If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   France says it's filing new doping charges against Lance Armstrong and he may lose all 7 Tour de France titles. Just kidding, it's the United States   (espn.go.com) divider line 168
    More: Followup, Tour de France, United States, United States Anti-Doping Agency, Tour de France titles, EPO, triathlons, team physician, Johan Bruyneel  
•       •       •

1128 clicks; posted to Sports » on 14 Jun 2012 at 8:57 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



168 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-14 01:51:03 PM
What's more, the "HE PASSED EVERY TEST" refrain isn't even true.

He's officially passed every test given contemporaneously with the event. But he has not been perfect. Samples from Armstrong have tested positive. 1999 samples retested for EPO using newer, more sensitive tests came up positive when retested in the mid-2000's. Armstrong refused to allow additional tests on these or other samples, claiming the samples were stored improperly. Nothing about the storage of samples would have created additional detectable EPO in them.

There's also the issue of the UCI concealing positive tests at the 2001 Tour de Suisse, uncovered by 60 Minutes, where samples "suspicious" for EPO were quashed and a $125,000 donation to the UCI made by Armstrong. The USADA's case may actually cause the UCI to swing behind Armstrong over concerns that detailing such a doping deal would damage the UCI.

Also, and far more subjective, the other cyclists saying he doped include George Hincapie. If you don't know cycling, George Hincapie was Armstrong's assist in all 7 of his victories and is probably the biggest mensch and all-around good guy there is in the sport. Why in hell would he ever say he and Armstrong used EPO together if it wasn't true?
 
2012-06-14 01:57:01 PM

GregInIndy: The anti-USADA and pro-Armstrong craziness is alarmingly strong in this comments thread. I'd advise checking out Armstrong's wikipedia page for a good, short rundown of his history around doping in cycling. The man is essentially dirty as hell, but also very smart about it. He's probably had someone advising him on pharmacology and how to use without pinging on the tests available at any given time for a while now. He's also gotten very good about his use of the media and his charity work to maintain popular support whenever anti-doping agencies come at him.


Hiring a private pharmacologist to advise him on how best to dope while avoiding positive tests would almost certainly cost a lot of money. Beyond that, what kinds of masking agents did he use? Did other people have them available as well, or did he develop them exclusively on his own for his personal use? If other people used these masking agents, presumably his former teammates did as well, so why did they all test positive years ago when Armstrong didn't?
 
2012-06-14 02:01:06 PM

jekostas: bigbadideasinaction: justneal: i really want to belive he is clean, he is the most tested athlete in history and they have never found anything. this far past just seems like a witch hunt, are they going to go back and strip his world championship as well?

Here's the more pressing issue - if they can prove convincingly (i.e. not just with testimony in exchange for deals) that he did cheat for 7 titles despite being the most tested athlete ever, doesn't this pretty much put the final nail in the coffin for the whole validity of drug testing?

No, it means that the science of drug testing is continuously improving and that cheaters will eventually get caught.

It's not like people making designer drugs just go ahead and tell the people developing tests that they exist and what markers are left over, tests have to be designed from the ground up. Science isn't magic.


It also means the end of professional bike racing to any real degree. Who cares who wins today when they might not have actually won, and it might take 10 years to find out? Its why I quit watching baseball. Getting all excited about seeing your favorite players break records only to basically be told years later you were a fool for ever having enjoyed watching them makes it all seem pointless.
 
2012-06-14 02:04:03 PM

bassmonkeee: Serious Black: Optimus Primate: Sure, he passed the tests for "KNOWN" drugs just fine. Armstrong was at the top of the game, and had suppliers giving him sh*t that the testers didn't even know of. The reason they are making these charges is because they have PROOF that he cheated.

I'm going to set aside the issue of proof that multiple other people have said USADA does not actually have since I'm not intimately familiar with the details of the claim yet. Let's go ahead and assume that you're right, that Lance Armstrong was taking designer PEDs that could not be detected. Here's my question: was Lance Armstrong the only person taking these designer PEDs?

If he was, how the hell was he bankrolling the organization that developed these PEDs as a cyclist? Don't get me wrong, he was making a decent chunk of money in the late 90's and early 2000's, but it takes a LOT of money to develop and test a new drug, and I'm not sure even the highest paid athlete in the world could afford to bankroll a new drug for his exclusive use. Suffice it to say that I think this possibility is less likely than my ultra-conservative parents suddenly embracing Communism this morning.

If he wasn't, how the hell did all of his prior tests come back negative while former teammates of his left and right (Floyd Landis, Tyler Hamilton, Roberto Heras) all tested positive at various points in their career? Did he have a masking agent that nobody else had access to? Did they have access to Lance's designer drugs while on his team and shift to using less designer drugs like EPO and HGH afterward? Both of those are offshoots of the above possibility which is still unbelievably unlikely. Did he pay off drug testers, journalists, and what not to cover up his positive drug tests? Doing this over and over and over again would require a shiat-ton of money just like developing a designer drug exclusively for his use, and it ignores the fact that the French media despise Armstrong and were willing to do anything to bring him down. Or maybe that was all an act to cover up the giant conspiracy theory of him using a designer PED exclusively...

In short, the only way that Lance Armstrong could have possibly been clean all these years while tons of other riders all tested positive is if he had a shiat-ton of money which he didn't have and bankrolled all of that into building his legacy and covering up indiscretions rather than, you know, using it to find treatments and cures for cancer like he's done over the past 8 years through Livestrong.

You forgot to add, "All the while being able to hide any payments or bankrolling of the entire operation to the point that the Feds closed their two year investigation without proceeding."

You'd think the USADA would want Lance and his team of pharmacologists on their payroll. Just think--one dude was able to stay ahead of all the dope testing experts in the world, even retroactively for over 500 tests. He's like Lex Luthor, or something.


Yeah, I missed the whole cover-up of the finances issue initially. I'm pretty sure that would qualify as a felony. And yes, if he really did cover up all of those tests that blew as positive, the USADA should be hiring everyone associated with Lance to help them figure out how to test for drugs as a condition of them avoiding conviction.
 
2012-06-14 02:04:42 PM
So we're going to just keep accusing and accusing until they get the result they want? Wouldn't they like to have at least one winner from the Period When Americans Kind Of Cared About Cycling that didn't ultimately get busted?

I mean sure, bust a doper, but at this point it'd be like handing the WCW belt to David Arquette.

Let's see...

1996: Winner, Bjarne Riis, busted, asked to surrender title, though UCI still calls him the winner. Runner-up, Jan Ullrich, also under investigation. Third place is mountain leader Richard Virenque. Points leader, Erik Zabel, also busted.
1997: Jan Ullrich wins. Runner-up is Richard Virenque, who wins mountains. Zabel wins points.
1998: Virenque busted, ejected from Tour as part of Festina team. Marco Pantani wins. Ullrich 2nd. Zabel wins points.
1999: Pantani busted during Giro d'Italia. Armstrong win #1. Alex Zulle runner-up. Zabel wins points. Virenque wins mountains.
2000: Armstrong win #2. Ullrich 2nd. Zabel wins points.
2001: Armstrong win #3. Ullrich 2nd. Zabel wins points. Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano finishes 5th
2002: Saeco team has invitation withdrawn after their main rider, Gilberto Simoni, gets busted. Armstrong win #4. Joseba Beloki 2nd. Raimondas Rumsas 3rd, promptly busted. Gonzalez de Galdeano 5th.
2003: Rumsas busted again during Giro d'Italia. Gonzalez de Galdeano busted. Armstrong win #5. Ullrich 2nd. Virenque wins mountains.
2004: Race starts with 21 teams instead of 22, as intended 22nd team, Kelme, busted. Armstrong win #6. Andreas Kloden 2nd. Ullrich 4th. Virenque wins mountains. Also year of David Millar getting busted.
2005: Roberto Heras, three-time winner of Vuelta Espana, busted right as he's about to win #4. Armstrong win #7. Ivan Basso 2nd. Jan Ullrich 3rd. Francisco Mancebo 4th. Alexandre Vinokourov 5th. Michael Rasmussen wins mountains.
2006: Basso, Ullrich, Mancebo and Vinokourov all prevented from racing: Basso, Ullrich and Mancebo under investigation, Vinokourov couldn't race because so many of his teammates were under investigation that his team couldn't send enough people to have an eligible squad. Ullrich busted. Floyd Landis wins, but is busted, and win reawarded to Oscar Peirero. Kloden 2nd. Rasmussen wins mountains.
2007: Rasmussen busted. Vinokourov busted, entire Astana team (including Kloden) withdraws. Cofidis team withdraws after Cristian Moreni busted. Alberto Contador wins, people embrace him, desperate for a clean winner. Levi Leipheimer 3rd. Alessandro Petacchi busted in Giro d'Italia.
2008: Astana not invited, meaning Contador doesn't race, nor does Kloden or Leipheimer. Carlos Sastre wins, people don't know what to believe anymore. There is officially no third-place finisher, as Bernhard Kohl came in 3rd, and won mountains, but was busted and removed from the records. Saunier-Duval team exits after Ricardo Ricco busted.
2009: Contador wins. Andy Schleck 2nd. Armstrong 3rd. There is officially no mountain winner, because Franco Pellizetti won it but was busted and his name removed from the records. 11th place overall, Mikel Astarloza, busted, name removed from records.
2010: Contador originally wins. However, he is later busted, and win reawarded to Andy Schleck. Denis Menchov 2nd. Petacchi wins points.
2011: Cadel Evans wins. Andy Schleck 2nd. Frank Schleck 3rd. Ricco busted again.
2012: Contador suspended from previous busting, will not race.

Armstrong is basically all you've got left from this era, cycling people, unless you think you can get by on Carlos Sastre. And we still have to hang on and see what happens to Menchov, Evans and the Schlecks.
 
2012-06-14 02:04:50 PM
everyone in the cycling industry -riders, writers etc knows he was taking supplements and transfused blood after the pre-race test on the rides to the staring lines. when his teammates are eager to turn him in, you know lance has personality issues. he make millions on books and his foundation, so the cause was there, even if he loses those TDF titles.
 
2012-06-14 02:05:07 PM
Hiring a private pharmacologist to advise him on how best to dope while avoiding positive tests would almost certainly cost a lot of money.

Hiring a trained clinical pharmacist to advise on use and keep them quiet would cost what, around $500k/year? Lance would definitely have that and tons more.

why did they all test positive years ago when Armstrong didn't?

You assume Armstrong was helping his team win. In reality their jobs were to help him win. He's just been smarter and better at it. Not that there haven't apparently been mistakes, as with the 2001 Tour de Suisse where payoffs appear to have been necessary.
 
2012-06-14 02:12:45 PM
Also, I should note: that's more or less just the highest-profile bustings. I left out all the ones that didn't affect the podium, the jerseys, get entire teams kicked out or leave gaps in the classifications.
 
2012-06-14 02:14:12 PM
Gosling
great perspective, i think if lance is punished, their will be no winner
Andy Schlek is out of this year's TDF, i hope Valverde takes the yellow, but his TT is not that strong enough, i think- i will find out tomorrow!
/Francisco Mancebo Banesto wins the 2005, the teams' 8th yellow!
//wait, he was involved in the op-puerto!
 
2012-06-14 02:21:29 PM

fonebone77: jekostas: bigbadideasinaction: justneal: i really want to belive he is clean, he is the most tested athlete in history and they have never found anything. this far past just seems like a witch hunt, are they going to go back and strip his world championship as well?

Here's the more pressing issue - if they can prove convincingly (i.e. not just with testimony in exchange for deals) that he did cheat for 7 titles despite being the most tested athlete ever, doesn't this pretty much put the final nail in the coffin for the whole validity of drug testing?

No, it means that the science of drug testing is continuously improving and that cheaters will eventually get caught.

It's not like people making designer drugs just go ahead and tell the people developing tests that they exist and what markers are left over, tests have to be designed from the ground up. Science isn't magic.

It also means the end of professional bike racing to any real degree. Who cares who wins today when they might not have actually won, and it might take 10 years to find out? Its why I quit watching baseball. Getting all excited about seeing your favorite players break records only to basically be told years later you were a fool for ever having enjoyed watching them makes it all seem pointless.


Whelp, track and field isn't dead.

Yet.

See Jones, Marion
 
2012-06-14 02:22:25 PM

jekostas: dlp211: 7 years and more tests then any athlete in the history of sports and he came up clean. I am sorry, if in 7 years you can't spring a surprise test on the man and catch him cheating then you lost, he won, move on..

In a thread full of seriously idiotic comments, this one is by far the most idiotic.

Congratulations, I guess.


What is idiotic about it. Armstrong won the TDF 7 years straight. If you couldn't get his archived 1st year tests to test positive by the 7th, the testing agency failed, it lost at this game of cat and mouse that so many here are accusing Armstrong of.

Think he is transfusing blood between pre-race and the starting line, test him post race. Think he is microdosing EPO, figure out a way to test for that and don't let anyone know you developed the new test.

Tested more then any athlete in the history of sports.
Investigated multiple times by multiple agencies to include the DOJ.
Never found to be conclusively guilty.

It's time to let it go, let the sport have one winner.
 
2012-06-14 02:22:52 PM

Optimus Primate: Marcus Aurelius: Optimus Primate: He doped. They all doped. He was able to hide it very well, but he doped. You don't win 7 Tours in this day and age without enhancements.

His "legacy" is over. He should just relinquish the titles now and try to get in front of this thing by becoming a big anti-doper and do the whole "tearful repentance™" spiel on national TV (expect an interview on a major network show within 6 months)

What's going to really hurt him is losing the respect of all the fans. He has lied like a boss for so long... lied to the faces of his fawning, admiring public with balls-out fearlessness.

His organization "Live Strong" will fold it's doors within the year as well, and it's a shame - it's a good one.

Goodbye, Lance Armstrong. And welcome...welcome to the ranks of The Shamed. The long list of cheats and liars who end up like Jose Canseco, struggling to get 500 dollar speaking gigs or tiny appearance fees. He will die an old, bitter man, filled with regret.

HE PASSED ALL HIS DRUG TESTS.

Let me say that again: HE PASSED ALL HIS DRUG TESTS.

This "investigation" is a load of horse shiat.

Sure, he passed the tests for "KNOWN" drugs just fine. Armstrong was at the top of the game, and had suppliers giving him sh*t that the testers didn't even know of. The reason they are making these charges is because they have PROOF that he cheated.

Don't worry, you poor little Armstrong apologist, it will all come out. I have a friend who works for UCI in Paris...he can't (won't) give me specifics, but he tells me that the evidence is undeniable. They have been sitting on everything for months prepping for this day. He fully admits they have a hardon for deposing the American that beat them at their own game, but it's not like they had to make anything up. This is a done deal.


But is Ferris OK? I heard he passed out at 31 Flavors...
 
2012-06-14 02:28:44 PM

dlp211: jekostas: dlp211: 7 years and more tests then any athlete in the history of sports and he came up clean. I am sorry, if in 7 years you can't spring a surprise test on the man and catch him cheating then you lost, he won, move on..

In a thread full of seriously idiotic comments, this one is by far the most idiotic.

Congratulations, I guess.

What is idiotic about it. Armstrong won the TDF 7 years straight. If you couldn't get his archived 1st year tests to test positive by the 7th, the testing agency failed, it lost at this game of cat and mouse that so many here are accusing Armstrong of.

Think he is transfusing blood between pre-race and the starting line, test him post race. Think he is microdosing EPO, figure out a way to test for that and don't let anyone know you developed the new test.

Tested more then any athlete in the history of sports.
Investigated multiple times by multiple agencies to include the DOJ.
Never found to be conclusively guilty.

It's time to let it go, let the sport have one winner.


Yep, because science certainly doesn't evolve or improve or time, right? Tests can't get more sensitive, new methodology can't be found, better markers can't be discovered, right?

Nope, Lance Armstrong "won" because he didn't get caught while he was actively competing.

Except Armstrong is still actively competing (ex. Ironman) and governing bodies in the sports he's competing in would have a vested interest in having a known cheater and doper kept out of their events.

What plainly stupid argument you have.
 
2012-06-14 02:30:07 PM

GregInIndy: Hiring a private pharmacologist to advise him on how best to dope while avoiding positive tests would almost certainly cost a lot of money.

Hiring a trained clinical pharmacist to advise on use and keep them quiet would cost what, around $500k/year? Lance would definitely have that and tons more.



Having the money isn't the issue. Paying it out without leaving any kind of paper trail whatsoever is a bit more difficult.
 
2012-06-14 02:40:36 PM

IAmRight: On the one hand, I think he cheated like everyone else. I somehow doubt that losing a nut makes you a better athlete than you were.

But on the other hand, it's been 7 years, who the hell gives a sh*t? And probably most people who finished behind him were doping too, so you just vacate 7 consecutive years of titles?


Because he's a smug bastard.

/yeah, I'm petty, sowhat wannafightabouddit?
 
2012-06-14 02:54:01 PM
I'll believe it when they produce a failed drug test.
 
2012-06-14 03:00:01 PM

GregInIndy: What's more, the "HE PASSED EVERY TEST" refrain isn't even true.

He's officially passed every test given contemporaneously with the event. But he has not been perfect. Samples from Armstrong have tested positive. 1999 samples retested for EPO using newer, more sensitive tests came up positive when retested in the mid-2000's. Armstrong refused to allow additional tests on these or other samples, claiming the samples were stored improperly. Nothing about the storage of samples would have created additional detectable EPO in them.

There's also the issue of the UCI concealing positive tests at the 2001 Tour de Suisse, uncovered by 60 Minutes, where samples "suspicious" for EPO were quashed and a $125,000 donation to the UCI made by Armstrong. The USADA's case may actually cause the UCI to swing behind Armstrong over concerns that detailing such a doping deal would damage the UCI.

Also, and far more subjective, the other cyclists saying he doped include George Hincapie. If you don't know cycling, George Hincapie was Armstrong's assist in all 7 of his victories and is probably the biggest mensch and all-around good guy there is in the sport. Why in hell would he ever say he and Armstrong used EPO together if it wasn't true?


Armstrong tested positive for cortisone as well.
 
2012-06-14 03:03:16 PM

Gosling: So we're going to just keep accusing and accusing until they get the result they want? Wouldn't they like to have at least one winner from the Period When Americans Kind Of Cared About Cycling that didn't ultimately get busted?

I mean sure, bust a doper, but at this point it'd be like handing the WCW belt to David Arquette.

Let's see...

1996: Winner, Bjarne Riis, busted, asked to surrender title, though UCI still calls him the winner. Runner-up, Jan Ullrich, also under investigation. Third place is mountain leader Richard Virenque. Points leader, Erik Zabel, also busted.
1997: Jan Ullrich wins. Runner-up is Richard Virenque, who wins mountains. Zabel wins points.
1998: Virenque busted, ejected from Tour as part of Festina team. Marco Pantani wins. Ullrich 2nd. Zabel wins points.
1999: Pantani busted during Giro d'Italia. Armstrong win #1. Alex Zulle runner-up. Zabel wins points. Virenque wins mountains.
2000: Armstrong win #2. Ullrich 2nd. Zabel wins points.
2001: Armstrong win #3. Ullrich 2nd. Zabel wins points. Igor Gonzalez de Galdeano finishes 5th
2002: Saeco team has invitation withdrawn after their main rider, Gilberto Simoni, gets busted. Armstrong win #4. Joseba Beloki 2nd. Raimondas Rumsas 3rd, promptly busted. Gonzalez de Galdeano 5th.
2003: Rumsas busted again during Giro d'Italia. Gonzalez de Galdeano busted. Armstrong win #5. Ullrich 2nd. Virenque wins mountains.
2004: Race starts with 21 teams instead of 22, as intended 22nd team, Kelme, busted. Armstrong win #6. Andreas Kloden 2nd. Ullrich 4th. Virenque wins mountains. Also year of David Millar getting busted.
2005: Roberto Heras, three-time winner of Vuelta Espana, busted right as he's about to win #4. Armstrong win #7. Ivan Basso 2nd. Jan Ullrich 3rd. Francisco Mancebo 4th. Alexandre Vinokourov 5th. Michael Rasmussen wins mountains.
2006: Basso, Ullrich, Mancebo and Vinokourov all prevented from racing: Basso, Ullrich and Mancebo under investigation, Vinokourov couldn't race because so many of hi ...


Wasn't Escartin one of the few top finishers that was never implicated in any doping?
 
2012-06-14 03:12:18 PM

jekostas: Yep, because science certainly doesn't evolve or improve or time, right? Tests can't get more sensitive, new methodology can't be found, better markers can't be discovered, right?

Nope, Lance Armstrong "won" because he didn't get caught while he was actively competing.

Except Armstrong is still actively competing (ex. Ironman) and governing bodies in the sports he's competing in would have a vested interest in having a known cheater and doper kept out of their events.

What plainly stupid argument you have.


OK, so now not only do we have 7 years of testing, but now, what 15 or more. And not once has he tested conclusively positive, yet everyone else has including those testifying against him.

The DOJ investigated for 2 years and decided not to pursue a case. I am pretty sure they have access to the latest and greatest.

It is sad that he will probably be found guilty by USADA on circumstantial evidence by a bunch of guys who were bribed to testify against him and stripped of his titles.

It would be one thing if they caught him cleanly, on a test, during that time period, but they haven't.
 
2012-06-14 03:15:38 PM
dlp211 Smartest
Funniest
2012-06-14 02:22:25 PM


jekostas: dlp211: 7 years and more tests then any athlete in the history of sports and he came up clean. I am sorry, if in 7 years you can't spring a surprise test on the man and catch him cheating then you lost, he won, move on..

In a thread full of seriously idiotic comments, this one is by far the most idiotic.

Congratulations, I guess.

What is idiotic about it. Armstrong won the TDF 7 years straight. If you couldn't get his archived 1st year tests to test positive by the 7th, the testing agency failed, it lost at this game of cat and mouse that so many here are accusing Armstrong of.

Think he is transfusing blood between pre-race and the starting line, test him post race. Think he is microdosing EPO, figure out a way to test for that and don't let anyone know you developed the new test.

Tested more then any athlete in the history of sports.
Investigated multiple times by multiple agencies to include the DOJ.
Never found to be conclusively guilty.

It's time to let it go, let the sport have one winner.


I feel the same way about these rapists convicted years after the fact because some jealous police investgator with a vendetta kept trying new ways to discover DNA "evidence" against them.
If they got away with it for 12 years, give it up, dude! They won.
 
2012-06-14 03:20:01 PM

Mike_LowELL: ITT: People desperately want to believe their hero didn't cheat.


ITT: People who want to see someone burned at the stake without any hard evidence of wrongdoing.
 
2012-06-14 03:23:53 PM

jekostas: See Jones, Marion


Almost every single woman's track and field record is dirty.
 
2012-06-14 03:30:47 PM
I find it interesting that some people on this thread who seem to be supporting Lance are saying things like:

"These people just like seeing their names in the paper and are sore at Armstrong for being smarter than they are."

and

" I am sorry, if in 7 years you can't spring a surprise test on the man and catch him cheating then you lost, he won, move on."

and

"If you couldn't get his archived 1st year tests to test positive by the 7th, the testing agency failed, it lost at this game of cat and mouse that so many here are accusing Armstrong of."


To me, this defense of Armstrong sounds suspiciously like, "I know he cheated, but he did a hell of a good job of it. That's gotta count for something, right?!" These comments focus on Lance's victory in the pharmaceutical arms race, and not his Tour victories.
 
2012-06-14 03:33:37 PM

just_intonation: Mike_LowELL: ITT: People desperately want to believe their hero didn't cheat.

ITT: People who want to see someone burned at the stake without any hard evidence of wrongdoing.


Not a single executive from the major banks went to jail in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Therefore, nobody did anything wrong.
 
2012-06-14 03:35:12 PM
CNN claims the tests are from blood samples from 09-10, so not from back in his glory days.
 
2012-06-14 03:36:25 PM

doubled99: I feel the same way about these rapists convicted years after the fact because some jealous police investgator with a vendetta kept trying new ways to discover DNA "evidence" against them.
If they got away with it for 12 years, give it up, dude! They won.


Yes, because that happens all the time.

500 Blood tests, 0 positives. Everyone who was anyone else in the field has tested positive or admitted to it.

The USADA's evidence is a bunch of eyewitnesses, ask the Duke lacrosse team how they feel about eyewitnesses, and two tests from 2009 and 2010, which if he did in fact test positive for, 1) why is this the first we are hearing about it and 2) does not prove that he doped from 98-05.

Let's be clear about something, the USADA has no proof from archive testing that he doped during his TDF years and with everyone rolling over on everything going down in the sport they still have got nothing on him from those years in the form of a positive test.
 
2012-06-14 03:42:20 PM

Mike_LowELL: just_intonation: Mike_LowELL: ITT: People desperately want to believe their hero didn't cheat.

ITT: People who want to see someone burned at the stake without any hard evidence of wrongdoing.

Not a single executive from the major banks went to jail in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Therefore, nobody did anything wrong.


Maybe because the difference is that Armstrong has been investigated multiple times, by multiple agencies, many of which would have loved to see the man fall from grace and no evidence ever turned up vs the non-existant investigations that went into the major banks.
 
2012-06-14 03:47:55 PM

dlp211: doubled99: I feel the same way about these rapists convicted years after the fact because some jealous police investgator with a vendetta kept trying new ways to discover DNA "evidence" against them.
If they got away with it for 12 years, give it up, dude! They won.

Yes, because that happens all the time.

500 Blood tests, 0 positives. Everyone who was anyone else in the field has tested positive or admitted to it.

The USADA's evidence is a bunch of eyewitnesses, ask the Duke lacrosse team how they feel about eyewitnesses, and two tests from 2009 and 2010, which if he did in fact test positive for, 1) why is this the first we are hearing about it and 2) does not prove that he doped from 98-05.

Let's be clear about something, the USADA has no proof from archive testing that he doped during his TDF years and with everyone rolling over on everything going down in the sport they still have got nothing on him from those years in the form of a positive test.


dude. He's still not going to blow you. And the zero positives is blatantly false.
 
2012-06-14 03:48:32 PM
dlp211 Smartest
Funniest
2012-06-14 03:36:25 PM


doubled99: I feel the same way about these rapists convicted years after the fact because some jealous police investgator with a vendetta kept trying new ways to discover DNA "evidence" against them.
If they got away with it for 12 years, give it up, dude! They won.

Yes, because that happens all the time.

500 Blood tests, 0 positives. Everyone who was anyone else in the field has tested positive or admitted to it.

The USADA's evidence is a bunch of eyewitnesses, ask the Duke lacrosse team how they feel about eyewitnesses, and two tests from 2009 and 2010, which if he did in fact test positive for, 1) why is this the first we are hearing about it and 2) does not prove that he doped from 98-05.

Let's be clear about something, the USADA has no proof from archive testing that he doped during his TDF years and with everyone rolling over on everything going down in the sport they still have got nothing on him from those years in the form of a positive test




Dude, you're in major denial. Everyone associated with the sport knows it. Only fanboys remain.

Let's get his out there- since it is an indisputable fact that technology and methods exist that can cheat the tests and make you clean when you aren't ,(See: Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, etc.)
THEN ANY CLAIM OF PASSING A TEST IS MEANINGLESS

End of story.

OJ was found innocent in an actual criminal trial. Why do you still think he's guilty?
 
2012-06-14 03:49:59 PM

muwaryer: I find it interesting that some people on this thread who seem to be supporting Lance are saying things like:

"These people just like seeing their names in the paper and are sore at Armstrong for being smarter than they are."

and

" I am sorry, if in 7 years you can't spring a surprise test on the man and catch him cheating then you lost, he won, move on."

and

"If you couldn't get his archived 1st year tests to test positive by the 7th, the testing agency failed, it lost at this game of cat and mouse that so many here are accusing Armstrong of."


To me, this defense of Armstrong sounds suspiciously like, "I know he cheated, but he did a hell of a good job of it. That's gotta count for something, right?!" These comments focus on Lance's victory in the pharmaceutical arms race, and not his Tour victories.


Since two of those quotes are mine let me respond. I don't know if he cheated, what I do know is that this isn't the first time he has been investigated. I know that as of right now, there have been 0 positive tests against Armstrong. I know that the DOJ, with the help of a special prosecutor in PED's failed to turn enough evidence to pursue a trial.

The USADA claims that they have two tests, one from 09, and one from 10 in which they claim he tested positive, and if this turns out to be true, I have no qualms with stripping him of any title he won in those years, but testing positive in those years proves nothing about him during the years of 98-05.

At this conjecture, while still competitive, Armstrong is not turning any sport on its head, even if he is/was guilty, stop wasting time, energy, and money on him and focus on developing and combating new methods of doping and cleaning up all sports.
 
2012-06-14 03:58:31 PM

gregario: dude. He's still not going to blow you. And the zero positives is blatantly false.


Oh that's funny, you think I actually am a fan of Armstrong, or cycling, or that I want a blow job from him. HA, I have no desire to meet him, talk to him, or be involved with his organization in anyway.

And care to show me a test where he tested positive? Difficulty, 98-05 since these are the years he won the TDF.

As I already stated, test positive in 09, 10, strip him of any title in those years.

doubled99: Let's get his out there- since it is an indisputable fact that technology and methods exist that can cheat the tests and make you clean when you aren't ,(See: Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, etc.)
THEN ANY CLAIM OF PASSING A TEST IS MEANINGLESS

End of story.

OJ was found innocent in an actual criminal trial. Why do you still think he's guilty?


OJ wasn't found innocent, he was found not guilty because of a crappy investigation and a crappy prosecution. Second, BB and MJ were never tested at the frequency that Armstrong was and still is, and both their names were exposed in the BALCO investigation.

There is absolutely a chance that Armstrong cheated, but he has been investigated, tested and tested, and in the end, nothing conclusive. Stop wasting money on this.
 
2012-06-14 04:03:54 PM
Stop wasting money on this.



The one thing I agree with. Do whatever you want in the sport, but this does not merit tax dollars or govt. involvement.

By the way, we're about to put a baseball pitcher in jail for doing steroids. At his second trial. Another good use of tax dollars
 
2012-06-14 04:08:34 PM

dlp211: gregario: dude. He's still not going to blow you. And the zero positives is blatantly false.

Oh that's funny, you think I actually am a fan of Armstrong, or cycling, or that I want a blow job from him. HA, I have no desire to meet him, talk to him, or be involved with his organization in anyway.

And care to show me a test where he tested positive? Difficulty, 98-05 since these are the years he won the TDF.

As I already stated, test positive in 09, 10, strip him of any title in those years.

doubled99: Let's get his out there- since it is an indisputable fact that technology and methods exist that can cheat the tests and make you clean when you aren't ,(See: Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, etc.)
THEN ANY CLAIM OF PASSING A TEST IS MEANINGLESS

End of story.

OJ was found innocent in an actual criminal trial. Why do you still think he's guilty?

OJ wasn't found innocent, he was found not guilty because of a crappy investigation and a crappy prosecution. Second, BB and MJ were never tested at the frequency that Armstrong was and still is, and both their names were exposed in the BALCO investigation.

There is absolutely a chance that Armstrong cheated, but he has been investigated, tested and tested, and in the end, nothing conclusive. Stop wasting money on this.


1999 Tour, positive for cortisone. Later cleared after providing a doctor's note after the fact, which was irregular. One example. I can see that no one is going to change your mind so I'll stop trying.
 
2012-06-14 04:14:53 PM

IAmRight: On the one hand, I think he cheated like everyone else. I somehow doubt that losing a nut makes you a better athlete than you were.

But on the other hand, it's been 7 years, who the hell gives a sh*t? And probably most people who finished behind him were doping too, so you just vacate 7 consecutive years of titles?


25 years racing professionally, no spike in performance, ever. Not even a slight one. Unlike every other doper in history, where the spikes are extremely conspicuous.

If he's guilty, it's an absolutely bizarre and inexplicable career result.
 
2012-06-14 04:19:07 PM

gregario: dlp211: gregario: dude. He's still not going to blow you. And the zero positives is blatantly false.

Oh that's funny, you think I actually am a fan of Armstrong, or cycling, or that I want a blow job from him. HA, I have no desire to meet him, talk to him, or be involved with his organization in anyway.

And care to show me a test where he tested positive? Difficulty, 98-05 since these are the years he won the TDF.

As I already stated, test positive in 09, 10, strip him of any title in those years.

doubled99: Let's get his out there- since it is an indisputable fact that technology and methods exist that can cheat the tests and make you clean when you aren't ,(See: Barry Bonds, Marion Jones, etc.)
THEN ANY CLAIM OF PASSING A TEST IS MEANINGLESS

End of story.

OJ was found innocent in an actual criminal trial. Why do you still think he's guilty?

OJ wasn't found innocent, he was found not guilty because of a crappy investigation and a crappy prosecution. Second, BB and MJ were never tested at the frequency that Armstrong was and still is, and both their names were exposed in the BALCO investigation.

There is absolutely a chance that Armstrong cheated, but he has been investigated, tested and tested, and in the end, nothing conclusive. Stop wasting money on this.

1999 Tour, positive for cortisone. Later cleared after providing a doctor's note after the fact, which was irregular. One example. I can see that no one is going to change your mind so I'll stop trying.


Positive for cortisone and under the flag amount....so bfd?
 
2012-06-14 04:21:07 PM
ISO15693 Smartest
Funniest
2012-06-14 04:14:53 PM


IAmRight: On the one hand, I think he cheated like everyone else. I somehow doubt that losing a nut makes you a better athlete than you were.

But on the other hand, it's been 7 years, who the hell gives a sh*t? And probably most people who finished behind him were doping too, so you just vacate 7 consecutive years of titles?

25 years racing professionally, no spike in performance, ever. Not even a slight one. Unlike every other doper in history, where the spikes are extremely conspicuous.



Incorrect. See Ramirez, Manny for one. Easy if you've always been on something.



If he's guilty, it's an absolutely bizarre and inexplicable career result.

Not at all. Marion Jones only screwed up once, and it took her a dozen years.
 
2012-06-14 04:26:29 PM

gregario: 1999 Tour, positive for cortisone. Later cleared after providing a doctor's note after the fact, which was irregular. One example. I can see that no one is going to change your mind so I'll stop trying.


Congratulations, you found a test that he was cleared of. And you are right, you aren't going to change my mind because you have no evidence that he doped. If every one of his archived tests comes back positive for EPO, that is a different story, but as of right now, that hasn't happened and that isn't the evidence that the USADA has against him.
 
2012-06-14 04:29:21 PM

dlp211: doubled99: I feel the same way about these rapists convicted years after the fact because some jealous police investgator with a vendetta kept trying new ways to discover DNA "evidence" against them.
If they got away with it for 12 years, give it up, dude! They won.

Yes, because that happens all the time.

500 Blood tests, 0 positives. Everyone who was anyone else in the field has tested positive or admitted to it.

The USADA's evidence is a bunch of eyewitnesses, ask the Duke lacrosse team how they feel about eyewitnesses, and two tests from 2009 and 2010, which if he did in fact test positive for, 1) why is this the first we are hearing about it and 2) does not prove that he doped from 98-05.

Let's be clear about something, the USADA has no proof from archive testing that he doped during his TDF years and with everyone rolling over on everything going down in the sport they still have got nothing on him from those years in the form of a positive test.


Well, there was that positive EPO test that suspiciously disappeared after Armstrong donated $125,000 to UCI in 2001.

But hey, keep ragging on that argument. Gives you something to hold on to.
 
2012-06-14 04:29:36 PM

expobill: Andy Schlek is out of this year's TDF


F*ck. Didn't know that.
 
2012-06-14 04:37:15 PM
Did Armstrong dope? Anybody who has paid any attention to cycling is certain he did but he never got caught and now it's time to leave it in the past and move on. You can pick at a scab forever or you can let things start to heal. There needs to be some sort of statute of limitations on how long WADA USADA and the like have before sanctioning bodies say 'Ok the results are official.' To continue spending taxpayer money on this is asinine.
 
2012-06-14 04:45:39 PM

jekostas: Well, there was that positive EPO test that suspiciously disappeared after Armstrong donated $125,000 to UCI in 2001.

But hey, keep ragging on that argument. Gives you something to hold on to.


So speculation?

So we have a cortisone test that wasn't even enough to set off the flag and had a doctors note, and third party accusations of a cover up. And I'm the one holding on to something?
 
2012-06-14 04:47:24 PM
The actual USADA complaint letter. Can't link directly to it http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613 .pdf
 
2012-06-14 04:57:28 PM
Also Chris Horner may or may not be in the TdF. He's not listed but with Andy out that opens up a slot.
 
kab
2012-06-14 04:59:04 PM

jekostas: Yep, because science certainly doesn't evolve or improve or time, right? Tests can't get more sensitive, new methodology can't be found, better markers can't be discovered, right?

Nope, Lance Armstrong "won" because he didn't get caught while he was actively competing.

Except Armstrong is still actively competing (ex. Ironman) and governing bodies in the sports he's competing in would have a vested interest in having a known cheater and doper kept out of their events.

What plainly stupid argument you have.


So he can be tested 'now' for his upcoming events. At what point do you draw the line? Should the victories of pretty much every multi-year winner be yanked, simply because drug testing wasn't very advanced when folks like Merckx, Induran and Hinault were winning it?

Like I said earlier. just drop the drug testing altogether, and ask other riders if they saw anything. This is sure to catch all cheaters.
 
2012-06-14 05:08:18 PM
I think I would be more disappointed if his legacy is derailed because it was proven he doped IN FRONT of multiple witnesses. It makes no sense that he would. He was smart enough to take drugs that would not show up on tests, but too dumb to dope in front of multiple witnesses. Some of these witnesses are domestiques who probably harbor some resentment or jealousy. They certainly didn't get any of the fame or dollars Lance did. There's motive to see him fall. If you're gonna cheat in the Tour de France, not once but 7 times, that's like killing someone: you don't want any witnesses to say you did it.

In the end, I still think they're gonna need a positive drug test in order to strip him of any titles. Jeez, the last Tour he did just 2 years ago, YOU KNOW they were going over his samples every which way, and nothing. He still finished 3rd overall.

With that said, he doped.
 
2012-06-14 05:16:25 PM

relaxitsjustme: Also Chris Horner may or may not be in the TdF. He's not listed but with Andy out that opens up a slot.


An article I read said Horner is not listed on RadioShack's squad for this year, so Frank Schleck will be their main man.
 
2012-06-14 05:19:23 PM
An interesting (redlit) article about the history of the cream and the clear. It was just one chemist who knew what he was doing and also liked to lift weights.
 
2012-06-14 05:23:45 PM
Another thought...how come these things always come up just before the Tour? IIRC Landis opened up just before the 2010 Tour.
 
2012-06-14 05:26:21 PM
The last couple of years I was ABC. Anybody But Contador. This year looks like ABC again. Anybody But Cadel
 
2012-06-14 05:27:05 PM

dlp211: Mike_LowELL: just_intonation: Mike_LowELL: ITT: People desperately want to believe their hero didn't cheat.

ITT: People who want to see someone burned at the stake without any hard evidence of wrongdoing.

Not a single executive from the major banks went to jail in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Therefore, nobody did anything wrong.

Maybe because the difference is that Armstrong has been investigated multiple times, by multiple agencies, many of which would have loved to see the man fall from grace and no evidence ever turned up vs the non-existant investigations that went into the major banks.


You said this better than I would have. I was just going to call him an argumentative ass.

I also think I may have fed the troll, in hindsight.

/Don't feed the trolls
 
Displayed 50 of 168 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report