The ball is now in Armstrong's pants

bronyaur1: Anyone who still believes that Armstrong did not dope probably also believes in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and the Great Pumpkin.

But he beat a field that was also doping. He was the fastest in a sport where everyone is cheating so I don't see the problem here.

Additionally he passed all the tests at the time so I'm not sure why we are still beating this dead horse. 50 years from now are we going to make a rule that alcohol is banned and retro-actively kick Babe Ruth out of the Hall? Probably a terrible analogy but you know what I'm saying.

Marcus Aurelius: Based on what? "Testimony" from Floyd Landis? A deposition from the Easter Bunny?

The problem is that everyone in the sport doped. If you were a top cyclist you more than likely had some kind of doping going on. Cases like this are like Mob RICO cases.

Marcus Aurelius: Based on what? "Testimony" from Floyd Landis? A deposition from the Easter Bunny?

Just the fact a man in his mid 30s, with only 1 testicle after cancer treatment, that didn't dope, can beat guys in their early to late 20s who were doping who trained just as hard as he did, should pretty much prove it.

Marcus Aurelius: So what? He's passed all his drug tests, and that's all that really matters. There's nothing else to discuss.

So did Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds. Even pro bodybuilders pass all their drug tests; doesn't mean they are clean. Beating a piss test is really, really easy if you know how to do it.

bronyaur1: Anyone who still believes that Armstrong did not dope probably also believes in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and the Great Pumpkin.

He's developed a cult of personality over the last decade. No matter what the evidence presented, his believers will refuse to accept it.

Interestingly they often seem to have two arguments going at once:

1) There is no real proof that he doped. He passed all his tests, etc...

2) Everyone was doping.

Lots of people in the world can tell you that passing drug screens and not using drugs are two very different things.

Marcus Aurelius: The problem is that he passed all 600 drug tests. I'm not saying he didn't dope, I'm saying there's no evidence to strip him of his 7 titles. The USADA just has a hard-on, and they want to fark him with it.

The problem is that at the time there was widespread use of doping that passed the drug tests of the time. The knock on Armstrong was never that he didn't work hard it was that he went from a sprint cyclist in the sport to a guy who was crushing people left and right for the majority of a decade.

blogstrong?

I really wish Lance Armstrong would just go away. You farking doped, like most of your sport. You helped taint an era, let alone your legacy as the best cyclist ever.

Then you go around expecting people to lick your boots and come to your defense. Piss off. The ego on this man...

You're about as believable and as much of a bold-faced liar as Roger Clemens. Let it go and slink back into your holier-than-thou hole. You pissed away all the goodwill surviving cancer gave you by acting like a continual crybaby a*hole who can't admit the truth. It must be a conspiracy! Yeah, sure.

Thank you judge.

Lance Armstong is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

mc_madness: Lance Armstong is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

Who left is wife for a singer, then left her for some younger girl. A real man's man he is.

And I love the arguments here, from multiple farkers. There's no proof he doped BUT everybody in the sport was at the time.

Brilliant.

Marcus Aurelius: bdub77: Lance is obviously guilty. At the same time it's pretty sad because he was so big for the sport of cycling for a long time. But sh*t, everyone in cycling at the top is pretty much dirty, as has been proven again and again.

Based on what? "Testimony" from Floyd Landis? A deposition from the Easter Bunny?


This is not scientific....but when was the last time someone was publicly accused of doping and turned out to be completely false? Like, the person accused was 100% innocent.

I'm not talking about someone being found not guilty in court (e.g., clemens)..I mean the testing agency saying..."yeah, our bad. Mr.______ was completely innocent. The positive test results were the result of an over zealous lab tech who was enraged over__________....our bad. We're sorry, Mr. __________" Think Duke lacrosse team case. Where the DA publicly announced that the students were totally and completely innocent....and the case was a result of crazy DA (who has was disbarred for his actions).


It just hasn't happened...at all. Name someone, anyone....A-rod, manny ramirez, david ortiz, bonds, clemens, pettite, canseco, mcguire, (a bunch of NFL players)....I can't think of single case where allegation were made and the player was found 100% innocent.

And it's not like allegations are just randomly made as anyone and everyone. I've never heard anything about Derek Jeter, or Lebron James, or Peyton Manning.

So, when I hear from numerous credible sources like team members and team doctors saying that Armstrong doped...I simply go, "yeah, it makes sense that he doped."

S.A.S.Q.U.A.T.C.H.: And I love the arguments here, from multiple farkers. There's no proof he doped BUT everybody in the sport was at the time.

Brilliant.

The testimony of one witness, believed by the trier of fact, can constitute proof. There have been several witnesses who allege they have seen him dope. It will be up to the trier of fact to determine if they are believable.

ambassador_ahab: Link to PDF of the opinion

Farking awesome. The pimp hand of a federal judge...experience it, remember it.

No doubt, this is what the folks at Above the Law would call a "bench slap."

In fact, they probably already have. Let me check...

Indeed they have.

machoprogrammer: So did Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds. Even pro bodybuilders pass all their drug tests; doesn't mean they are clean. Beating a piss test is really, really easy if you know how to do it.

Beating 1 piss test can be done, but beating 500 tests that are both random, and taken during competition takes serious luck.

MLB did not start testing players until 2004, so Mark McGwire never took an official drug test. Sosa and Bonds were part of the twice per season random drug screening, so they may or may not have even taken a test. Even if they tested positive once, they would have only received anonymous treatment

So it is possible, if Sosa or Bonds were tested, they could have tested positive.

mc_madness: Lance Armstong is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

Ask anyone here in Austin.......BIGGEST DOUCHE!

theorellior: Krowdaddy Chixdiggit: Ask anyone here in Austin.......BIGGEST DOUCHE!

There are people from Austin who definitely think that (me), but remember, the LiveStrong bracelet is an important douchebag accessory for a reason. Douchebags revere Lance as their Pope. He feeds on their enabling adulation.

+1

xtragrind: But he beat a field that was also doping. He was the fastest in a sport where everyone is cheating so I don't see the problem here.

I have been at the head of the list lo these last few years vilifying Armstrong and calling him a cheater and a fraud, and all of a sudden I had that same epiphany, that they literally were all cheating, and in some sick way, he was the best of the cheaters, and therefore was probably the best regardless. I still have no problem with him being shamed, and in fact crave it.

The USADA had a president named Dick Pound. I think that says plenty about their organization.

// judge is being silly
// 80 pages isn't necessarily a long brief when asking for relief from harassment

If I had been born with the genetic gifts and competitive drive to be within range of the top 100 athletes in any sport, I guarantee you I'd dope as much as I could get away with. So would everyone else posting on this thread.

Luckily I was born with just enough brains and ambition to get by, and don't have to worry about being fired, fined or publicly flogged for using red bull (deadlines) and alcohol (meetings and pitches) to remain competitive in my field.

"This court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement, or vilification of defendants, by sifting through 80 mostly unnecessary pages in search of the few kernels of factual material relevant to his claims,"

I like this judge.

mc_madness: Lance Armstong is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

bronyaur1: Anyone who still believes that Armstrong did not dope probably also believes in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and the Great Pumpkin.

And JoePa being a good person.

God bless The Onion.

Their proof is one pissed off person saying they saw it. Meanwhile the scientific evidence says nay 500+ times.


Im so glad this is still continuing.

RsquaredW: // 80 pages isn't necessarily a long brief when asking for relief from harassment

Or, as the associate at the law firm put it, "we still bill by the hour, right?"

In all seriousness, though, it's a delicate balancing act -- absolutely get little digs against the defendant where you can, but you can't let them overwhelm the substance of the complaint. When you start getting into political remarks about the use of taxpayers' dollars, the "anti-athlete" rules, USADA's secret desire to get more positive tests to justify its existence, something like 15 pages on how Floyd Landis doesn't know anything, etc. etc., eventually the judge's eyes are going to glaze over.

Broktun: Beating 1 piss test can be done, but beating 500 tests that are both random, and taken during competition takes serious luck.

Not really. Drugs are always one step ahead of the testing. And you bet that pro-athletes get the best drugs possible.

Marcus Aurelius: So the logical thing to do is strip Lance of all his titles and give them to the next doper in line?

Or should they be awarded to the guy that came in last?

Never said that. I just said I assume he was doping (like everyone else). And I provided my logic for how I got there. It's not foolproof..but it's been pretty good so far.


Dr Dreidel: KFBR392: It just hasn't happened...at all. Name someone, anyone....A-rod, manny ramirez, david ortiz, bonds, clemens, pettite, canseco, mcguire, (a bunch of NFL players)....I can't think of single case where allegation were made and the player was found 100% innocent.

And it's not like allegations are just randomly made as anyone and everyone. I've never heard anything about Derek Jeter, or Lebron James, or Peyton Manning.

So, when I hear from numerous credible sources like team members and team doctors saying that Armstrong doped...I simply go, "yeah, it makes sense that he doped."

Wasn't there a guy on the Brewers this year who tested positive due to an anti-herpes drug he was taking?

Besides which are all the "questionable" positives, like the O's pitchers a few years ago that tested positive for "performance enhancing drugs", which turned out to be an OTC diet pill. I think even you'll agree that "doping" by taking an OTC pill is not nearly the same as blood doping or nandrolone or andro or winstrol.


First, the brewers guy (Ryan Bruan) wasn't found innocent...he merely had his suspension overturned. And it wasn't overturned becuase he was innocent, it was overturned becuase of a technicality in the testing procedure (namely that the tester didn't mail the sample to the lab fast enough).

As for all those questionable positive results..apples to oranges. You're talking about guys who randomly tested positive during random sampling and had some weird explanations...

I'm talking about a situation where someone (a doctor, a team member) flat out accuses someone of doping/cheating....and it turns out the accused was completely innocent. That hasn't happened. In every case so far, when serious accusations fly...they have been proven right time and and time again. So when serious accusations were brought about Armstrong, from people who had access to his daily routines, I believe them.

But the tour has major problems with doping...so I also assume all or nearly all of the serious rider are doping.

Moopy Mac: bronyaur1: Anyone who still believes that Armstrong did not dope probably also believes in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and the Great Pumpkin.

He's developed a cult of personality over the last decade. No matter what the evidence presented, his believers will refuse to accept it.

Interestingly they often seem to have two arguments going at once:

1) There is no real proof that he doped. He passed all his tests, etc...

2) Everyone was doping.

^THIS. As a cycling enthusiast and fan, I've been disappointed several times by guys I thought were clean but were doped to the gills. Example: Tyler Hamilton. Anyone who thinks Armstrong is clean is delusional. Hell, when he was diagnosed with cancer he admitted a whole laundry list of drugs in front of witnesses. That has since been covered up. There are many guys who have since retired that has said they doped during their careers and never got caught. One example is Eric Zabel. There's another reason I don't understand the Lance apologists, they seem to have no concern for other riders who have not doped and have been cheated or those who did not want to dope but did just to be able to compete.The fanboys also seem to ignore the fact that Armstrong is just a bully.

bronyaur1: Anyone who still believes that Armstrong did not dope probably also believes in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and the Great Pumpkin.

Personally, I don't care that he did, if he did. Cycling is the homeworld of doping and anyone who had a reasonable chance to beat Armstrong (Ulrich, etc.) was probably gaming the odds as well.