding from the Government but chooses the procedure it wishes to follow in relations to sanctions imposed upon athletes.

 

Before this matter goes anywhere ARMSTRONG will obviously try to make sure the process is fair before any of the evidence is even considered or admitted into the trial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I like this. Exact same reasons why he happens to own a ranch on The Big Island. It's no fluke that he's probably ridden the Queen K more than any other athlete racing Kona. The guy made the Queen K his home. If he ever gets to race there and does well, it shouldn't be a surprise and accusing him of doping would be lame.

 

Another thing I forgot to mention about what a national coach said to me last night was in relation to Hincapie, Leipheimer, Vande Velde and David Zabriskie.

 

I assumed they had asked that they be taken out of the running for the Olympics because of some kind of cover-up or obligations to give evidence to USADA.

 

Coach had no doubt that these 4 athletes were making a statement in support of LA by a boycott from racing for the USA. An interesting perspective indeed!

 

 

did you watch the 98 tour? Riders had a boycott on one of the stages from recollection, but i'm not sure festina was being victimised.

 

One can speculate every which way about such things. And by golly this thread is living proof of that !

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm inclined to think that USADA would not even attempt action and a hearing if they only had shot gun stuff. I think they will have some substantial information/evidence that we don't know about.

 

 

 

faith in the effectiveness of govt agencies can be misplaced ..

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/18/sports/la-sp-clemens-trial-20120619

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Armstrong had 10 days, until June 22, to file a written submission to that review board. If he had failed a drug test, he would have received the laboratory documentation of that failed test. But he did not, according to a letter the antidoping agency sent to him last week that listed the charges against him" todays New York Times

 

USADA admits that Lance has not failed a drug test.

 

Interesting article you have quoted from (full copy below).

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/sports/cycling/us-anti-doping-agency-braces-for-legal-battle-in-lance-armstrong-case.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

 

For those who are into stats (and if the article is correct), approx 23% of cases referred to the Review Board (as LA's case has been) don't proceed past the Review Board stage due to lack of evidence.

 

But if the Review Board rules that there is enough evidence to proceed then the USADA has only lost twice out of 58 contested cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that jet fuel ain't cheap!

A serious question tho, how much longer do you think livestrong needs to raise cancer awareness? Has anyone in the western world not heard about it or know someone affected by it?

Does livestrong do cancer research now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, over in Italy Coni are squeezing Dr Ferrari and riders being linked.

Another 3 riders have been called in to Coni for questioning.

So that makes it 4 now, Pellizotti, Scarponi, Visconti & Bertagnolli.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that jet fuel ain't cheap!

A serious question tho, how much longer do you think livestrong needs to raise cancer awareness? Has anyone in the western world not heard about it or know someone affected by it?

Does livestrong do cancer research now?

 

 

Yeah I know what your saying but to be honest its irrelevant - Lance's lawyers will go in hard .

 

Damages will be multi millions .

 

Lets hope their case is solid

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As they should - it's a witch hunt :shy:

 

 

Interesting take, I was even inclined to think the same way. However in my mind there is absolutely no doubt LA took PEDs and would not have won much at all without them, certainly no TdFs.

 

But for a minute AP, assume all charges are correct and there was a systematic doping program that LA was one of the main instagators of - would you still say it's a witch hunt?

 

Or would you think that it is just USADA doing what it is supposed to do...i.e attempt to clean up sports and investigate and prosecute professional athletes who are using PEDs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Interesting take, I was even inclined to think the same way. However in my mind there is absolutely no doubt LA took PEDs and would not have won much at all without them, certainly no TdFs.

 

But for a minute AP, assume all charges are correct and there was a systematic doping program that LA was one of the main instagators of - would you still say it's a witch hunt?

 

Or would you think that it is just USADA doing what it is supposed to do...i.e attempt to clean up sports and investigate and prosecute professional athletes who are using PEDs?

 

why is there no doubt in your mind and what evidence have you actually seen? Noting the USADA admit in writing that he has not returned any positive tests. Noting the ball cream has been done to death and was subject to a reasonable explanation

Link to post
Share on other sites

why is there no doubt in your mind and what evidence have you actually seen? Noting the USADA admit in writing that he has not returned any positive tests. Noting the ball cream has been done to death and was subject to a reasonable explanation

 

 

If you believe that cycling is clean, then it's understandable that you would also believe that Lance is clean.

 

Given the established history of drug use in cycling during his career, IF his career was squeaky clean ( no rumours, no dodgy TUE, no dodgy doctors, nothing suspicious at all) and you believe that Lance was clean, then you're only mildly gullible.

 

However, with the history of drug use in cycling, PLUS all the varying degrees of evidence surrounding Lance's career in particular, if you genuinely believe that he never, ever took drugs then, frankly, you're delusional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

why is there no doubt in your mind and what evidence have you actually seen? Noting the USADA admit in writing that he has not returned any positive tests. Noting the ball cream has been done to death and was subject to a reasonable explanation

 

 

How ironic...

 

The agency, which started operations in 2000, was a result of a recommendation made by the United States Olympic Committee, which developed how the agency would work and what rules it would follow. The committee, its athletes advisory council — of which Armstrong’s agent, Bill Stapleton, was the chair — and the national governing bodies of the Olympic sports in the United States worked together to design and eventually approve the protocol the antidoping agency uses now.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/sports/cycling/us-anti-doping-agency-braces-for-legal-battle-in-lance-armstrong-case.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&ref=julietmacur

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you believe that cycling is clean, then it's understandable that you would also believe that Lance is clean.

 

Given the established history of drug use in cycling during his career, IF his career was squeaky clean ( no rumours, no dodgy TUE, no dodgy doctors, nothing suspicious at all) and you believe that Lance was clean, then you're only mildly gullible.

 

However, with the history of drug use in cycling, PLUS all the varying degrees of evidence surrounding Lance's career in particular, if you genuinely believe that he never, ever took drugs then, frankly, you're delusional.

 

I am not believeing anything other than the USADA sent a letter that says Lance has not tested positive to drugs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

why is there no doubt in your mind and what evidence have you actually seen?

 

Because I have read and listened to alot of testimony from those who were in close contact with Lance. Inlcuding reading From Lance to Landis by David Walsh, and the interviews with David Walsh, Betsy Andrieu and others I posted earlier. Also the physiological impossibility of a non-doper beating dopers in the pre-biological passport period.

 

What's more - the information above has outlined repeated aggressive cover-up tactics that went close to ruining people's lives, and points to him being one of the driving forces behind the doping not just being dragged along for the ride. Not to mention his crappy charity that was deliberately created to deflect attention from his less than savoury deeds and then to use shed-loads of the money for himself.

 

Combine that knowledge with some common sense and, also - the most important bit - not having read "It's Not About the Bike". (I'd wager that most of his fan-boys are the opposite to me - only read his autobiography and never exposed themselves to other details about him). Given the information I've taken in I doubt anyone with normal reasoning power could be exposed to that and not make the conclusion that he was not only a doper but a very nasty human being.

 

And I won't be changing my opinion regardless of what the evidence USADA bring to the table and whether they can prove to the letter of the law that he was injecting EPO not B vitamins, as he will no doubt claim.

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

×
×
  • Create New...