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.

(Sports Illustrated) NewsFlash Lance Armstrong's time in France rubs off as he surrenders to U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, loses Tour titles   (sportsillustrated.cnn.com) divider line 524
    More: NewsFlash, United States Anti-Doping Agency, United States, International Cycling Union, Floyd Landis, U.S. Agent, Tour de France, blood doping, EPO  
•       •       •

4116 clicks; posted to Sports » on 23 Aug 2012 at 11:10 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

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

Archived thread
 
2012-08-23 10:33:15 PM
I prefer this headline so far...
 
2012-08-23 10:40:22 PM
At least he had the ball to stick it out this long subby.
 
2012-08-23 11:03:00 PM
Well that sucks
 
2012-08-23 11:11:05 PM
Good. Cheating bastard.
 
2012-08-23 11:11:11 PM
I guess he was on V after all.
 
2012-08-23 11:11:27 PM
Man up, Lance. Man the f*ck up and admit it. You know it, we know it. You're going to lose the titles anyway, if you want to be petty and not say anything out of spite, that's your choice, but you're going to be a title-less nobody and we all know why.
 
2012-08-23 11:11:40 PM
So he doesn't admit guilt, but just stops fighting the witch hunt. I'm OK with that.
 
2012-08-23 11:12:04 PM
Sports talk radio is going to bust a nut over this news.
 
2012-08-23 11:12:27 PM
♫ You say black I say white
You say bark I say bite
You say clenbuterol I say hey man.. ♫
 
2012-08-23 11:12:44 PM
That is some imbalanced, asymmetrical reasoning on his part.
 
2012-08-23 11:13:25 PM

JosephFinn: So he doesn't admit guilt, but just stops fighting the witch hunt. I'm OK with that.


Yes, that's it. He just got tired. A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

That's the ticket.
 
2012-08-23 11:13:34 PM
Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.
 
2012-08-23 11:14:19 PM
Just another liar....
 
2012-08-23 11:14:43 PM
France is gonna be partying like its Bastille Day when it wakes up tomorrow morning.
 
2012-08-23 11:15:16 PM
The ole' "I know I cheated, they got the proof, so instead of fighting it I'm going to take all the money I made from selling armbands to morons and head off into history." Move.
 
2012-08-23 11:15:43 PM

4NSpy: Sports talk radio is going to bust a nut over this news.


Here and PTI is getting preempted by the Little League World Series >
 
2012-08-23 11:15:48 PM
Day what you want, but what this is is a very calculated strategy on the pay of a man who doped, thought he got away with it, and very much does not want you to see a parade of experts testify about his old samples. But most of all he doesn't want you to see George Hincapie on the stand. Because he knows George will tell the truth and you'll believe him.
 
2012-08-23 11:15:59 PM
Cool story, bro: Not to get too political, but earlier today I had a long discussion with someone in which I, at length, compared Mitt Romney's tax evasion to Lance Armstrong's PED use. Guess I'm not going to be able to re-use that particular simile as many times as I'd hoped.
 
2012-08-23 11:16:15 PM
api.ning.com
 
2012-08-23 11:16:40 PM
So . . . he's quitting?
 
2012-08-23 11:16:58 PM
"The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place."

Interesting way of phrasing it. Sounds like someone who knowingly exploited a loophole.
 
2012-08-23 11:16:59 PM
all your heroes are cheaters
 
2012-08-23 11:17:04 PM
Man...why didn't I think to enter the Tour de France 10 years ago?

I could probably have gotten first place once they disqualified all the dopers.
 
2012-08-23 11:17:05 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.


Yeah but no one will remember that. They'll remember him as the guy who was disgraced and thrown out of his sport.
 
2012-08-23 11:17:08 PM
And cycling goes back to being a sport no one in the U.S. cares about... But actively now.
 
2012-08-23 11:17:11 PM
This is gonna absolutely wreck the Livestrong band futures market.
 
2012-08-23 11:18:01 PM

JohnBigBootay: Because he knows George will tell the truth and you'll believe him.


Absolutely. Hincapie would've crucified him from the stand.

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.


You're entire house is wallpapered with Livestrong armbands, isn't it?
 
2012-08-23 11:18:05 PM

cameroncrazy1984: A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.


You don't win the Tour de France without help.
 
2012-08-23 11:18:08 PM

JohnBigBootay: Day what you want, but what this is is a very calculated strategy on the pay of a man who doped, thought he got away with it, and very much does not want you to see a parade of experts testify about his old samples. But most of all he doesn't want you to see George Hincapie on the stand. Because he knows George will tell the truth and you'll believe him.


If you assume I care.

I consider doping to be acceptable. I'd much rather watch Mark McGuire pop 'em into the river than see clever dicks hit singles to let their guy on third get a run in.
 
2012-08-23 11:18:18 PM
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- U.S. Anti-Doping Agency chief executive Travis Tygart says the agency will ban Lance Armstrong from cycling for life and strip him of his seven Tour de France titles for doping.

So if I see him riding a bike on the side of the road I can make a citizens arrest?
 
2012-08-23 11:18:21 PM
Great, now what am I going to do with a storage locker full of yellow "Livestrong" bracelets?
 
2012-08-23 11:18:33 PM

whatshisname: cameroncrazy1984: A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

You don't win the Tour de France without help.


Alright, if you want to be pedantic: "without drugs"
 
2012-08-23 11:18:46 PM
How was he the only one who wasn't caught? He was the most-tested athlete in the world for a while. Why are they suddenly railroading him with witness testimony instead of blood? Don't they hold onto samples like the Olympics' anti-dopers? If they have witnesses that can say what exactly he was using, then they should be able to test for exactly that.
 
2012-08-23 11:18:58 PM
Is there actual evidence or just allegations? I haven't paid a lot of attention to this...
 
2012-08-23 11:20:09 PM
He's a pro cyclist, who had testicular cancer that spread to his brain.

He wasn't cheating. He was leveling the field.
 
2012-08-23 11:20:20 PM
His excuse is such horse shiat for not fighting the findings. He put his family on all sorts of hold whenever he trained. It was a sacrifice he and his family were willing to make. His training was literally hell on wheels. Now he just has to use some of his money to fight for what he claims is legitimately and rightly his. And he quits. GUILTY.

crockettlives.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-08-23 11:21:01 PM
Read his first book and loved it. Wanted to believe him, lost that feeling maybe 5 years ago.
 
2012-08-23 11:21:50 PM
Which family is this? The wife and kids he left when became famous? The ex wife who was a celebrity? Or the current wife and kids?
 
2012-08-23 11:22:34 PM
I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness. This reeks of "everyone thinks he's guilty so he must be guilty" which is fine in the court of public opinion but not in anything that actually matters. They keep on investigating, investigating and investigating until finally anyone would have enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not say he absolutely didn't dope but there has been no conclusive evidence released and you know damn well that the French would have been all over the media if there was any clear evidence.
 
2012-08-23 11:22:43 PM
Well, if he didn't win all those races through cheating, then I guess he wouldn't have anything to regret for the rest of his life. I'm sure that decision won't haunt him forever.
 
2012-08-23 11:23:18 PM
Oh, and I know everyone else doped. I just can't stand the arrogance of the man steadfastly standing there and trying to have us believe he was clean. All the while one after another of the teammates who pulled his ass up the mountain were found to be dirty. What I STILL find shocking is that so many diehard fans would believe this control freak egomaniac micromanager could have THAT many dopers in his camp but somehow he not know. Please, give it up already. You're hero is a juicer. I freely admit he was the best at that one race as they were all doing it. Just don't try to tell me he was clean the whole time.
 
2012-08-23 11:23:18 PM
So they have no positive drug tests, they aren't in charge of the Tour, but they want to strip him of the titles. Uh ok.
 
2012-08-23 11:23:20 PM

Confabulat: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.

Yeah but no one will remember that. They'll remember him as the guy who was disgraced and thrown out of his sport.


Indeed - just like no one outside of San Francisco considers Barry Bonds the Home Run King.
 
2012-08-23 11:24:11 PM
He always said over and over that he didn't dope, he did it clean. 
 
It breaks my heart, but if he cheated to win it, he deserves to be stripped of those titles.
 
2012-08-23 11:24:59 PM
Just curious, how can the USADA strip him of his Tour De France wins? I didn't know they governored over that race...
 
2012-08-23 11:25:06 PM
harrumpher.com
 
2012-08-23 11:25:36 PM

CommieTaoist: I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness. This reeks of "everyone thinks he's guilty so he must be guilty" which is fine in the court of public opinion but not in anything that actually matters. They keep on investigating, investigating and investigating until finally anyone would have enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not say he absolutely didn't dope but there has been no conclusive evidence released and you know damn well that the French would have been all over the media if there was any clear evidence.


Members of Armstrong's cycling team were set to testify against him including George Hincapie, who was an assist in all 7 of Armstrong's tour wins . It's not just Landis.
 
2012-08-23 11:25:57 PM

mjones73: I didn't know they governored over that race...


The UCI does, and they never came up with any bad drug tests on him.
 
2012-08-23 11:26:13 PM
Who cares about this Lance Armstrong guy? He never even won the Tour de France.
 
2012-08-23 11:26:27 PM

cameroncrazy1984: JosephFinn: So he doesn't admit guilt, but just stops fighting the witch hunt. I'm OK with that.

Yes, that's it. He just got tired. A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

That's the ticket.


Without having the evidence, and with all the uncertainty that surrounds each of these cases, I'm not even going to venture an opinion on whether or not he's guilty or innocent of doping.

But that said, I can buy this course of action as legit. I don't know if I do quite yet since I just heard about it, but it's at least plausible to me.

The accusations are never going to stop. He last won the Tour what, seven years ago and he first faced allegations in 1999 and he's still having to answer for it? I can see where a guy would finally be like "Fark it."

I'm not defending him....as I said I don't know all the details regarding all the allegations. But I can see a guy just tiring of pouring piles of money and time down a hole with no end in sight.
 
2012-08-23 11:26:31 PM
He rode a bike fast.

cache.jezebel.com
 
2012-08-23 11:26:34 PM

carmi990: His training was literally hell on wheels.


I literally died when I read that...
 
2012-08-23 11:26:42 PM
I personally think all doping should be allowed. If you devote your life to training that hard, get to your full potential and then discover you could EVEN BE BETTER with just a little help from a syringe or two, the temptation must be worse than crack. But then all our baseball players wouldn't have necks anymore, I guess.
 
2012-08-23 11:27:26 PM
Has anyone seen Robin Williams? He might be on suicide watch.
 
2012-08-23 11:27:40 PM
I feel better about my decision to make Stephen Colbert's "WristStrong" bracelets my bracelet of choice.
 
2012-08-23 11:28:02 PM

CommieTaoist: I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness..


no, they have a lot more witnesses than just Landis. Tyler Hamilton gave a scathing interview on 60 minutes. They also have several other witnesses who came forward as well.
 
2012-08-23 11:28:09 PM
What evidence do they have to prove he doped?
 
2012-08-23 11:29:18 PM
Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!
 
2012-08-23 11:29:25 PM

I_Hate_Iowa: How was he the only one who wasn't caught? He was the most-tested athlete in the world for a while. Why are they suddenly railroading him with witness testimony instead of blood? Don't they hold onto samples like the Olympics' anti-dopers? If they have witnesses that can say what exactly he was using, then they should be able to test for exactly that.


I assume you know that all those confirmed dopers passed many test themselves, right? And they have lance's old samples. Lance is trying to make sure you don't hear the expert testimony that those samples are consistent with doing. But mostly I think, and this is conjecture, he doesn't want you to hear Georges testimony. He's thrown everyone else under the bus already but George won't lie and lance knows it.
 
2012-08-23 11:30:02 PM

Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!


Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!
 
2012-08-23 11:31:19 PM
Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

He's moving on. The titles don't compare to what he's doing. The USADA is doped up more than he ever was -- until there's proof to the contrary.
 
2012-08-23 11:31:22 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!


That's why enroll all my mistresses in Walk for the Cure races.
 
2012-08-23 11:32:00 PM

Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!


I'm sure that's why he cheated - to raise money for cancer research. Had nothing to do with, you know, winning the damn bike race.
 
2012-08-23 11:32:43 PM
2 scenarios: he's the best because he won clean in a sport full of dopers, or he's the best because he doped to win in a sport full of dopers. Either way, he's still the best. Suck it, haters.
 
2012-08-23 11:32:47 PM

WTF Indeed: cameroncrazy1984: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!

That's why enroll all my mistresses in Walk for the Cure races.


I chortled.
 
2012-08-23 11:32:47 PM

Jodeo: Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

He's moving on. The titles don't compare to what he's doing. The USADA is doped up more than he ever was -- until there's proof to the contrary.


You can stop sucking his cock, his balls are so small you won't get anything out of them anyhow.
 
2012-08-23 11:33:42 PM
So wait, does this leave ANY winners of the TdF in the past decade?!
 
2012-08-23 11:33:58 PM

Jodeo: Innocent until PROVEN guilty.

He's moving on. The titles don't compare to what he's doing. The USADA is doped up more than he ever was -- until there's proof to the contrary.


This may come as a shock to some people in here but multiple, corroborating eyewitness accounts do, in fact, count as evidence.

I know, I know. Tough to believe.
 
2012-08-23 11:34:11 PM

WTF Indeed: cameroncrazy1984: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!

That's why enroll all my mistresses in Walk for the Cure races.


Someone should have told Bill Belichick this...
 
2012-08-23 11:34:35 PM
He's a man with brass balls to admit that.

/too soon?
 
2012-08-23 11:35:45 PM
Over 500 hundred tests and no sign of doping. Last tour was what, seven years ago? What a worthless agency. Either they were utterly incompetent then, when they didn't catch him doping with their flawed drug tests, or worse, they are now wrongfully destroying the phenomenal record of an American legend. Either way, Travis Tygart and his agency are farking idiots.
 
2012-08-23 11:36:12 PM
I was unaware that USADA regulated sporting events in France. Isn't that like the Canadian doping agency stripping Usain Bolt of a gold medal at the London Olympics or something stupid like that
 
2012-08-23 11:36:38 PM
I don't follow the cycling sport so I don't understand how, years later, he's going to be stripped of his titles.

I assume he got tested back then like everyone else. I assume that after he won a couple of times they'd double and triple test him just out of envy and resentment. Since he was allowed to keep competing I'm assuming he passed their tests.

So what changed? The tests themselves? So what? If the rule says you must pass Test X and he did, who gives a crap if years later they develop Test Y and he fails? That wasn't the rule back then.
 
2012-08-23 11:36:40 PM

Darth Hater: WTF Indeed: cameroncrazy1984: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!

That's why enroll all my mistresses in Walk for the Cure races.

Someone should have told Bill Belichick this...


I lol'd.
 
2012-08-23 11:37:20 PM

4NSpy: Great, now what am I going to do with a storage locker full of yellow "Livestrong" bracelets?


Abandon it and have one of the Storage Wars people get stuck with it.
 
2012-08-23 11:37:30 PM
FTFA: He called the USADA investigation an "unconstitutional witch hunt."

Could someone please explain to this guy that the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with his case?

Actually, forget about it. Let's just forget this asshole even exists. fark Lance Armstrong. And while we're at it, fark Tiger Woods too.
 
2012-08-23 11:37:50 PM
"Tour de France" roughly translates as "Tour of France."

Next week, I'll tell you the meaning of LeBron James.
 
2012-08-23 11:38:27 PM

WTF Indeed: cameroncrazy1984: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!

That's why enroll all my mistresses in Walk for the Cure races.


I bet she runs instead of walks too, huh?
 
2012-08-23 11:38:59 PM
i177.photobucket.com i177.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-23 11:39:22 PM
So the frat douchebags who wear the Livestrong bracelets as a douche accessory are even douchier now? Sweet.
 
2012-08-23 11:39:34 PM
a.espncdn.com
Presenting Douchebag of the Century:
Travis Tygart, CEO, United States Anti-Doping Agency
 
2012-08-23 11:39:34 PM

consider this: blood samples consistent with blood doping.


If they do, it's odd the USADA hasn't made it public.
 
mjg
2012-08-23 11:39:41 PM

Darth Hater: WTF Indeed: cameroncrazy1984: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!

That's why enroll all my mistresses in Walk for the Cure races.

Someone should have told Bill Belichick this...


southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com
 
2012-08-23 11:39:53 PM

Representative of the unwashed masses: I was unaware that USADA regulated sporting events in France. Isn't that like the Canadian doping agency stripping Usain Bolt of a gold medal at the London Olympics or something stupid like that


Lance raced under a US license internationally which meant he was subject to the rules of the USADA and by extension the WADA and the IOC.
 
2012-08-23 11:40:11 PM

Birnone: So what changed? The tests themselves? So what? If the rule says you must pass Test X and he did, who gives a crap if years later they develop Test Y and he fails? That wasn't the rule back then.


This is such a stupid comment I'm wondering if it's a terrible attempt at trolling, but okay, I'll bite.

No, the rules do *not* say you have to pass a specific test. If new tests are developed and someone thinks to test your samples and you fail? No title.

Otherwise people like Marion Jones wouldn't have had her Olympic medals stripped years later.
 
2012-08-23 11:40:51 PM

malaktaus: fark Tiger Woods too.


Why? He just needed 18 holes to be happy.
 
2012-08-23 11:41:00 PM

whatshisname: cameroncrazy1984: A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

You don't win the Tour de France without help.


You didn't ride that!
 
2012-08-23 11:41:41 PM
The only thing that the public likes more than a hero is a fallen hero.
 
2012-08-23 11:41:42 PM

DrySocket: Lance raced under a US license internationally which meant he was subject to the rules of the USADA and by extension the WADA and the IOC.


Thing is, it's the UCI that sanctions cycling events and the tests therein. And the UCI boots people for doping and takes away wins and places bans. Yet the UCI hasn't really had an issue with Lance.
 
2012-08-23 11:41:52 PM
I really don't understand how USADA can strip Armstrong of the titles. You'd think that would be something only the actual Tour would be able to do that. That said, they'd be more than happy to take away Armstrong's seven wins.

I do agree that the whole "investigation" is really down to a "he said/she said" type thing with their star witness being an already disgraced Floyd Landis. If USADA has all this evidence, release it. Otherwise, shut up and move on.
 
2012-08-23 11:43:27 PM

Billy Crystal Meth Lab: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

I'm sure that's why he cheated - to raise money for cancer research. Had nothing to do with, you know, winning the damn bike race.


Doesn't matter why he cheated. The end result is he raised money to fight cancer. The ends justify the means. BTW, I hope you die from aggressive colon cancer.
 
2012-08-23 11:43:42 PM

Billy Crystal Meth Lab: So wait, does this leave ANY winners of the TdF in the past decade?!


Erik Zabel came in second 6 years in a row, I bet he'll be the next doper to be stripped of Armstrong's vacant 1st place.
 
2012-08-23 11:43:44 PM

Representative of the unwashed masses: I was unaware that USADA regulated sporting events in France. Isn't that like the Canadian doping agency stripping Usain Bolt of a gold medal at the London Olympics or something stupid like that


Well, since Usain Bolt is not a Canadian citizen, no that is not the same thing. I'm pretty sure all US professional athletes are under the authority of the USADA, regardless of where they are playing that sport.
 
2012-08-23 11:43:45 PM

consider this: They haven't made their witness list public yet either.


Which I have a problem with. Either fess up to what you have against someone, or drop it. The UCI has dealt with doping issues and had no problem saying "Person X said person Y was doping, we followed up on it and found evidence they were doping".
 
2012-08-23 11:43:53 PM

WhyteRaven74: DrySocket: Lance raced under a US license internationally which meant he was subject to the rules of the USADA and by extension the WADA and the IOC.

Thing is, it's the UCI that sanctions cycling events and the tests therein. And the UCI boots people for doping and takes away wins and places bans. Yet the UCI hasn't really had an issue with Lance.


The UCI is in a tricky spot here. Part of the evidence against Lance says that the UCI helped Lance cover up a positive EPO test from 2001. If the UCI appeals, they could incur the wrath of the WADA and the IOC who could decide to exclude professional cyclists from the next olympics because they decide the UCI is corrupt and dont follow anti-doping rules.
 
2012-08-23 11:44:35 PM
Kind of like soccer, I don't care.
 
2012-08-23 11:45:28 PM

Fisty Bum: If USADA has all this evidence, release it.


They might just do that. On Monday, Armstrong lost his lawsuit to have it blocked.
 
2012-08-23 11:45:36 PM
And a Martyr is born.

\Don't like him
\\But you pee 1000 times, somebody will f it up.
 
2012-08-23 11:46:10 PM

Transubstantive: I'm pretty sure all US professional athletes are under the authority of the USADA,


They're not. Only certain ones are, football players aren't, track athletes are.
 
2012-08-23 11:46:20 PM

whatshisname: Fisty Bum: If USADA has all this evidence, release it.

They might just do that. On Monday, Armstrong lost his lawsuit to have it blocked.


Unless part of the settlement included not releasing said evidence, which is likely the case.
 
2012-08-23 11:46:31 PM
Dodge, duck, dip, dive, and dope.
 
mjg
2012-08-23 11:47:07 PM
Dick Pound is still one of the funnier names I've heard
 
2012-08-23 11:47:14 PM

jekostas: Unless part of the settlement included not releasing said evidence, which is likely the case.


There was no settlement. A judge threw out Armstrong's petition.
 
2012-08-23 11:47:18 PM
This is hilarious. He STILL has people saying he's clean. I guess I don't know what to say to that. If you can't see a transparent attempt to keep you from seeing the evidence and a whole raft of teammates testify against him (both those who have been busted and those who have not) then I guess I don't know what to tell you.

But know this - if they didn't have dirty samples to show you... and if they didn't have compelling witness testimony beyond Landis and Hamilton, Armstrong would still be fighting. He quit at the eleventh hour for one reason and one reason only - he knows how damning their evidence is. You can't tell me this guy, who has been fighting this shiat for years, this guy who is one of the most litigous sportsmen in history, is quitting on the very last hill because he's fed up. This was the last hurdle.

What he is, is dirty. Hats off for the cancer shiat lance. I just hope we get to see the testimony anyway. Especially from Hincapie.
 
2012-08-23 11:47:21 PM

Darth Hater: Billy Crystal Meth Lab: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

I'm sure that's why he cheated - to raise money for cancer research. Had nothing to do with, you know, winning the damn bike race.

Doesn't matter why he cheated. The end result is he raised money to fight cancer. The ends justify the means. BTW, I hope you die from aggressive colon cancer.


Hey, given my family history, you could maybe put money on it!
 
2012-08-23 11:47:22 PM

WTF Indeed: The ole' "I know I cheated, they got the proof, so instead of fighting it I'm going to take all the money I made from selling armbands to morons and head off into history." Move.

 
2012-08-23 11:47:40 PM

basemetal: Kind of like soccer, I don't care.


My personal feeling is that I dont care whether its right or wrong if he doped. From a purely scientific perspective there is a very plausable scenario where he could have used transfusions and EPO to gain an advantage while avoiding testing positive. He took the risk to dope and he now has to pay the consequences for doing so and he doesnt want to, mainly to protect his public persona.
 
2012-08-23 11:47:53 PM

DrySocket: Part of the evidence against Lance says that the UCI helped Lance cover up a positive EPO test from 2001


I've heard that, yet seen nothing released.
 
2012-08-23 11:49:19 PM
cbsbaltimore.files.wordpress.com
RIP Louis Armstrong
 
2012-08-23 11:49:32 PM

jekostas: whatshisname: Fisty Bum: If USADA has all this evidence, release it.

They might just do that. On Monday, Armstrong lost his lawsuit to have it blocked.

Unless part of the settlement included not releasing said evidence, which is likely the case.


What settlement?
 
2012-08-23 11:50:15 PM

whatshisname: Fisty Bum: If USADA has all this evidence, release it.

They might just do that. On Monday, Armstrong lost his lawsuit to have it blocked.


If they do, I will happily back them in stripping Armstrong of his titles.

/Robbie McEwen is the last clean man in cycling from that era...
 
2012-08-23 11:50:29 PM

lohphat: WTF Indeed: The ole' "I know I cheated, they got the proof, so instead of fighting it I'm going to take all the money I made from selling armbands to morons and head off into history." Move.


The thing that irritates me is that his foundation doesnt actually give money for cancer research, instead promoting "cancer awareness" whatever that means. I always assumed that they run around going "Hey man, did you know cancer kills people?" Its either that or its merely a self-promotional vehicle for Lance himself.
 
2012-08-23 11:50:49 PM

WhyteRaven74: Transubstantive: I'm pretty sure all US professional athletes are under the authority of the USADA,

They're not. Only certain ones are, football players aren't, track athletes are.


That makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up!
 
2012-08-23 11:50:57 PM

CommieTaoist: The only thing that the public likes more than a hero is a fallen hero.


The only thing the public likes more than a hero is being the party that makes the hero fall. Everybody hates a winner and they take perverse pride in causing their demise. Public pressure from everybody that just "knew" he was doping, even though he passed every test, something that would require a conspiracy impossible to keep secret as he was the most scrutinized athlete in the world for the better part of a decade, people who somehow took it so personally that he was "getting over" on them, is what caused this. He would be dead or broke before this ended and the result would still have been the same.

It's like when you were a kid and you got grounded for something you didn't do, then because you were tired of being punished you confessed to your non-existent crime only to be punished for lying about it, even though you never did. There's no justice here, and that's what bothers me about the whole thing.
 
2012-08-23 11:51:57 PM
Lance Armstrong supporters: "I'd have to see a video of him singing "Pee On You," two forms of government ID, a police officer there to verify the whole thing, four or five of my buddies and Neal taking notes, and R. Kelly's grandma to confirm his identity."
 
2012-08-23 11:51:57 PM

Barbecue Bob: [cbsbaltimore.files.wordpress.com image 300x381]
RIP Louis Armstrong


HE'S NOT EVEN DEAD! C'MON! >:-(
 
2012-08-23 11:52:23 PM
My headline would have been, "Armstrong to eat Crow."
 
2012-08-23 11:52:47 PM

Mike_LowELL: Lance Armstrong supporters: "I'd have to see a video of him singing "Pee On You," two forms of government ID, a police officer there to verify the whole thing, four or five of my buddies and Neal taking notes, and R. Kelly's grandma to confirm his identity."


THIS!
 
2012-08-23 11:52:51 PM

Transubstantive: WhyteRaven74: Transubstantive: I'm pretty sure all US professional athletes are under the authority of the USADA,

They're not. Only certain ones are, football players aren't, track athletes are.

That makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up!


It primarily has to do if the sport is an olympic sport. If it is and they want their professionals to participate in the olympics, they have to abide by the rules of the WADA or USADA.
 
2012-08-23 11:53:10 PM
Anyone genuinely upset about something like this is an utterly clueless moron who's not paying attention to the world we live in.

We all talk a good game about how "it's not whether you win or lose..." but we all know deep down that that's grade A bullshiat. The rewards we bestow upon sports winners are so excessive that it's not even remotely surprising that many of them cheat. The difference between a winner and a loser on the national stage can be measured in millions of dollars. If Usain Bolt left London with silver medals, his earning potential would be quite different right now.

So Armstrong cheated better than anyone in a field of cheaters. BFD.
 
2012-08-23 11:53:38 PM
Finally.
The guy just

WhyteRaven74: consider this: They haven't made their witness list public yet either.

Which I have a problem with. Either fess up to what you have against someone, or drop it. The UCI has dealt with doping issues and had no problem saying "Person X said person Y was doping, we followed up on it and found evidence they were doping".


I'm sure they told him. If he decided not to fight it...I'm good with that. I don't have some God given right to know the evidence and neither do you.
 
2012-08-23 11:53:38 PM

apachevoyeur: Over 500 hundred tests and no sign of doping. Last tour was what, seven years ago? What a worthless agency. Either they were utterly incompetent then, when they didn't catch him doping with their flawed drug tests, or worse, they are now wrongfully destroying the phenomenal record of an American legend. Either way, Travis Tygart and his agency are farking idiots.


But this story is about lance, not travis.
 
2012-08-23 11:54:29 PM

Captain Steroid: Barbecue Bob: [cbsbaltimore.files.wordpress.com image 300x381]
RIP Louis Armstrong

HE'S NOT EVEN DEAD! C'MON! >:-(


Louis Armstrong? For over 40 years now.
 
2012-08-23 11:55:05 PM
Welcome to the New America, where you can piss negative yet still fail!

Fascists are awesome!
 
2012-08-23 11:56:22 PM
Aren't his genes all farked up anyhow? From what I understood, his blood dopes itself. Goes for most other athletes.
 
2012-08-23 11:56:41 PM

choo: Welcome to the New America, where you can piss negative yet still fail!

Fascists are awesome!


2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-23 11:57:03 PM
Once again, the record for consecutive victories in France is held by Germany.
 
2012-08-23 11:57:06 PM

Palmer Eldritch: Cool story, bro: Not to get too political, but earlier today I had a long discussion with someone in which I, at length, compared Mitt Romney's tax evasion to Lance Armstrong's PED use. Guess I'm not going to be able to re-use that particular simile as many times as I'd hoped.


With comments like this maybe Drew can be talked into a 'Stupid' button.

If Mitt evaded taxes why isn't he under investigation?

You're a farking idiot.
 
2012-08-23 11:57:09 PM
Adolf

So, what's your position. That he passed all the drug tests when given... Or that he's actually been clean the whole time? Two coherent things you know.

Just so you know. Just about every cyclist that popped a positive only did it once and passed all the rest. Hamilton, Landis, Contador, etc. We KNOW Hamilton passed many many tests while dirty. He freely admits it as does Landis.
 
2012-08-23 11:58:38 PM

pedobearapproved: Billy Crystal Meth Lab: So wait, does this leave ANY winners of the TdF in the past decade?!

Erik Zabel came in second 6 years in a row, I bet he'll be the next doper to be stripped of Armstrong's vacant 1st place.


Who was the highest finishing Frenchman? In the end he's going to be the winner, you know the Frenchies have been the driving force behind this. They've been after Armstrong from the day he won his first one.
 
2012-08-23 11:59:27 PM
Lance's last Tour win was July, 2005. Seven years ago. This whole sorry mess reeks of politics.
 
2012-08-23 11:59:27 PM

consider this: USADA has at least 10 witnesses ready to testify against him and blood samples consistent with blood doping.


Blood samples? I thought all this was based on the witness testimony, which if why I found it odd he'd give up after passing all those drug tests
. I dunno. On one hand, I can see where he would be sick of everyone from the French to that obsessed Nowisky guy coming after him year after year and just gave up. But then, he's fought this long, why not keep going?
I personally got tired of hearing about him all the time (Outside Magazine and Mens Journal seemed obsessed with him for years) and I'm not defending him or anything, but this whole thing does carry an Ahab/Moby DIck crazy vendetta vibe going. Like no matter, what, they were going to get this guy. Wierd.

JohnBigBootay: I_Hate_Iowa: How was he the only one who wasn't caught? He was the most-tested athlete in the world for a while. Why are they suddenly railroading him with witness testimony instead of blood? Don't they hold onto samples like the Olympics' anti-dopers? If they have witnesses that can say what exactly he was using, then they should be able to test for exactly that.

I assume you know that all those confirmed dopers passed many test themselves, right? And they have lance's old samples. Lance is trying to make sure you don't hear the expert testimony that those samples are consistent with doing. But mostly I think, and this is conjecture, he doesn't want you to hear Georges testimony. He's thrown everyone else under the bus already but George won't lie and lance knows it.


Is the testing so much better now or something? I'd assume it is. But do ...uh...'they' keep everyone's samples or just those they want to nail down the line when testing gets better? I admit I've tuned a good deal of this out over the years, struck me as the supercharged version of the "hype them up!Tear them down!" deal, but one of the few detailed articles about Armstrong I read was a couple months ago in Mens Journal and there was no mention of this George person, but like I said, I'm no expert.
 
2012-08-23 11:59:40 PM
Every daaaaaay is a winding road....
 
2012-08-23 11:59:59 PM
Transubstantive:

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 500x224]


Not sure if your head'up your ass. but yea, it's firmly logged up in there..
 
2012-08-24 12:00:42 AM

consider this: they're not going to make all of their information public before it's time.


That's what I have a problem with. This isn't a criminal trial, there's no reason to be hiding things, if they have positive testing results, there's no excuse for not making that public ASAP.
 
2012-08-24 12:01:03 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: you know the Frenchies have been the driving force behind this. They've been after Armstrong from the day he won his first one.


I think that's more to do with Armstrong's personality than his nationality. The French loved Wiggins this year. But he's rather humble and speaks fluent French.
 
2012-08-24 12:01:06 AM
So now we are back to believing the only way to win multiple consecutive Tour de Frances is to be a biological freak of nature?

/Nice going Miguel Indurain
 
2012-08-24 12:01:35 AM
Greg LeMond must be feeling pretty vindicated right now and waiting for that giant apology from Trek.
 
2012-08-24 12:01:47 AM

Sgygus: Lance's last Tour win was July, 2005. Seven years ago. This whole sorry mess reeks of politics.


Lance last competed in the TdF in 2009 and 2010 and placed pretty well in both instances. The USADA has the samples from those years and has said they're definitely consistent with blood doping.
 
2012-08-24 12:02:16 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: pedobearapproved: Billy Crystal Meth Lab: So wait, does this leave ANY winners of the TdF in the past decade?!

Erik Zabel came in second 6 years in a row, I bet he'll be the next doper to be stripped of Armstrong's vacant 1st place.

Who was the highest finishing Frenchman? In the end he's going to be the winner, you know the Frenchies have been the driving force behind this. They've been after Armstrong from the day he won his first one.


Yeah, right. The USADA...of France. That's what it is, the French. I suspect you are in for a rude awakening about your boy as more comes out on this in the coming weeks.
 
2012-08-24 12:02:20 AM

consider this: WhyteRaven74: I've heard that, yet seen nothing released.

The USADA has been preparing a case against Armstrong, they're not going to make all of their information public before it's time.


It's past time. They were going to arbitration. The investigation is over. It's not like a criminal trial where they need to keep some cards close to the vest. If he did it, I really don't care and he should be stripped, but don't hold this over us with shadowy claims of unnamed people who saw him do it, and a re-test that might or might not show doping.
 
2012-08-24 12:03:26 AM

choo: Not sure if your head'up your ass. but yea, it's firmly logged up in there..

 

www.fohguild.org
 
2012-08-24 12:05:36 AM

WhyteRaven74: consider this: they're not going to make all of their information public before it's time.

That's what I have a problem with. This isn't a criminal trial, there's no reason to be hiding things, if they have positive testing results, there's no excuse for not making that public ASAP.


He just made the damn statement. You think they're gonna post a bittorrent for you an hour later?
 
2012-08-24 12:05:50 AM

DidyoumeanDark: apachevoyeur: Over 500 hundred tests and no sign of doping. Last tour was what, seven years ago? What a worthless agency. Either they were utterly incompetent then, when they didn't catch him doping with their flawed drug tests, or worse, they are now wrongfully destroying the phenomenal record of an American legend. Either way, Travis Tygart and his agency are farking idiots.

But this story is about lance, not travis.


No, this is a story of a failed agency that is using a witch hunt to remain relevant. I'd love to know why so many people here want to destroy Armstrong's accomplishments without a shred of evidence.

He passed over 500 doping tests! If he WAS doping, the agencies were to incompetent to detect it. His last tour... SEVEN FARKING YEARS AGO!

Fark, we don't pursue murders with this much energy. Travis needs to DIAF. He's just making his country look bad and trashing a man's reputation with scant verbal evidence from a small band of sore losers.
 
2012-08-24 12:06:27 AM

srhp29: I don't have some God given right to know the evidence and neither do you.


Well the USADA has been going after Armstrong for a long time now, given what he was doing was in the public eye, the public does have the right to now. When the UCI has caught people they say what they were caught with. When people in track and field get caught, one of the things that comes with it is at least the category of what they were caught taking if not the exact substance name. If you want to enforce drug controls in sport you have to operate with transparency, not just as far as the athletes are concerned but the public as well. To say "This person doped, and now we're taking their title(s)" without revealing exactly what it is they did, is not exactly inline with the mission of promoting fair competition and discourse about such issues.
 
2012-08-24 12:08:07 AM

consider this: apachevoyeur: Over 500 hundred tests and no sign of doping.

Well except the blood samples in the hands of the USADA that show doping.


Seriously? Seven years after his last Tour? Blood shows up with evidence of doping now? I call bullshiat.
 
mjg
2012-08-24 12:08:27 AM
While working for a foundation (non-profit org) I learned that the organization has a policy of not 'naming' things (ie. awards, academic bursaries, etc) after a living person, purely for the reason that Lance is in hot water for.

The foundation, and all it's work, come into question by the person's past and future mistakes.

/kinda tough in this case since Lance is the focus of Livestrong
 
2012-08-24 12:08:37 AM

pedobearapproved: but don't hold this over us with shadowy claims of unnamed people who saw him do it, and a re-test that might or might not show doping


I don't think they are. They gathered the evidence and sent Armstrong the accusations in a letter. It wasn't made public but the Washington Post managed to get hold of a copy of the letter and published some details. Since he got the letter, Armstrong's been fighting to have their inquiry stopped but it wasn't until this Monday that a federal judge tossed out Armstrong's petition. If they'd released evidence or started a hearing while the appeal was going on they'd have looked even worse.
 
2012-08-24 12:08:48 AM
That verdict came in faster than a Congressman trying to reduce defense spending. I'd say Lance was Shafted on his Soul Train. But he can take it.

/shafted
//USADA needs defunding
 
2012-08-24 12:08:57 AM
jekostas: The USADA has the samples from those years and has said they're definitely consistent with blood doping.

Yes, I remember this! The Tour threw his ass out of the race.

/no they didn't
 
2012-08-24 12:09:06 AM

Sgygus: Lance's last Tour win was July, 2005. Seven years ago. This whole sorry mess reeks of politics.


THIS! FARKING THIS!
 
2012-08-24 12:09:35 AM
Like everyone else in this thread, I have no idea if he doped or not. But for those that are saying he doped, how can you possibly know? You can't. He passed all his drug tests, and you know damn well if there was any clear-cut evidence, the French would have been all over it. Instead, we're relying on arseholes like Floyd Landis for the truth? He's hardly an impartial witness.

At what point are your accomplishments no longer worth fighting for? There has to be a point where you just want to spend your time with your family and friends and not have to worry about this stuff any more. I think Lance has gotten there.
 
2012-08-24 12:10:09 AM

Your_Huckleberry: consider this: USADA has at least 10 witnesses ready to testify against him and blood samples consistent with blood doping.

Blood samples? I thought all this was based on the witness testimony, which if why I found it odd he'd give up after passing all those drug tests
. I dunno. On one hand, I can see where he would be sick of everyone from the French to that obsessed Nowisky guy coming after him year after year and just gave up. But then, he's fought this long, why not keep going?
I personally got tired of hearing about him all the time (Outside Magazine and Mens Journal seemed obsessed with him for years) and I'm not defending him or anything, but this whole thing does carry an Ahab/Moby DIck crazy vendetta vibe going. Like no matter, what, they were going to get this guy. Wierd.

JohnBigBootay: I_Hate_Iowa: How was he the only one who wasn't caught? He was the most-tested athlete in the world for a while. Why are they suddenly railroading him with witness testimony instead of blood? Don't they hold onto samples like the Olympics' anti-dopers? If they have witnesses that can say what exactly he was using, then they should be able to test for exactly that.

I assume you know that all those confirmed dopers passed many test themselves, right? And they have lance's old samples. Lance is trying to make sure you don't hear the expert testimony that those samples are consistent with doing. But mostly I think, and this is conjecture, he doesn't want you to hear Georges testimony. He's thrown everyone else under the bus already but George won't lie and lance knows it.

Is the testing so much better now or something? I'd assume it is. But do ...uh...'they' keep everyone's samples or just those they want to nail down the line when testing gets better? I admit I've tuned a good deal of this out over the years, struck me as the supercharged version of the "hype them up!Tear them down!" deal, but one of the few detailed articles about Armstrong I read was a couple months ago in Mens Journal and there was no mention of this George person, but like I said, I'm no expert.


Just google George Hincapie. He was on every team and considered to be his number one lieutenant and extremely loyal and honest to a fault. Never tested positive for anything either. He certainly has no reason to lie about lance and every reason to lie for lance. Anyway, that's whose testimony I want to see.
 
2012-08-24 12:10:21 AM

apachevoyeur: Seriously? Seven years after his last Tour? Blood shows up with evidence of doping now? I call bullshiat.


He last raced in the Tour de France in 2010.
 
2012-08-24 12:10:40 AM

apachevoyeur: consider this: apachevoyeur: Over 500 hundred tests and no sign of doping.

Well except the blood samples in the hands of the USADA that show doping.

Seriously? Seven years after his last Tour? Blood shows up with evidence of doping now? I call bullshiat.


Hey, f*ckwit.

ARMSTONG COMPETED IN THE TDF IN 2009 AND 2010.


Perhaps you'll see that point now.

The USADA has samples from those years and claim that they show evidence of blood doping.
 
2012-08-24 12:11:01 AM

kliq: My headline would have been, "Armstrong to eat Crow."


Heh, again? :P I like it.
 
2012-08-24 12:11:06 AM

Sgygus: jekostas: The USADA has the samples from those years and has said they're definitely consistent with blood doping.

Yes, I remember this! The Tour threw his ass out of the race.

/no they didn't


I don't suppose it's possible that they came up with a test that shows masking agents or things they were not previously able to test for. No, science never progresses.
 
2012-08-24 12:11:27 AM
well the new winners of those 7 tour de frances get it easy. how will they prove they didnt cheat?
 
2012-08-24 12:11:29 AM
That guy has some ball to put out a statement like that.

Seriously, though, he fought back from cancer, he fought to win seven Tour de France titles, and he won't fight this? Yeah, I don't buy it.
 
2012-08-24 12:12:28 AM

JohnBigBootay: You think they're gonna post a bittorrent for you an hour later?


Cyclists have been busted with failed blood tests and the public has known the full details within hours of the cyclist being told they were caught. There's been no "We have something, but we're not saying what, so give up or else". The whole point to the tests is you can remove the human element, either someone passes, or they fail. If they fail, then that's that. Afterwards they can file an appeal. But you don't go around saying you have a failed drug test and try to string people along. The rules say that if you fail a test, that's it. You ask for a test of your B sample and then you can lodge an appeal, but if you fail a test, any expectation at privacy is out the window. You're busted, and everyone gets to find out that you're busted and just what you were busted with.
 
2012-08-24 12:12:43 AM
I had a weird epiphany about the whole thing in that I realized that since they were all doping, he was the best of all the dopers, so theoretically he is still the best. it was an odd realization, in that it made me respect him more in a retarded way, because I think he deserves to be shamed for it.
 
2012-08-24 12:13:20 AM
Did you dope?
No.
Did you dope?
No.
Did you dope?
I'm not talking about this anymore.
A ha! He's guilty!
 
2012-08-24 12:13:41 AM

jekostas: apachevoyeur: consider this: apachevoyeur: Over 500 hundred tests and no sign of doping.

Well except the blood samples in the hands of the USADA that show doping.

Seriously? Seven years after his last Tour? Blood shows up with evidence of doping now? I call bullshiat.

Hey, f*ckwit.

ARMSTONG COMPETED IN THE TDF IN 2009 AND 2010.


Perhaps you'll see that point now.

The USADA has samples from those years and claim that they show evidence of blood doping.


Excuse me, arseface, 7 years since his last Tour WIN. The USADA is stripping him of his wins... not his losses.
 
2012-08-24 12:14:18 AM

apachevoyeur: Sgygus: Lance's last Tour win was July, 2005. Seven years ago. This whole sorry mess reeks of politics.

THIS! FARKING THIS!


You seem like you know a lot about this.
 
2012-08-24 12:14:42 AM
Suck it Lance. Take your fraud ass and go somewhere else. Back in the day, everyone knew you were a doper when you were riding for Subaru Montgomery. LeMond was right about you all along. Suck it again doper. DOPER!
 
2012-08-24 12:15:25 AM

jekostas: claim that they show evidence of blood doping.


If they had the evidence back then, that should've been the end of it. Declare he failed a test and handle things from there.
 
2012-08-24 12:16:25 AM
This is really surprising. Wow
 
2012-08-24 12:17:27 AM

consider this: Your_Huckleberry: Blood samples? I thought all this was based on the witness testimony, which if why I found it odd he'd give up after passing all those drug tests

There are two allegations against him, blood doping to boost red blood cell count and transfusions to eliminate banned substances.


Interesting. All I had heard of was the witness testimony. But I wonder:

jekostas: Sgygus: Lance's last Tour win was July, 2005. Seven years ago. This whole sorry mess reeks of politics.

Lance last competed in the TdF in 2009 and 2010 and placed pretty well in both instances. The USADA has the samples from those years and has said they're definitely consistent with blood doping.


From 09 and 10? What about the years he won? And if they have him dirty in 09 and 10, I suppose that warrents a lifetime ban and said ban negates anything prior?

JohnBigBootay: Your_Huckleberry: consider this: USADA has at least 10 witnesses ready to testify against him and blood samples consistent with blood doping.

Blood samples? I thought all this was based on the witness testimony, which if why I found it odd he'd give up after passing all those drug tests
. I dunno. On one hand, I can see where he would be sick of everyone from the French to that obsessed Nowisky guy coming after him year after year and just gave up. But then, he's fought this long, why not keep going?
I personally got tired of hearing about him all the time (Outside Magazine and Mens Journal seemed obsessed with him for years) and I'm not defending him or anything, but this whole thing does carry an Ahab/Moby DIck crazy vendetta vibe going. Like no matter, what, they were going to get this guy. Wierd.

JohnBigBootay: I_Hate_Iowa: How was he the only one who wasn't caught? He was the most-tested athlete in the world for a while. Why are they suddenly railroading him with witness testimony instead of blood? Don't they hold onto samples like the Olympics' anti-dopers? If they have witnesses that can say what exactly he was using, then they should be able to test for exactly that.

I assume you know that all those confirmed dopers passed many test themselves, right? And they have lance's old samples. Lance is trying to make sure you don't hear the expert testimony that those samples are consistent with doing. But mostly I think, and this is conjecture, he doesn't want you to hear Georges testimony. He's thrown everyone else under the bus already but George won't lie and lance knows it.

Is the testing so much better now or something? I'd assume it is. But do ...uh...'they' keep everyone's samples or just those they want to nail down the line when testing gets better? I admit I've tuned a good deal of this out over the years, struck me as the supercharged version of the "hype them up!Tear them down!" deal, but one of the few detailed articles about Armstrong I read was a ...


Guilty conscience or did someone roll him? I could see where his testimony would be a game changer.
 
2012-08-24 12:18:14 AM
I don't know who to believe in this until I see the evidence. Honestly I don't care enough either way, but so far its just been Armstrong saying he didn't and USADA saying he did based on so called evidence that they haven't shared yet and witness statements. Which eh. Either way its a clusterfark for this sport.
 
2012-08-24 12:21:41 AM

Jumpthruhoops: Did you dope?
No.
Did you dope?
No.
Did you dope?
I'm not talking about this anymore.
A ha! He's guilty!


It went more like this:

Did you dope?
No
This evidence says you did, and the world will find out about it tomorrow.
I QUIT
 
2012-08-24 12:22:08 AM
I'm pretty sure someone just copied one of the Penn State threads and did a find/replace on "Joe Paterno" and "child rape" with "Lance Armstrong" and "doping."

Hero worshippers gonna hero-worship.
 
2012-08-24 12:22:59 AM

Your_Huckleberry:
From 09 and 10? What about the years he won? And if they have him dirty in 09 and 10, I suppose that warrents a lifetime ban and said ban negates anything prior?


Maybe, maybe not, I don't pretend to understand how the USADA works.

However, physical evidence that Armstrong did dope and 10 eyewitness accounts from previous years does not exactly paint a very positive picture.
 
2012-08-24 12:23:21 AM

cameroncrazy1984: will find out about it tomorrow.


That's where the rub is, if they have proof of a failed blood test, why wasn't it made public as soon as they had it? That's how it usually is done, you get the results, inform the athlete, then release the results to the public.
 
2012-08-24 12:23:54 AM

Dr. Steve Brule: I'm pretty sure someone just copied one of the Penn State threads and did a find/replace on "Joe Paterno" and "child rape" with "Lance Armstrong" and "doping."

Hero worshippers gonna hero-worship.


If a biker isn't doping, he's not really trying. Is wussy sports whats the itser bitser baby wants?
 
2012-08-24 12:23:54 AM
Sounds to me like Lance insulted some petty USADA bureaucrat.

You lose, Armstrong!

/never underestimate low-paid vindictive shiats with a lot of power
 
2012-08-24 12:24:37 AM
I guess he just decided it was time to take his ball and go home.
 
2012-08-24 12:24:49 AM

Dr. Steve Brule: I'm pretty sure someone just copied one of the Penn State threads and did a find/replace on "Joe Paterno" and "child rape" with "Lance Armstrong" and "doping."

Hero worshippers gonna hero-worship.


Pretty much. Who cares about this dimwit anyway? Wow, he can ride a bike fast and only has one ball.

OMG WE MUST DEFEND HIM AGAINST THE NAYSAYERS!

Screw Lance Armstrong. He's no hero to anyone but people with pretty screwed-up ideals.
 
2012-08-24 12:25:24 AM
So, since 1990 how many tour titles have been stripped now?
 
2012-08-24 12:25:46 AM

consider this: the USADA has data from 38 blood samples that are consistent with doping.


Per the rules, one test is enough to kick him on his ass. Per the spirit of the rules as soon as they had that first result, it should've been all over. Tell Armstrong, put out a press release, go from there.
 
2012-08-24 12:25:57 AM
I still think he's innocent. Sure he had help, it's called a team. They all support 1 rider.
 
2012-08-24 12:26:41 AM

Sgygus: Sounds to me like Lance insulted some petty USADA bureaucrat.

You lose, Armstrong!

/never underestimate low-paid vindictive shiats with a lot of power


And US government funding. Your tax dollars paid for this pile of crapola.
 
2012-08-24 12:27:18 AM
Your tax dollars at work.

The USADA should not exist.
 
2012-08-24 12:27:32 AM
Hates to say "I told you so", but...
i28.photobucket.com

I do think the agency should be required to show some evidence before formally stripping Lance of the TDF titles, but I am having a really hard time believing that he would give them up simply because he was "tired of fighting the doping allegations". That just doesn't pass the smell test.

Lance, I am disappoint.
 
2012-08-24 12:27:36 AM

WhyteRaven74: cameroncrazy1984: will find out about it tomorrow.

That's where the rub is, if they have proof of a failed blood test, why wasn't it made public as soon as they had it? That's how it usually is done, you get the results, inform the athlete, then release the results to the public.


This

Sgygus:
Sounds to me like Lance insulted some petty USADA bureaucrat.
You lose, Armstrong!
/never underestimate low-paid vindictive shiats with a lot of power


And that 
 
2012-08-24 12:27:44 AM
I feel vindicated.
 
2012-08-24 12:28:20 AM
Whether or not he is guilty of doping, this kind of scandal casts a dark pall over sports and brings down our heroes rather than edify the athletes of tomorrow.
 
2012-08-24 12:28:38 AM
nascarcasm @nascarcasm

Hey everyone - our long national nightmare is over. Lance Armstrong had been stripped of his Tour De France titles. You're safe now.
 
2012-08-24 12:28:46 AM
Michael Phelps can still smoke a bowl and swim circles around this guy anyway.
 
2012-08-24 12:30:15 AM
Regarding the 2009/2010 samples, what does "fully consistent with doping" mean? And why would someone with the microscope on him take that risk? It doesn't add up.

If the USADA had something solid on Armstrong, why would they not state: "we found specific chemicals in his blood samples that are banned as performance enhancing drugs". And maybe "And we were too farking dumb to find them two and three years ago".
 
2012-08-24 12:30:26 AM
LI_ESTRONG
 
2012-08-24 12:30:33 AM

cc_rider: i28.photobucket.com


Funny thing is, I think he still as the record, unofficial though it is, for most powerful legs ever measured for a Tour cyclist.

Also, I'm pretty sure this guy is safe

www.triathlonbusiness.com
 
2012-08-24 12:31:43 AM

jekostas: Your_Huckleberry:
From 09 and 10? What about the years he won? And if they have him dirty in 09 and 10, I suppose that warrents a lifetime ban and said ban negates anything prior?

Maybe, maybe not, I don't pretend to understand how the USADA works.

However, physical evidence that Armstrong did dope and 10 eyewitness accounts from previous years does not exactly paint a very positive picture.


Oh come on. Those ten guys just must be jealous. Don't you have a smarmy sort of successful guy at your work? Wouldn't you like to take that guy down a peg? Of course you would, the smug bastard getting all the chicks and making all that money. Well, here's what you do. You just find ten of your buddies - it's ok if a couple of them are dirtbags - and get them to agree to lie to federal prosecutors about something this guy did. Just say he did something he didn't do. It'll be easy. Oh stop it - don't tell me you can't find ten guys to lie in a deposition. It's easy.
 
2012-08-24 12:31:51 AM

apachevoyeur: And we were too farking dumb to find them two and three years ago


If drug technology in sports is anything like drug technology at your local seedy convenience store, they're usually at least that far ahead of anyone involved with enforcement. It always takes years for the coppers to dig what's up in the streets, man.
 
2012-08-24 12:32:17 AM
1- Does the USADA have any physical evidence of his juicing?

2- Does the USADA have any witnesses that haven't lied about their own use of PEDs?

3- What does it say that the world cycling governing body, the UCI, was backing Armstrong's attempts to shut down the USADA's efforts?

4- What does it say that the judge who denied Armstrong's case questioned the USADA's motives on this matter on Monday? "USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives," such as politics or publicity, U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks wrote. (from ESPN.com)

I don't know what to think here. All I know is that there's something really rotten going on here. Whether it's Armstrong having cheated all along and fooled everybody in the process or it's the USADA having a case with more holes in it than swiss cheese... I don't think we'll ever know.
 
2012-08-24 12:32:28 AM

jekostas: Your_Huckleberry:
From 09 and 10? What about the years he won? And if they have him dirty in 09 and 10, I suppose that warrents a lifetime ban and said ban negates anything prior?

Maybe, maybe not, I don't pretend to understand how the USADA works.

However, physical evidence that Armstrong did dope and 10 eyewitness accounts from previous years does not exactly paint a very positive picture.


You're right about that.

Still, getting him for 09 and 10 (and not the years he won) kind of has that 'getting Capone for tax evasion and not murder' feel. Gets the job done, but not as flashy. I bet there are quite a few people out there that oh-so-want positive proof those titles are dirty.
 
2012-08-24 12:32:51 AM

Sgygus: Sounds to me like Lance insulted some petty USADA bureaucrat.

You lose, Armstrong!

/never underestimate low-paid vindictive shiats with a lot of power


Yeah, that's the ticket.

Forget that he had testicular cancer, a known effect of long-time doping.

Forget that his own teammate years, Floyd Landis, was found guilty of doping.

Forget that there were questionable samples in Armstrong's past.


This is all because some desk jockey at the USADA wanted to take Armstrong down because he had a vendetta.

Do you realize how retarded you sound?
 
2012-08-24 12:33:07 AM

Confabulat: Michael Phelps can still smoke a bowl and swim circles around this guy anyway.


what if it were a bike race in the pool though???
 
2012-08-24 12:33:54 AM

contrapunctus: Anyone genuinely upset about something like this is an utterly clueless moron who's not paying attention to the world we live in.

We all talk a good game about how "it's not whether you win or lose..." but we all know deep down that that's grade A bullshiat. The rewards we bestow upon sports winners are so excessive that it's not even remotely surprising that many of them cheat. The difference between a winner and a loser on the national stage can be measured in millions of dollars. If Usain Bolt left London with silver medals, his earning potential would be quite different right now.

So Armstrong cheated better than anyone in a field of cheaters. BFD.


That's my problem with this. Every goddamned one of the guys he raced against was doping too. Every single guy in the sport now still is.

It's gotten to the point where if you want to win the Tour De France, you aim for second, because the guy who comes in first gets extra scrutiny, somebody finds a positive test, and since you don't get everybody hunting for fault with your tests for those years, the title sticks with you.

And I'm supposed to care? You didn't catch him the first time around. Get over it and move on. There's a reason real laws usually have statutes of limitation for everything but the most major crimes. Acknowledge that everybody cheated, and try to fix it in the future.

I have the same attitude with Baseball, for the record. Maybe keep the earliest group of big name dopers out of the hall- Sosa, McGuire, Bonds, Clemens, but let the rest in like normal. Don't strip records or change results. Those things verifiable happened, and they don't go away because of that. Stripping wins and crap like that always reminded me of 1984- editing the past to fit the narrative you want rather than what actually happened. Make a note of the circumstances in the history books and move the fark on.
 
2012-08-24 12:34:29 AM

Confabulat: Michael Phelps can still smoke a bowl and swim circles around this guy anyway.


Pot isn't a PED unless there's a giant Hershey bar at each end of the pool (cheerfully stolen from Robin Williams)
 
2012-08-24 12:34:30 AM

thisiszombocom: Confabulat: Michael Phelps can still smoke a bowl and swim circles around this guy anyway.

what if it were a bike race in the pool though???


I'd smoke up and watch that.
 
2012-08-24 12:35:02 AM

Confabulat: If drug technology in sports is anything like drug technology at your local seedy convenience store,


Well from the sound of things, he was busted for something to do with his red blood cell count, ESPN just said it's EPO and blood transfusion related. Thing is, riders were busted for the same stuff well before 09.
 
2012-08-24 12:37:24 AM

WhyteRaven74: Confabulat: If drug technology in sports is anything like drug technology at your local seedy convenience store,

Well from the sound of things, he was busted for something to do with his red blood cell count, ESPN just said it's EPO and blood transfusion related. Thing is, riders were busted for the same stuff well before 09.


I'll have to read about it, but it sounds mostly like he figured out ways to beat the tests. I can respect that; I've peed fake urine into a cup before; hey man has to pay the bills.
 
2012-08-24 12:37:38 AM

Dr. Steve Brule: I'm pretty sure someone just copied one of the Penn State threads and did a find/replace on "Joe Paterno" and "child rape" with "Lance Armstrong" and "doping."

Hero worshippers gonna hero-worship.


And in about three years this will become the "Chinese swimmer whose name I'm too lazy to look up" thread.
 
2012-08-24 12:38:02 AM

WhyteRaven74: cameroncrazy1984: will find out about it tomorrow.

That's where the rub is, if they have proof of a failed blood test, why wasn't it made public as soon as they had it? That's how it usually is done, you get the results, inform the athlete, then release the results to the public.


Probably because of the rules of evidence regarding Armstrong's suit that he just lost on Monday.
 
2012-08-24 12:39:11 AM
apachevoyeur: what does "fully consistent with doping" mean?

I think it means they can't prove anything, but like many in this thread, are certain Lance is a doper.
 
2012-08-24 12:39:39 AM

whither_apophis: Dr. Steve Brule: I'm pretty sure someone just copied one of the Penn State threads and did a find/replace on "Joe Paterno" and "child rape" with "Lance Armstrong" and "doping."

Hero worshippers gonna hero-worship.

And in about three years this will become the "Chinese swimmer whose name I'm too lazy to look up" thread.


Remember when we got all those breathless stories about how much bigger Armstrong's lungs are than everyone else's? Phelps has had quite a few stories about his wingspan and flipper-like feet. I would not be surprised if we DID have that thread in 3 years.
 
2012-08-24 12:40:02 AM

Rev.K: Forget that he had testicular cancer, a known effect of long-time doping.


That argument would work a bit better if he had the cancer recently, not when he was 25. And he must've had it a while given it spread to his lungs and brain.

consider this: Do you really farking think they'd be doing after him if there wasn't proof that he was cheating?


If they have the proof, it should be public. You get busted at the Olympics, the public knows within hours. You get busted during the Tour, the public knows within hours. You get busted at any time by anyone for drug violations and the public knows within hours.
 
2012-08-24 12:40:23 AM

Sgygus: apachevoyeur: what does "fully consistent with doping" mean?

I think it means they can't prove anything, but like many in this thread, are certain Lance is a doper.


It means the same thing as "blood spray consistent with a 9mm hollowpoint shot from close range"

AKA, prescision.
 
2012-08-24 12:41:29 AM

Sgygus: apachevoyeur: what does "fully consistent with doping" mean?

I think it means they can't prove anything, but like many in this thread, are certain Lance is a doper.


I'm curious, less about why you feel the need to defend him, but why you feel you are on a first-name basis with him.
 
2012-08-24 12:42:04 AM
consider this: If this was a foreign agency, I could see some people being skeptical of the allegations. This is the United States Anti-Doping Agency ...

You're joking, right?

/'cause that is funny
 
2012-08-24 12:42:33 AM

Confabulat: apachevoyeur: And we were too farking dumb to find them two and three years ago

If drug technology in sports is anything like drug technology at your local seedy convenience store, they're usually at least that far ahead of anyone involved with enforcement. It always takes years for the coppers to dig what's up in the streets, man.


Yeah, but if you're going to say "x is illegal" then come up with a solid method of detecting x or let it go. I know there are agents that can throw off the tests and it is a cat and mouse game to track those as well, but stripping wins from 99-05 seems like it ought to fall outside of some statute of limitations. Set the bar, test to it, and move forward. It won't catch everyone, but if the testing agencies are doing their jobs it should be fair enough. And it's just a bloody sport
 
2012-08-24 12:42:43 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Probably because of the rules of evidence regarding Armstrong's suit that he just lost on Monday.


That suit was only brought up because of how the USADA had handled things. If they had a failed drug test, there was nothing preventing them from informing Armstrong and then the public. As it is, they've been going after Armstrong and saying "we have something" and there's been a really ugly back and forth which if they have a failed blood test, there was no need for.
 
2012-08-24 12:42:57 AM

WhyteRaven74: Confabulat: If drug technology in sports is anything like drug technology at your local seedy convenience store,

Well from the sound of things, he was busted for something to do with his red blood cell count, ESPN just said it's EPO and blood transfusion related. Thing is, riders were busted for the same stuff well before 09.


But Armstrong would have you believe this all about stuff well over a decade ago. Why I think that rascal might be trying to put some spin on this.
 
2012-08-24 12:43:38 AM

WhyteRaven74: That argument would work a bit better if he had the cancer recently, not when he was 25. And he must've had it a while given it spread to his lungs and brain.


So how about his own teammate, Floyd Landis, doping and found guilty.

Lance didn't know about that?

Floyd just doped when Lance wasn't looking?

Floyd was doping yet still never beat Lance in a Tour De France where they both competed?


Bullsh*t.

Occams Razor.

It's pretty goddamn obvious what was going on and Armstrong would rather go out as a cowardly cockroach, clinging to corners of darkness, rather than be a man and admit his wrongdoing.
 
2012-08-24 12:43:57 AM
Confabulat: why you feel you are on a first-name basis with him

Calling him Mr. Armstrong in a fark thread seems unnecessarily formal.
 
2012-08-24 12:44:03 AM
Here's the thing. He'a always been a gigantic asshole. This was well known to anyone who knew him before the cancer.The cancer thing just sanctified everything he did after. fark your fake hero.
 
2012-08-24 12:44:49 AM

JohnBigBootay: But Armstrong would have you believe this all about stuff well over a decade ago. Why I think that rascal might be trying to put some spin on this.


Thing is the USADA could've ended this the second they had the first failed blood test.
 
2012-08-24 12:45:44 AM

apachevoyeur: Set the bar, test to it, and move forward. It won't catch everyone, but if the testing agencies are doing their jobs it should be fair enough. And it's just a bloody sport


I'd agree 100% with this. What if, in 20 years MLB rules that nicotine is a banned substance? Do we vacate all the wins when some guy had some dip in his lip throughout baseball history? Seems like if he passed the rules at the time, it's over with. Certainly by now.
 
2012-08-24 12:45:45 AM

kliq: My headline would have been, "Armstrong to eat Crow."


I would have laughed
 
2012-08-24 12:45:54 AM

cptjeff: I have the same attitude with Baseball, for the record. Maybe keep the earliest group of big name dopers out of the hall- Sosa, McGuire, Bonds, Clemens, but let the rest in like normal.


do you know why the mike stanton reverted back to his birth name, because a mike stanton was on the mitchell report.

/big papi
 
2012-08-24 12:45:59 AM
Eh. If he did anything, it was just some performance enhancing drugs. It's not like he assisted in covering up child rape for 14 years.
 
2012-08-24 12:46:21 AM
I feel like an important race was one today. One for the HUMAN race.

A great evil named Lance Armstrong had been vanquished.
 
2012-08-24 12:46:49 AM

apachevoyeur: Confabulat: apachevoyeur: And we were too farking dumb to find them two and three years ago

If drug technology in sports is anything like drug technology at your local seedy convenience store, they're usually at least that far ahead of anyone involved with enforcement. It always takes years for the coppers to dig what's up in the streets, man.

Yeah, but if you're going to say "x is illegal" then come up with a solid method of detecting x or let it go. I know there are agents that can throw off the tests and it is a cat and mouse game to track those as well, but stripping wins from 99-05 seems like it ought to fall outside of some statute of limitations. Set the bar, test to it, and move forward. It won't catch everyone, but if the testing agencies are doing their jobs it should be fair enough. And it's just a bloody sport


Athletes who compete in the Olympics have their blood samples held on record for a minimum of 8 years, and in the case of winners, much longer. Why? Sometimes it takes that long, or longer to develop a test capable of detecting current drugs/PEDs/doping techniques.

There's no "statute of limitations". It's a regulatory body of a sport, not a criminal proceeding. And every athlete knows and agrees to these rules when they compete.
 
2012-08-24 12:46:52 AM

WhyteRaven74: Rev.K: Forget that he had testicular cancer, a known effect of long-time doping.

That argument would work a bit better if he had the cancer recently, not when he was 25. And he must've had it a while given it spread to his lungs and brain.

consider this: Do you really farking think they'd be doing after him if there wasn't proof that he was cheating?

If they have the proof, it should be public. You get busted at the Olympics, the public knows within hours. You get busted during the Tour, the public knows within hours. You get busted at any time by anyone for drug violations and the public knows within hours.


That's not always true and as a track fan you know that very well. I bet you can name a half dozen track positives that took a long time to come out off the top of your head.
 
2012-08-24 12:47:48 AM

WTF Indeed
2012-08-23 11:31:22 PM
cameroncrazy1984: Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!

Yes, it's totally ok to cheat, as long as you raise money for cancer!

That's why enroll all my mistresses in Walk for the Cure races.




Truly farking funny, my brother.
+1000
 
2012-08-24 12:49:07 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Sgygus: apachevoyeur: what does "fully consistent with doping" mean?

I think it means they can't prove anything, but like many in this thread, are certain Lance is a doper.

It means the same thing as "blood spray consistent with a 9mm hollowpoint shot from close range"

AKA, prescision.


Maybe, but I'm not sold on that. If they found trace amounts of a specific molecule, they need to spell it out. If this means that they found trace elements of a chemical that is the product of the PED interacting with another agent, then we have a different story. I'd want to know if using Right Guard deodorant, brushing with Crest toothpaste and eating out Sheryl Crow may have produced the exact same trace elements.
 
2012-08-24 12:49:23 AM

Rev.K: Floyd was doping yet still never beat Lance in a Tour De France where they both competed?


It wouldn't be the first time someone was doping and got beaten by someone who wasn't. Also Landis was busted for something different from what the USADA is saying Armstrong tested positive for. And there have been cases of one cyclist on a team doing something while no one else on the team does. And of course there have also been cases of entire teams being kicked from races because a few if not all members were found to be doing something not allowed.
 
2012-08-24 12:49:30 AM

cameroncrazy1984: whither_apophis: Dr. Steve Brule: I'm pretty sure someone just copied one of the Penn State threads and did a find/replace on "Joe Paterno" and "child rape" with "Lance Armstrong" and "doping."

Hero worshippers gonna hero-worship.

And in about three years this will become the "Chinese swimmer whose name I'm too lazy to look up" thread.

Remember when we got all those breathless stories about how much bigger Armstrong's lungs are than everyone else's? Phelps has had quite a few stories about his wingspan and flipper-like feet. I would not be surprised if we DID have that thread in 3 years.


Is thalidomide a PED for swimming?

/sorry sorry, i feel terrible
//still posting tho
 
2012-08-24 12:49:47 AM
Lance Armstrong be eliminate from any future glory and peddling. LOve it i do.
 
2012-08-24 12:50:47 AM

TheHopeDiamond: Well that sucks


Who cares? Its cycling and people pay attention to maybe one race a year and even then its only a curiosity at best.

Convinced that cycling is the dirtiest sport around.
 
2012-08-24 12:51:08 AM
i.imgur.com

About damn time he got caught.
 
2012-08-24 12:51:20 AM

doubled99: Here's the thing. He'a always been a gigantic asshole. This was well known to anyone who knew him before the cancer.The cancer thing just sanctified everything he did after. fark your fake hero.


Thank you for putting into words what this is all about. The whole sordid saga in 5 sentences. I'll distill it even further: I think he's a jerk so let's get him!
 
2012-08-24 12:54:46 AM

consider this: By the way, his trainer has already received lifetime ban for doping.


So what it's at now... two coaches, trainer, a couple of his super-domestique teammates, and a doctor now - is that right? It's hard to keep track sometimes. Anyway, however many it is now Lance sure does have the worst luck. It must be tough to be so anti-doping yourself but have it all around you constantly. What an irony!
 
2012-08-24 12:55:09 AM
Adolf Oliver Nipples
2012-08-24 12:51:20 AM
doubled99: Here's the thing. He'a always been a gigantic asshole. This was well known to anyone who knew him before the cancer.The cancer thing just sanctified everything he did after. fark your fake hero.

Thank you for putting into words what this is all about. The whole sordid saga in 5 sentences. I'll distill it even further: I think he's a jerk so let's get him!




Santa is real, too. He just can't get through customs anymore what with all the government red tape these days
 
2012-08-24 12:55:38 AM

WhyteRaven74: It wouldn't be the first time someone was doping and got beaten by someone who wasn't.


Seven times.

I'm supposed to believe that others in the Tour De France field, including Armstrong's own teammate Floyd Landis, were doping, yet perfectly clean Lance Armstrong was able to best them all not once, not twice, BUT SEVEN CONSECUTIVE TIMES.

It is too improbable, too impossible to believe. It's bullsh*t.
 
2012-08-24 12:56:39 AM

JohnBigBootay: I bet you can name a half dozen track positives that took a long time to come out off the top of your head.


I can think of one that was kinda overlooked/reversed that smells a bit, Carl Lewis did have an issue with a test way back when.
 
2012-08-24 12:57:02 AM

CommieTaoist: I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness. This reeks of "everyone thinks he's guilty so he must be guilty" which is fine in the court of public opinion but not in anything that actually matters. They keep on investigating, investigating and investigating until finally anyone would have enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not say he absolutely didn't dope but there has been no conclusive evidence released and you know damn well that the French would have been all over the media if there was any clear evidence.


Agreed, every single allegation came from a cyclist who just happen to be selling a book.

I would not be at all surprised if they found concrete evidence of his doing, but neither do I take his wins against former dopers as de facto proof of cheating. The guy had arguably the best tour de france teams assembled specifically to help him win. Look at his first victories against Ulrich. Armstrong had two out three guys pulling him up the mountain long after Ulrich's lieutenant had left him alone. That makes a hell of a difference.

I actually met a guy who tested lance a an amateur. His VO2 max from that test is still the highest ever measured. Is it just possible the guy was just a statistical outlier? What about people like Gebraselasie (sp?) who dominated long distance running at the olympics. Does the fact that he dominated dopers on his own prove something? Why isn't he getting accused?

Give me samples, and I'll believe it in a second, but winning isn't proof of doping, nor is gossip from people selling books. Hincapie's testimony s would be hard to ignore, but those other guys are really suspect in my book. If we are going to accuse everybody who wins the race of cheating, and say that their win itself is proof, what's the point of watching?
 
2012-08-24 12:57:16 AM

4NSpy: "The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place."

Interesting way of phrasing it. Sounds like someone who knowingly exploited a loophole.


Sounds like the Barry bonds defense
 
2012-08-24 12:57:59 AM
Boy, I'm really glad our tax dollars were used to prove that Lance Armstrong cheated when he competed in cycling, instead of funding less important things like education and curing AIDS.
 
mjg
2012-08-24 12:58:08 AM
Does this mean he has to return is ESPYs?
 
2012-08-24 12:58:46 AM
Prove he cheated before you punish him you jerks, just because he decided it not worth fighting a fight that is clearly so stacked against him he cannot win.

Show us a test from during the time when he won those tours and the bronze medal that proves he doped then we can talk.

USADA can't force the Tour to strip him of his titles.

Also dumbasses it over 4 years since he won the bronze medal in 2000 they can't take it back now.
 
2012-08-24 12:59:52 AM

Rev.K: WhyteRaven74: It wouldn't be the first time someone was doping and got beaten by someone who wasn't.

Seven times.

I'm supposed to believe that others in the Tour De France field, including Armstrong's own teammate Floyd Landis, were doping, yet perfectly clean Lance Armstrong was able to best them all not once, not twice, BUT SEVEN CONSECUTIVE TIMES.

It is too improbable, too impossible to believe. It's bullsh*t.


Of course, he was the best of the dopers seven times, which is impressive.

/or he was the best doper
//either way, the Tour De France might as well delete the last 20 or so years off the record books
 
2012-08-24 12:59:57 AM

WhyteRaven74: As it is, they've been going after Armstrong and saying "we have something" and there's been a really ugly back and forth which if they have a failed blood test, there was no need for.


THIS.

If they had anything but hearsay this whole issue would be a non-story. Kind of like how the Chinese teams were kicked out of badminton for tossing matches. It's pretty obvious what they did right there on camera.

They have nothing solid against him, so they have to keep hounding him like this. Now they can crow victory, even though they lost. Even if he was doping, they don't have real evidence of it or it would have been made public a decade ago.
 
2012-08-24 01:00:35 AM

Kouvre: Boy, I'm really glad our tax dollars were used to prove that Lance Armstrong cheated when he competed in cycling, instead of funding less important things like education and curing AIDS.


You must be livid about the rest of our government's budget...
 
2012-08-24 01:01:07 AM

Transubstantive: Kouvre: Boy, I'm really glad our tax dollars were used to prove that Lance Armstrong cheated when he competed in cycling, instead of funding less important things like education and curing AIDS.

You must be livid about the rest of our government's budget...


Pretty much.
 
2012-08-24 01:01:10 AM
Okay, I just don't care. If you guys want to meet in an hour, drive up to his house and stone him to death, let's go. (just kidding NSA, FBI, DHS and other TLAs)

I will say this... when I lived in Houston I lived next to a couple who were track and field stars. I'd even see Carl come over on occasion. Well I asked one of them, how many track athletes take performance drugs. He said ALL OF THEM. He said the only ones that got caught were the ones who couldn't afford the newest drugs or the right substances to mask the older drugs. It wouldn't surprise me if that was largely true and for almost every sport (except synchronized pool dancing or whatever). Kinda makes me sick, but less so than other inequities in our financial and political systems.
 
mjg
2012-08-24 01:02:32 AM
thesportingsnarf.com
 
2012-08-24 01:03:11 AM

cc_rider: Hates to say "I told you so", but...


I do think the agency should be required to show some evidence before formally stripping Lance of the TDF titles, but I am having a really hard time believing that he would give them up simply because he was "tired of fighting the doping allegations". That just doesn't pass the smell test.

Lance, I am disappoint.


Exactly! LeMond has been saying this for over a decade and lost money over it. Greg was as clean as a whistle and has the physicals to back it up.
 
2012-08-24 01:03:59 AM
apachevoyeur: He said ALL OF THEM.

All dopers say that.
 
2012-08-24 01:04:32 AM

Rev.K: WhyteRaven74: That argument would work a bit better if he had the cancer recently, not when he was 25. And he must've had it a while given it spread to his lungs and brain.

So how about his own teammate, Floyd Landis, doping and found guilty.

Lance didn't know about that?

Floyd just doped when Lance wasn't looking?

Floyd was doping yet still never beat Lance in a Tour De France where they both competed?


Bullsh*t.

Occams Razor.

It's pretty goddamn obvious what was going on and Armstrong would rather go out as a cowardly cockroach, clinging to corners of darkness, rather than be a man and admit his wrongdoing.


Landis was hired to escort him up the mountain. So no, even if he was stronger, he would not hasn't beat Armstrong.
 
2012-08-24 01:04:57 AM

steamingpile: Its cycling and people pay attention to maybe one race a year and even then its only a curiosity at best.


That's only the case in America, in Europe? Not so much. Also there are plenty of Americans who follow cycling quite closely.

Rev.K: Seven times.


Armstrong won his first tour in 99, Landis wasn't even in the race until 02, and was nowhere near the front riders his firs two Tours. And in 06, the last time Armstrong won, Landis finished 9th, over 12 minutes behind Armstrong.
 
2012-08-24 01:07:20 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: doubled99: Here's the thing. He'a always been a gigantic asshole. This was well known to anyone who knew him before the cancer.The cancer thing just sanctified everything he did after. fark your fake hero.

Thank you for putting into words what this is all about. The whole sordid saga in 5 sentences. I'll distill it even further: I think he's a jerk so let's get him!


To be fair, he is a gigantic douche.
 
2012-08-24 01:07:59 AM

WhyteRaven74: Armstrong won his first tour in 99, Landis wasn't even in the race until 02, and was nowhere near the front riders his firs two Tours. And in 06, the last time Armstrong won, Landis finished 9th, over 12 minutes behind Armstrong.


And we know Landis was doping.

We KNOW Landis was taking performance enhancing drugs and yet he finished behind Armstrong.

Interesting.
 
2012-08-24 01:08:07 AM

Kouvre: Boy, I'm really glad our tax dollars were used to prove that Lance Armstrong cheated when he competed in cycling, instead of funding less important things like education and curing AIDS.


Only a small part of the USADA's budget comes from federal funds.
 
2012-08-24 01:08:24 AM
I'm just glad I don't have to work tomorrow.

The wailing and gnashing of teeth would make my ears bleed.
 
2012-08-24 01:08:49 AM
kevinsampsell.files.wordpress.com

RIP
 
2012-08-24 01:08:50 AM
 
2012-08-24 01:11:36 AM
So, "eyewitness testimony" from dudes with books to sell and axes to grind is way more true than a pile of passed tests? What a joke.
 
2012-08-24 01:13:37 AM
Lance Armstrong now has more balls than tour titles.
 
2012-08-24 01:14:34 AM

Rev.K: We KNOW Landis was taking performance enhancing drugs and yet he finished behind Armstrong.


Landis finished behind riders for whom there's no suspicion of doping. You might want to try a better argument, like Armstrong himself, not guilt by association.
 
2012-08-24 01:14:43 AM

rga184: CommieTaoist: I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness. This reeks of "everyone thinks he's guilty so he must be guilty" which is fine in the court of public opinion but not in anything that actually matters. They keep on investigating, investigating and investigating until finally anyone would have enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not say he absolutely didn't dope but there has been no conclusive evidence released and you know damn well that the French would have been all over the media if there was any clear evidence.

Agreed, every single allegation came from a cyclist who just happen to be selling a book.

I would not be at all surprised if they found concrete evidence of his doing, but neither do I take his wins against former dopers as de facto proof of cheating. The guy had arguably the best tour de france teams assembled specifically to help him win. Look at his first victories against Ulrich. Armstrong had two out three guys pulling him up the mountain long after Ulrich's lieutenant had left him alone. That makes a hell of a difference.

I actually met a guy who tested lance a an amateur. His VO2 max from that test is still the highest ever measured. Is it just possible the guy was just a statistical outlier? What about people like Gebraselasie (sp?) who dominated long distance running at the olympics. Does the fact that he dominated dopers on his own prove something? Why isn't he getting accused?

Give me samples, and I'll believe it in a second, but winning isn't proof of doping, nor is gossip from people selling books. Hincapie's testimony s would be hard to ignore, but those other guys are really suspect in my book. If we are going to accuse everybody who wins the race of cheating, and say that their win itself is proof, what's the point of watching?


I don't think that's what's happening here but I do want to hear about the testosterone test from 09/10.

But really, at some point it just strains credibility that so many guys around him dope, but he beats them while not doping. And then they go on to say that he does too and he denies it. Once or twice and I'll reserve judgement. But at some point it stains credibility that all of these people are willing to tell the same lie about a former teammate and globally revered hero.

I'm jealous of lots of people. It doesn't really occur to me to holds a press conference and slander them though. And then keep getting other guys to make up the same story. I think some people are so invested in the myth of lance that they can't force themselves to see what's so obviously true.
 
2012-08-24 01:15:39 AM
You know who else likes dope?
www.therealstevegray.com
 
dbv
2012-08-24 01:16:53 AM

Rev.K: WhyteRaven74: Armstrong won his first tour in 99, Landis wasn't even in the race until 02, and was nowhere near the front riders his firs two Tours. And in 06, the last time Armstrong won, Landis finished 9th, over 12 minutes behind Armstrong.

And we know Landis was doping.

We KNOW Landis was taking performance enhancing drugs and yet he finished behind Armstrong.

Interesting.


Maybe I am missing something, but what does one have to do with the other? Are you saying that a person who does not take performance enhancing drugs should always finish behind a person who does take performance enhancing drugs? What about the those in places 7th-2nd, were they doping as well?
 
2012-08-24 01:17:54 AM

cameroncrazy1984: whither_apophis: Dr. Steve Brule: I'm pretty sure someone just copied one of the Penn State threads and did a find/replace on "Joe Paterno" and "child rape" with "Lance Armstrong" and "doping."

Hero worshippers gonna hero-worship.

And in about three years this will become the "Chinese swimmer whose name I'm too lazy to look up" thread.

Remember when we got all those breathless stories about how much bigger Armstrong's lungs are than everyone else's? Phelps has had quite a few stories about his wingspan and flipper-like feet. I would not be surprised if we DID have that thread in 3 years.


Yeah, except at 6'4 you can SEE Phelps' wingspan and freakishly large feet.
 
2012-08-24 01:18:57 AM

dbv: Maybe I am missing something, but what does one have to do with the other? Are you saying that a person who does not take performance enhancing drugs should always finish behind a person who does take performance enhancing drugs? What about the those in places 7th-2nd, were they doping as well?


Again.

I'm supposed to believe that Armstrong beat a field full of dopers, including his own teammate, Floyd Landis, not once, not twice, but seven consecutive times.

Armstrong took no performance enhancing drugs, none at all, and beat a field riddled with dopers seven times in a row.

No.

No. F*cking. Way.
 
2012-08-24 01:19:24 AM
s3-ec.buzzfed.com
 
2012-08-24 01:19:38 AM
Great! Now all the guys with the Lance Armstrong starter kits won't be clogging up the roadways during rush hour.

\hopefully
 
2012-08-24 01:19:46 AM

JohnBigBootay: hear about the testosterone test from 09/10.


ESPN said it's an EPO and blood transfusion thing, not a testosterone issue.
 
2012-08-24 01:22:43 AM

Rev.K: Armstrong took no performance enhancing drugs, none at all, and beat a field riddled with dopers seven times in a row.


Miguel Indurain won the tour five times in a row, and was no talk of him doping except perhaps by a few just trying to stir the pot. Though riders he beat were busted for it and others were rumored to be doing it.
 
2012-08-24 01:25:05 AM

WhyteRaven74: Miguel Indurain won the tour five times in a row, and was no talk of him doping except perhaps by a few just trying to stir the pot. Though riders he beat were busted for it and others were rumored to be doing it.


Then bust his ass too if he's guilty. I don't give a f*ck.

I'm merely pointing out that the logic one has to follow to believe that Armstrong didn't dope, WHILE HIS OWN TEAMMATE WAS DOING IT, is a pretty goddamn impossible story to believe.
 
2012-08-24 01:27:36 AM
yiiiipppppie!
i have been waiting 1 years for this announcement!
I'm very happy!
 
2012-08-24 01:28:11 AM

expobill: yiiiipppppie!
i have been waiting 11 years for this announcement!
I'm very happy!

 
2012-08-24 01:32:57 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Right, because stripping his titles means that nobody remembers he won them. You know who won those Tours if Lance didn't? The guy who finished dead last, because he was the only one who either didn't dope or sucked so bad at it that he deserves to win.


100%wrong!
 
2012-08-24 01:33:04 AM

Barbecue Bob: [cbsbaltimore.files.wordpress.com image 300x381]
RIP Louis Armstrong


Over 75 posts before the first one?
 
2012-08-24 01:34:51 AM
www.itv.com
 
2012-08-24 01:35:32 AM
www.periodistadigital.com
 
2012-08-24 01:35:41 AM

Rev.K: WHILE HIS OWN TEAMMATE WAS DOING IT,


Guilt by association doesn't work all that well. Riders have been busted while superior teammates not only haven't been busted but haven't been suspected of anything. If you want to focus on Armstrong, go nuts, but guilt by association in cycling doesn't necessarily work very well. Also keep in mind, Landis only ever failed one drug test, the test after the seventeenth stage in the 06 tour. And he failed for something that was readily and easily tested for at the time. Oh and in 05 when Landis finished 9th? He wasn't on the same team as Armstrong.
 
2012-08-24 01:35:56 AM
Well, guess that means he's guilty. You don't just give up on something like this if you're actually innocent.
 
2012-08-24 01:36:13 AM

WhyteRaven74: Rev.K: Armstrong took no performance enhancing drugs, none at all, and beat a field riddled with dopers seven times in a row.

Miguel Indurain won the tour five times in a row, and was no talk of him doping except perhaps by a few just trying to stir the pot. Though riders he beat were busted for it and others were rumored to be doing it.


I think that's the real issue for me. It's a sport where it seems that just about everyone was doping and we don't know exactly how long this has been going on. So, you strip Lance of his Tour wins but you don't touch Indurain? Or any number of Tour winners over the past 30 years? Everyone is suspect. So, how do you confidently strip Lance of his titles without stripping everyone else? It seems very arbitrary.

Just as with baseball, there are the heroes and the villains, but nobody can say for sure who did and who did not cheat. Yeah, Barry Bonds probably cheated, but so did Chuck Knoblauch. So, it's not like you can just spot the guy with the giant head and huge physique and say that he's the cheater, Anyone can be the cheater, and maybe everyone is. Nobody knows.

So, tar and feather whomever you want, but in this era of doping, which has been around for three decades at least, nobody can say without a shadow of a doubt who did, and who did not, cheat somewhere along the way.
 
2012-08-24 01:37:07 AM
So out of 600 tests, all passed, they somehow still think he doped? Sounds very much like a witch hunt
 
2012-08-24 01:38:54 AM
LIVEWRONG

/too soon?
 
2012-08-24 01:39:37 AM

UNC_Samurai: Once again, the record for consecutive victories in France is held by Germany.


no, Indurain is the only cyclist to win 5 in a row.]
/viva banesto!
 
dbv
2012-08-24 01:39:55 AM

Rev.K: WhyteRaven74: Miguel Indurain won the tour five times in a row, and was no talk of him doping except perhaps by a few just trying to stir the pot. Though riders he beat were busted for it and others were rumored to be doing it.

Then bust his ass too if he's guilty. I don't give a f*ck.

I'm merely pointing out that the logic one has to follow to believe that Armstrong didn't dope, WHILE HIS OWN TEAMMATE WAS DOING IT, is a pretty goddamn impossible story to believe.


I don't really follow cycling and couldn't care less if Armstrong is guilty or not. The youtube/espn level of fallacious arguments against Armstrong are kind of ridiculous in this thread though; is there a lot of butthurt in the cycling world against Lance or something?
 
2012-08-24 01:39:58 AM
Okay, great, they got Armstrong like they always wanted.

Now what?

Now what does cycling have to show for... well, pretty much everything post-Miguel Indurain? Now it's just an unbroken wake of doping, doping, doping in just about every major Tour de France jersey since then, to the point where you have to think really, really hard to come up with anyone who's actually been clean the whole time. There's almost nobody left to bust anymore.
 
2012-08-24 01:42:27 AM

BobNesta420: Everyone is suspect.


There really wouldn't be a reason to suspect Indurain given what was widely known and circulated about his physiology that provided him advantages as is that couldn't be gotten by taking any sort of performance enhancer.
 
2012-08-24 01:43:18 AM

JohnBigBootay: But most of all he doesn't want you to see George Hincapie on the stand. Because he knows George will tell the truth and you'll believe him.



Oh bull shiat. They rounded up cyclists caught doping red handed and offered reduced suspensions (as opposed to lifetime bans) if they would offer testimony implicating Armstrong in doping. If you think that's proof, or even remotely believable, then you're a fool.
 
2012-08-24 01:46:03 AM
20054 Francisco Mancebo (ESP) Illes Balears-Caisse d'Epargne +9' 59"

Banesto's 10th yellow jersey!
 
2012-08-24 01:47:32 AM
Usain Bolt, winner 100m 200m gold in 2008.
Usain Bolt, winner 100m 200m gold in 2012.

DOPER!
 
2012-08-24 01:47:36 AM

WhyteRaven74: BobNesta420: Everyone is suspect.

There really wouldn't be a reason to suspect Indurain given what was widely known and circulated about his physiology that provided him advantages as is that couldn't be gotten by taking any sort of performance enhancer.


what i love about Miguel was he suffered from seasonally allergies, like i do!
he is one of the greatest!
 
2012-08-24 01:50:13 AM
www.esciclismo.com
 
2012-08-24 01:50:14 AM

JohnBigBootay: Just google George Hincapie. He was on every team and considered to be his number one lieutenant and extremely loyal and honest to a fault. Never tested positive for anything either. He certainly has no reason to lie about lance and every reason to lie for lance. Anyway, that's whose testimony I want to see.



Well if Armstrong conceding the case is an admission of guilt that he doped then Hincapie's outright admission to the USADA that he doped should be proof enough that he isn't honest to a fault and he tested positive at some point. The fact that he is implicating Lance in exchange for a lenient 6 month ban (in a case devoid of anything other than purchased testimony) should tell you that he has every reason to lie.
 
2012-08-24 01:52:23 AM
Sorry but no matter how much he whines about getting beat by dopers Greg LeMond was not clean either.
 
2012-08-24 01:56:23 AM

relaxitsjustme: Greg LeMond was not clean either.


And your proof is?
 
kab
2012-08-24 01:58:06 AM
Can you blame him? He probably figures that he's made enough money, so is basically saying "fark you, think whatever you want".

USADA and ICU need to come to grips that if you don't get busted AT THE TIME of the competition, that's the end of the story. Write it down, hand over the crown, and move on to next year. And if that's not going to be the case, hopefully Indurain, Mercx, Hinault, and all the other multi-time winners are put under just as much scrutiny as Armstrong... but you know that won't happen.

Either way, the end result is a general public that simply assumes that every last winner of this race is a doper that simply hasn't been busted yet, and that isn't going to help the sport whatsoever, nor any other sports where drug testing is a huge issue.
 
2012-08-24 02:01:51 AM

WhyteRaven74: relaxitsjustme: Greg LeMond was not clean either.

And your proof is?


There is no proof, only some circumstantial evidence that cannot be ignored. #1 is the fact that he held the TdF ITT record for years. Even through the 'doping era' on equipment that was not nearly as aero as the stuff they are riding now. Without checking it I think it's still the 2nd or 3rd fastest.
 
2012-08-24 02:04:15 AM

kab: Can you blame him? He probably figures that he's made enough money, so is basically saying "fark you, think whatever you want".

USADA and ICU need to come to grips that if you don't get busted AT THE TIME of the competition, that's the end of the story. Write it down, hand over the crown, and move on to next year. And if that's not going to be the case, hopefully Indurain, Mercx, Hinault, and all the other multi-time winners are put under just as much scrutiny as Armstrong... but you know that won't happen.

Either way, the end result is a general public that simply assumes that every last winner of this race is a doper that simply hasn't been busted yet, and that isn't going to help the sport whatsoever, nor any other sports where drug testing is a huge issue.


There should definitely be a time limit on this kind of thing. If you can't prove it in say, 2 years after the race, then they won end of story.
 
2012-08-24 02:04:22 AM
Jens Voigt of RadioShack-Nissan-Trek Dominates Stage 4 of the 2012 USA Pro Challenge.

He's 41 year old.

/obviously a doper
 
2012-08-24 02:09:39 AM
That Lance Armstrong is one nutty guy!

/get it?
 
kab
2012-08-24 02:11:15 AM

Gosling: Now what does cycling have to show for... well, pretty much everything post-Miguel Indurain? Now it's just an unbroken wake of doping, doping, doping in just about every major Tour de France jersey since then,


Now? It's been part of the tour since the race started. They didn't even start testing for it until 1965.
 
2012-08-24 02:11:48 AM

relaxitsjustme: #1 is the fact that he held the TdF ITT record for years


If you mean the speed record, he stills has it. Also LeMond rode in an era where you were allowed to time trial on a bike where the front wheel was smaller than the back wheel which would put the rider in fairly aerodynamic body position. Interestingly LeMond didn't always use such a bike for time trials, but here's a pic from one time trial when he did

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-24 02:13:24 AM

Darth Hater: Lance Armstrong cheated?!? I'm so hurt by this. How dare he cheat the system, become famous, and then raise a shiat load of money to fight cancer. Cancer deserved a fair fight. Shame on you Lance...SHAME ON YOU!!!


i.imgur.com
 
2012-08-24 02:14:14 AM
Someone should sue the USDF on his behalf. It's a crock.

They burnt their witch.
 
2012-08-24 02:14:29 AM

JK47: JohnBigBootay: Just google George Hincapie. He was on every team and considered to be his number one lieutenant and extremely loyal and honest to a fault. Never tested positive for anything either. He certainly has no reason to lie about lance and every reason to lie for lance. Anyway, that's whose testimony I want to see.


Well if Armstrong conceding the case is an admission of guilt that he doped then Hincapie's outright admission to the USADA that he doped should be proof enough that he isn't honest to a fault and he tested positive at some point. The fact that he is implicating Lance in exchange for a lenient 6 month ban (in a case devoid of anything other than purchased testimony) should tell you that he has every reason to lie.


You can explain away Landis if you want. And Hamilton even. But now you have to add Leipheimer, Vande Velde, Zabriskie, and Hincapie. There's nobody left man. At what point do you say 'wait a minute... are all of these guys lying? Maybe I've been wrong about this and it's just this one guy who's lying?'

The legacy is gone man. At the very, very best every one of his tours is grossly tainted by the simple fact that virtually his entire team has admitted to doping now. There's simply no way in hell the farking winner of the damn thing was surrounded by this many dopers without knowing what was going on. It was his farking team.
 
2012-08-24 02:15:56 AM
Chuck Norris once challenged Lance Armstrong in a "Who has more testicles?" contest. Chuck Norris won by 5.
 
kab
2012-08-24 02:19:40 AM
Actually, reading his full statement, I definitely can't blame him.

USADA is basically deciding that they're the governing body in a race that they have nothing to do with.
 
2012-08-24 02:22:10 AM

WhyteRaven74: steamingpile: Its cycling and people pay attention to maybe one race a year and even then its only a curiosity at best.

That's only the case in America, in Europe? Not so much. Also there are plenty of Americans who follow cycling quite closely.

Rev.K: Seven times.

Armstrong won his first tour in 99, Landis wasn't even in the race until 02, and was nowhere near the front riders his firs two Tours. And in 06, the last time Armstrong won, Landis finished 9th, over 12 minutes behind Armstrong.


Just curious, how long have you been following professional bicycle racing? Have you ever raced? Do you ever cycle? Thanks.
 
2012-08-24 02:26:29 AM

WhyteRaven74: Kouvre: Boy, I'm really glad our tax dollars were used to prove that Lance Armstrong cheated when he competed in cycling, instead of funding less important things like education and curing AIDS.

Only a small part of the USADA's budget comes from federal funds.


$1 of federal funding to this joke of an agency is too much.
 
2012-08-24 02:29:43 AM

dandude28: So out of 600 tests, all passed, they somehow still think he doped? Sounds very much like a witch hunt


236 tests, 233 passes.

His entire team was going to line up and testify against him.

Marion Jones never failed a drug test either...
 
2012-08-24 02:30:28 AM

Account Created To Respond To Your Idiocy: how long have you been following professional bicycle racing?


I've been following it a good 25 years now, granted not as much in the early days since there wasn't as much on TV to watch and no internet, but back when LeMond won his Tours I was already a big fan. I never did race though I used to ride a bunch, at 15 I was riding a good 220 to 300 miles a week, depending a bit on the weather and I had no problem riding at a nice clip. And I really did want to race, alas the velodrome in the area wasn't exactly close to where I was growing up and getting my parents to agree to take me there a few times a week would've been a hard sell. And at the time wasn't very much in the area for road racing either. Though there was some stuff, tour rider Christian Vande Velde grew up not very far from where I did and he's just two years younger than I am. Then again his dad was a former rider, so wasn't like he had to ponder asking his parents if he could race.
 
2012-08-24 02:31:37 AM

kab: Actually, reading his full statement, I definitely can't blame him.

USADA is basically deciding that they're the governing body in a race that they have nothing to do with.


Yeah, not sure he's giving you the whole scoop there. He sort of falls to mention the 09/10 blood they claim to have. Or that four brand new teammates who have not written books or been positive in the past are ready to roll on him. I'd have declined the hearing too. What would you rather be? Seen as guilty and be done with it? Or be seen as guilty while you and a million other people closely scrutinize your shame as scientists reveal their damning results right before you watch your closest friend and longest loyal teammate expose you on the witness stand?
 
2012-08-24 02:34:32 AM

echo5juliet: LIVEWRONG

/too soon?


too late
 
2012-08-24 02:36:31 AM

WhyteRaven74: relaxitsjustme: #1 is the fact that he held the TdF ITT record for years

If you mean the speed record, he stills has it. Also LeMond rode in an era where you were allowed to time trial on a bike where the front wheel was smaller than the back wheel which would put the rider in fairly aerodynamic body position. Interestingly LeMond didn't always use such a bike for time trials, but here's a pic from one time trial when he did

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 550x361]


I'm not going to get into a big pissing match about whether LeMond doped but he put 58 seconds into a confessed doper. So to me it's the same thing as the people saying Armstrong is clean while beating a bunch of dopers.
 
2012-08-24 02:38:27 AM

WhyteRaven74: at 15 I was riding a good 220 to 300 miles a week


300 miles?
 
2012-08-24 02:46:04 AM

What_Would_Jimi_Do: 300 miles?


Yeah, not hard to do over the course of a week, even riding just 5 days during the week. Just average of 60 miles a day for each day riding, not a big deal. I rode over 80 miles in a single ride here and there.
 
2012-08-24 02:46:20 AM
I certainly know guys who do that. I would if I could but that's a good month for me. Then again I suck.
 
2012-08-24 02:48:19 AM

WhyteRaven74: BobNesta420: Everyone is suspect.

There really wouldn't be a reason to suspect Indurain given what was widely known and circulated about his physiology that provided him advantages as is that couldn't be gotten by taking any sort of performance enhancer.


But isn't there some story about Armstrong having an enlarged heart that gives him some physiological advantages? And Michael Phelps having double jointed ankles, or something like that? These guys may have some natural advantages over other typical super athletes that they were competing against, but in this era of rampant doping, it seems to make sense that if everyone else is doping, that these guys who already have a natural advantage would have a leg up to put them over the top if they were doping too. But if these naturally gifted athletes weren't given an advantage because their competitors were doping, wouldn't they be on somewhat equal footing? So why wouldn't it be possible that Indurain could have been doping just because everyone else was, to make him that much better?

If everyone is doping, then the guys with the natural advantages could be put on an equal footing to capitalize on their natural advantages to put them in a position that they were better than the rest. So, if a non-doping Indurain is better equipped than any other non-doping cyclist, then a doping Indurain would be better than other doping cyclists. Same is true with Armstrong, I would guess. I'm no professional in this matter, by any stretch, but I'm still inclined to think that in an era when so many people are doping, how can we assume that the best athletes aren't also doping just to capitalize on their natural physiological advantages. So, if we assume Armstrong was doping with his natural advantages, how can we not assume that someone else wasn't? 

There are just too many questions to assume that Armstong was definitely doping, but Indurain or LeMond wasn't. It hasn't been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Armstrong was doping, and it hasn't been proven that those other guys weren't. So it still seems very arbitrary that we go after Armstrong and strip his titles, but the other guys get a pass. As far as I'm concerned, everybody probably was, and these guys were just better than the rest during this tainted period.
 
2012-08-24 02:53:07 AM

JosephFinn: So he doesn't admit guilt, but just stops fighting the witch hunt. I'm OK with that.


The bastards have dogged Armsrong for so many years it is ridiculous. Despite constant litigation and "charges," Armstrong has consistently prevailed. At this point his options are go bankrupt paying lawyers to fight another round or just throw in the towel. He doesn't get a public defender in this Kafka-court. As far as I'm concerned, this is not "justice" or anything of the kind.

They should all just drop it.
 
2012-08-24 02:56:17 AM
I think a lot of what I see is an anger / denial thing going on here. And I'm still shocked that do many believe an innocent Armstrong would quit on the eve of the last time he'd have to deal with this investigation. He didn't quit because he thinks the evidence is trumped up. He quit because he doesn't want to sit there at an ugly varnished oak table in a hard chair whilst they parade it in front of him. oh, and watch all his former teammates tell everyone he's a juicer and spill specifics.

Best case he's a criminally negligent dolt who was literally surrounded by dopers despite the fact he hired the coaches and trainers and was, as has been so painstakingly detailed by so many writers, completely in charge of everything. It simply strains credibility that he did not know anything.
 
2012-08-24 02:56:41 AM

BobNesta420: But isn't there some story about Armstrong having an enlarged heart that gives him some physiological advantages?


There was some stuff like that, but Indurian's lung capacity was almost 30% bigger than average and his resting heart rate was in the neighborhood of 30 to 32 beats a minute. They did the usual performance tests on him and his body just wasn't taxed the same way other riders' bodies were. It was why he did so well in time trials. His body didn't have to work as hard as other riders to get oxygen to where it needed to go, which in cycling is a huge advantage.
 
2012-08-24 03:00:31 AM
From the article I read, they hadn't stripped him yet, and they don't have the actual power to strip him of his titles. They can claim 'banned for life' and 'stripped of titles', but their jurisdiction in the matter isn't being recognized by the international community, and rightly so from what I gather.

It's a shiat storm.

I believe the most telling thing is that the criminal case didn't find evidence, yet this shiat is still going through.
 
2012-08-24 03:01:27 AM
god damnit.
 
2012-08-24 03:03:55 AM
thumbnails.hulu.com
It's time
 
2012-08-24 03:18:22 AM
When I was a kid, the Tour was a big thing to watch... we only had like 30 channels back then. But now... I'd never even have known about the last Tour except for minute blips on SportsCenter. Maybe this is just an effort to draw more attention to an event that's fallen by the wayside.
 
2012-08-24 03:19:27 AM
WHOA WHOA WHOA. I just read the SI article. Jesus, that was vicious in comparison to the regular CNN site article - which provided much more information. That thing was just spewing hatred from the pages.
 
2012-08-24 03:20:30 AM

mbuna: fallen by the wayside.


in Europe it's still one of the biggest things in sports. Part of the problem in the US has been the coverage has been all over the place, hard to keep a good following when the coverage is a mess, though this year's was pretty darn good.
 
2012-08-24 03:26:14 AM

DeathByGeekSquad: I just read the SI article.


If it's the same one I'm reading right now, the author can't even manage to get what Armstrong is accused of doing right. Guy says steroids, but Armstrong isn't accused of using steroids, but rather EPO, which boosts red blood cell counts and of using transfused blood to up his red blood cell count. Which actually for a rider in the Tour is more help than steroids really would be.
 
2012-08-24 03:28:26 AM

mbuna: the Tour was a big thing to watch.


and thanks :)
 
2012-08-24 03:33:50 AM

WhyteRaven74: Account Created To Respond To Your Idiocy: how long have you been following professional bicycle racing?

I've been following it a good 25 years now, granted not as much in the early days since there wasn't as much on TV to watch and no internet, but back when LeMond won his Tours I was already a big fan. I never did race though I used to ride a bunch, at 15 I was riding a good 220 to 300 miles a week, depending a bit on the weather and I had no problem riding at a nice clip. And I really did want to race, alas the velodrome in the area wasn't exactly close to where I was growing up and getting my parents to agree to take me there a few times a week would've been a hard sell. And at the time wasn't very much in the area for road racing either. Though there was some stuff, tour rider Christian Vande Velde grew up not very far from where I did and he's just two years younger than I am. Then again his dad was a former rider, so wasn't like he had to ponder asking his parents if he could race.


Cool. I've been riding and following racing, for like 30 years now myself. I used to race criteriums mostly, and some road races. I used to kill it on an MTB until the bike got stolen. Just today, I rode at the BMX park for a session.... So I'm really getting a kick....

I'm saying that Lance doped, like the whole peloton did during that time. Surely you remember Lance before cancer when he was a great one day racer, like Kelly was. He didn't do too well in his first tours, still a great one day racer- won the greatest one-day race; the pro worlds. Suddenly the cancer survivor John Wayne American Cowboy starts winning the tour and it starts making cycling popular again with potential boatloads of money to be made off of the American market. It stands to reason that the UCI would then benefit from the increase of popularity of racing by looking the other way to certain racers doping. If you recall, the USADA's letter alleges corruption coming from the UCI and I believe that the USADA was very willing to name names within the UCI as well. Recall that two of the allegations against Lance are that he a got a back-dated TUE for a steroid cream while leading the tour in 99 and making a so called donation to the UCI to cover up a positive test after the tour of Switzerland. They also claim blood doping in samples of 2010 and 2011 from the last comeback, evidence of which they claimed would be revealed at arbitration. Arbitration that Lance chose not to fight. What does this mean? Well, this isn't a criminal trial. What this seems like to me is that the USADA is part of the WADA, which governs international competition sports. Pro cycling signed on to the WADA code to be recognized as an international competition sport. USADA, as part of the WADA rules the UCI signed off on, has stated that they have evidence to disqualify his results, and are in fact doing so. Lance has recourse to address the arbitration panel and refute their claims, publicly if he chooses to do so. Looks like he choose not to show up and defend himself. To me this is more easily understood as like a job dispute. Imagine if Lance was a contractor, and he got caught cutting corners on materials or billing hours or something, and the licensing board says "don't trust anything built by this guy," and also he is never allowed on job site again- i.e., no more competing in any WADA sport- triathalon. They just kicked him right in the nut in front of the whole world and gave himself a chance to fight back and he did not. Seems odd, don't you think?

Been drinking and may not reply until tomorrow.....

Cheers. Ride on.



Suck it Lance. DOPER
 
2012-08-24 03:39:13 AM
LIVESTR*NG

/amidoinitrite?
 
2012-08-24 03:50:24 AM
"LIESTRONG"
 
2012-08-24 03:56:21 AM
I think that for the month prior to the Tour de France, all competitors should be confined in a big building, with 24-hour surveillance.

That way, any effects of doping will have worn off
 
2012-08-24 03:57:07 AM

Account Created To Respond To Your Idiocy: I rode at the BMX park for a session..


heh I actually want to get a BMX bike myself.

As for Armstrong and doping, he may well have done it, my issue is with how things are being handled. If there is a positive test result, there's no point in trying to line up people to testify and all the rest, you have physical proof of cheating and that ends it. Also there's issue of when the positive test result is from, if it's from 09 but they can't haven't turned up anything in his earlier samples, of which they would have lots, then the punishment is a bit hinky. But mostly I'm just a bit displeased with how the USADA is handling things.
 
2012-08-24 04:02:49 AM
Maybe cycling as a whole should be investigated, how could he have passed the tests when he was actually racing if they had samples that show he was cheating? Good thing Americans don't actually care about cycling as a sport.
 
2012-08-24 04:04:03 AM

rga184: CommieTaoist: I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness. This reeks of "everyone thinks he's guilty so he must be guilty" which is fine in the court of public opinion but not in anything that actually matters. They keep on investigating, investigating and investigating until finally anyone would have enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not say he absolutely didn't dope but there has been no conclusive evidence released and you know damn well that the French would have been all over the media if there was any clear evidence.

Agreed, every single allegation came from a cyclist who just happen to be selling a book.

I would not be at all surprised if they found concrete evidence of his doing, but neither do I take his wins against former dopers as de facto proof of cheating. The guy had arguably the best tour de france teams assembled specifically to help him win. Look at his first victories against Ulrich. Armstrong had two out three guys pulling him up the mountain long after Ulrich's lieutenant had left him alone. That makes a hell of a difference.

I actually met a guy who tested lance a an amateur. His VO2 max from that test is still the highest ever measured. Is it just possible the guy was just a statistical outlier?


In addition he produces less lactic acid than the average person. Ohhhh......lactic acid build up is something that you don't experience in front of the computer btw....no matter which particular porn you are fapping to.

An article describing his physical characteristics through the eyes of a researcher:

Link

If he was doping, I would have thought that would have come out during the 7 years he was winning, not now. Show me the positives for any of the Tours that he won. That's all I need to see. Until then, I really don't give a fark what the USADA has to say.
 
2012-08-24 04:05:53 AM
I'm not sure who they want to give the titles to if Lance is stripped. Basso, Ullrich, Klöde, Pantani? All of the 2nd and 3rd placers were dopers. Is anyone going to Spanish Inquisition those guys if they get handed a title they allso don't deserve?
 
2012-08-24 04:10:07 AM

HaywoodJablonski: That way, any effects of doping will have worn off


For what the big thing is among cyclists, wouldn't need that long. EPO which is used to boost red blood cell production doesn't provide benefits for long at all once you stop taking it. The body returns to its usual red blood production and count drops pretty fast unless you happen to be up at altitude. In the case of transfusions to bump red blood cell count, that disappears even faster. In the case of testosterone it's in and out real fast, in the 06 Tour when Floyd Landis got caught with too much, his test the day before came back with normal testosterone levels, then after the sixteenth stage he wasn't even close to what's acceptable and a test a day later would have him pretty well back to acceptable levels unless he took some more. Landis was a case of a performance that just raised eyebrows. On the sixteenth stage of the Tour he didn't just ride badly he looked like he utterly fell apart. The next day he just flat out blew by everyone, which raised some eyebrows. It's not unusual to see a rider ride not well one day and ride well the very next, but you don't see them go from riding just badly one day to having an all time awesome ride the next day. There was some talk that he had been using synthetic testosterone all along and just screwed up that one day with whatever he would've done to mask the levels, but given his performance that doesn't seem all that plausible.
 
2012-08-24 04:20:41 AM
Here is what would be awesome....if Lance is stripped of his titles, and all of the cyclists declined to accept the rank promotion. Imagine, no Yellow Jersey for those years.
 
2012-08-24 04:30:34 AM
Yet another example of motorists screwing with innocent bicycle riders.
 
2012-08-24 04:56:14 AM

WhyteRaven74: Account Created To Respond To Your Idiocy: I rode at the BMX park for a session..

heh I actually want to get a BMX bike myself.

As for Armstrong and doping, he may well have done it, my issue is with how things are being handled. If there is a positive test result, there's no point in trying to line up people to testify and all the rest, you have physical proof of cheating and that ends it. Also there's issue of when the positive test result is from, if it's from 09 but they can't haven't turned up anything in his earlier samples, of which they would have lots, then the punishment is a bit hinky. But mostly I'm just a bit displeased with how the USADA is handling things.


I pretty much agree with this, from my perspective this certainly is a witch hunt because of the number of times they've gone after him for the same thing and in fact, even the same races. There was even a criminal investigation that didn't go anywhere.

I know this isn't the real judicial system, but there has to be a limit of the number of times you can put someone on trial for the same presumed offense, otherwise everything is more or less politically motivated to some degree or another.
 
2012-08-24 04:59:19 AM
On the issue of the there being a lot of people doping, during one of the big climb stages this year they compared the times on one of the climbs this year to those of the past, and even the very best climbers this year couldn't match what had been done 8 years ago or even 15 years ago. Indeed in the late 90s the times just dropped like a stone, then two years ago shot back up back to roughly what they used to be. So either all of a sudden the best climbers in the world got way better and then got way worse, all at the same time mind you, or something was up.

And because it's come up Greg LeMond's record for fastest speed in a Tour time trial isn't actually so odd, it was the last stage of the Tour, so no point in holding back at all and LeMond was a very good time trial rider to begin with. It wasn't exactly shocking he could cruise along at 36 mph given such speed was not beyond what he had already shown himself capable of. Plus it was a fairly short time trial, just over 15 miles which means even less concern with holding back. And also the speed comes down to a part of cycling that doesn't get talked about much, gear ratios. LeMond rode a 54x12 almost the whole way, that's 54 teeth in the chain ring up front and 12 for the gear in back. He did shift as he came up the Champs Elysees to an easier gear, 54x13. By way of comparison a regular road bike you can get at a local bike shop might have a top gear of 50x14 or if it's a bit more performance oriented 52x12, and while it doesn't seam like there's much different between a 50x14 and a 54x12, there's a good amount of difference. Also the average mere mortal will have their quads begging for mercy if they tried to really push a 54x12.
 
2012-08-24 05:00:51 AM
Those pointing out that "eveyone else was on drugs so awarding the titles to someone else doesn't solve the problem" are in some way correct. However, the argument also somewhat condemns Armstrong as to suggest one clean guy could beat everyone else who was doped has always troubled me.

I recently read David Millar's autobiography (which I recommend) and his view of Armstrong is interesting as is his relationship with him through the book. In short, towards the end of his book, Millar basically makes the same suggestion - eveyone else was doing it so it is almost impossible to believe Armstring didn't.

As for the testing issue, the way I undertsand EPO doping (mostly from Millar's book) is that if done methodically in training it will never be picked up in a race and that was all the testing there was then. If you want to know about doping in cycling read Millar's book.

I'd like to believe that he was clean but balance of probablilities is against it.
 
2012-08-24 05:12:17 AM
long live Greg Lemond
 
2012-08-24 05:15:04 AM

Brigandaca: is that if done methodically in training it will never be picked up in a race and that was all the testing there was then


Well if it's done right it can work out that way, but the UCI is coming out with something called a blood passport that's going to make it a lot harder. Basically they'll take random samples of blood and urine and beyond checking for EPO they'll also check red blood cell counts and hemoglobin levels and establish they are within the rules. Then this will be used as a baseline for subsequent testing, you know what each riders' baseline counts are, so if they get tested during the season and all of a sudden their counts are off, it makes it easier to spot EPO use or transfusion based doping.
 
2012-08-24 05:25:53 AM
I have just one question: whether he doped or not, why should I give a fark?
 
2012-08-24 05:51:23 AM
But on the bright side, OJ Simpson just got a long-awaited golf partner.
They're perfect for each other.
 
2012-08-24 05:57:55 AM
The man has never failed a banned substances test. So why have various persons kept hounding him, looking for something, anything, to get him on? Why do they want so badly for it to be true that he used banned substances? And why is it that he can be stripped of his gold metal, Seven TourDeFrance wins and prize money since 1998 even though his accusers have not proven anything?
 
2012-08-24 05:58:34 AM

WhyteRaven74: Brigandaca: is that if done methodically in training it will never be picked up in a race and that was all the testing there was then

Well if it's done right it can work out that way, but the UCI is coming out with something called a blood passport that's going to make it a lot harder. Basically they'll take random samples of blood and urine and beyond checking for EPO they'll also check red blood cell counts and hemoglobin levels and establish they are within the rules. Then this will be used as a baseline for subsequent testing, you know what each riders' baseline counts are, so if they get tested during the season and all of a sudden their counts are off, it makes it easier to spot EPO use or transfusion based doping.


Then & now. This just didn't exist at the time in any sort of regulated fashion. The creastion of the Garmin Slipstream team was the start of cleaning things up and Sky went further. Again, all covered in excellent detail in Millar's book.
 
2012-08-24 05:59:39 AM
Adding to my last post, do his accusers have something to gain? Or is it "I don't understand how he can be doing so well and not be using banned substances, so he must be using banned substances!"
 
2012-08-24 06:01:25 AM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: The man has never failed a banned substances test. So why have various persons kept hounding him, looking for something, anything, to get him on? Why do they want so badly for it to be true that he used banned substances? And why is it that he can be stripped of his gold metal, Seven TourDeFrance wins and prize money since 1998 even though his accusers have not proven anything?


Not failing the tests is only as good an argument as how extensive the testing was and at the time the testing was poor. In essence, you could do anything you liked outside of a race especially if you lived in Spain or Italy rather than France.

That said, as everyone else was doing it too - does one drug cheat beating other drug cheats invalidate the result?
 
2012-08-24 06:09:55 AM

doglover: I consider doping to be acceptable


I know you're just trolling, but over breakfast we got a chuckle imagining what it would be like if there was an Olympics just for drug cheats - any and all doping would be mandatory.

Imagine the thrills, the broken records, the popped veins, the epic rages on the medal stands, and the the unfortunate deaths during the events. Admit it, the ratings would make Rollerball and Death Race 2000 look like Captain Kangaroo.

Hell, why we're at it, why not do the same for children's sports? It'd be HILARIOUS to watch kids play to WIN!
 
2012-08-24 06:45:47 AM

WhyteRaven74: So they have no positive drug tests, they aren't in charge of the Tour, but they want to strip him of the titles. Uh ok.


Yes they have positive tests. His B tests are all positive.

Remember, if you pass the A test, then the B test is just stored. Today you can test for EPO though.
 
2012-08-24 06:50:15 AM
So he passed hundreds of drug tests without issue and spent years, tons of time and probably no small amount of money fighting against people who just wouldn't leave him the F alone already?

I don't blame him one bit. This started purely and simply because he was an American doing it. This issue would have been dead and buried long ago if he'd been from one of the Euro countries and if he'd been from anywhere else, you'd be a racist for not letting it go.
 
2012-08-24 07:06:44 AM

randomjsa: So he passed hundreds of drug tests without issue and spent years, tons of time and probably no small amount of money fighting against people who just wouldn't leave him the F alone already?

I don't blame him one bit. This started purely and simply because he was an American doing it. This issue would have been dead and buried long ago if he'd been from one of the Euro countries and if he'd been from anywhere else, you'd be a racist for not letting it go.


2/10. no bites.
 
2012-08-24 07:09:07 AM

spawn73: . His B tests are all positive.


Well if they are, then all the USADA had to do was release those test results and this was all done and over with.
 
2012-08-24 07:12:30 AM
Well, duh.

Just remember what Armstrong's defenders would have you believe, that 98% of the cycling community was doping, except for Lance Armstrong, the guy who won every Tour de France for 7 years.
 
2012-08-24 07:19:22 AM
If only this kills the recent rash of idiot bicyclists on the roads, it was well worth it.
 
2012-08-24 07:44:02 AM
Interestingly enough, it was on this day, August 24, in 1989 that Pete Rose was banned from baseball.
 
2012-08-24 07:46:49 AM
all i have to say is, "WHAR POSITIVE TESTS? WHARRRRR?"

seriously, the USADA keeps saying that they have these positive results and yet hasnt released them. and as for the people saying his lawsuit was thrown out monday, three days is more than enough time to release the test results, hell, they could have done it anytime before.

Armstrong is one of my personal idols (im a weekend cyclist) and I'd like to believe he is clean. Frankly, I'm going to keep believing he is until somebody shows me that one of his piss samples had something other than piss in it.
 
2012-08-24 07:51:59 AM

Yanks_RSJ: Well, duh.

Just remember what Armstrong's defenders would have you believe, that 98% of the cycling community was doping, except for Lance Armstrong, the guy who won every Tour de France for 7 years.


Seriously. I think some people believe steroids are some magical pill that instantly make you better without any effort. Even if he was doping Armstrong had to work insanely hard to reach the level of performance he was at. Combine that with the fact a there was likely a good percentage of his competitors doping as well and his victories are still really impressive.

It's time they throw out the antiquated doping rules and let adults make their own choices if they want to take the risks for increased performance.
 
2012-08-24 07:58:19 AM

Yanks_RSJ: Well, duh.

Just remember what Armstrong's defenders would have you believe, that 98% of the cycling community was doping, except for Lance Armstrong, the guy who won every Tour de France for 7 years.


Yep. Either 1)He wasn't doping and did better than everyone else who was, or 2)He was doping, and still did better than everyone else who was too. Serious case of this going on with the losers sore at being dominated for so long a time:

i.imgur.com
 
2012-08-24 08:01:23 AM

I_Hate_Iowa: How was he the only one who wasn't caught? He was the most-tested athlete in the world for a while. Why are they suddenly railroading him with witness testimony instead of blood? Don't they hold onto samples like the Olympics' anti-dopers? If they have witnesses that can say what exactly he was using, then they should be able to test for exactly that.


Not testing positive is not a good reason to think he was innocent. There are all sorts of designer drugs out there, which are not detectable (until a test is developed to detect them).

Carth: Yanks_RSJ: Well, duh.

Just remember what Armstrong's defenders would have you believe, that 98% of the cycling community was doping, except for Lance Armstrong, the guy who won every Tour de France for 7 years.

Seriously. I think some people believe steroids are some magical pill that instantly make you better without any effort. Even if he was doping Armstrong had to work insanely hard to reach the level of performance he was at. Combine that with the fact a there was likely a good percentage of his competitors doping as well and his victories are still really impressive.

It's time they throw out the antiquated doping rules and let adults make their own choices if they want to take the risks for increased performance.


Carth: Yanks_RSJ: Well, duh.

Just remember what Armstrong's defenders would have you believe, that 98% of the cycling community was doping, except for Lance Armstrong, the guy who won every Tour de France for 7 years.

Seriously. I think some people believe steroids are some magical pill that instantly make you better without any effort. Even if he was doping Armstrong had to work insanely hard to reach the level of performance he was at. Combine that with the fact a there was likely a good percentage of his competitors doping as well and his victories are still really impressive.

It's time they throw out the antiquated doping rules and let adults make their own choices if they want to take the risks for increased performance.


This. And what Yanks_RSJ said
 
2012-08-24 08:01:28 AM

Carth: Seriously. I think some people believe steroids are some magical pill that instantly make you better without any effort. Even if he was doping Armstrong had to work insanely hard to reach the level of performance he was at. Combine that with the fact a there was likely a good percentage of his competitors doping as well and his victories are still really impressive.


I'd never debate the fact that Armstrong's accomplishments are impressive or that he didn't work incredibly hard to achieve them, just the idea that he was somehow the only clean one in a sport full of cheaters yet managed to dominate it for the better part of a decade. It's implausible.
 
2012-08-24 08:05:35 AM
So just ban everyone in the past 20 years and strip all titles. If they continue to hound him for a decade until he basically gave up fighting there's no reason to believe everyone else that was in race wasn't cheating as well.
 
2012-08-24 08:17:49 AM
Hilarious. Still the deniers and defenders.
You'd think he went to Penn State
 
2012-08-24 08:18:21 AM

Yanks_RSJ: Carth: Seriously. I think some people believe steroids are some magical pill that instantly make you better without any effort. Even if he was doping Armstrong had to work insanely hard to reach the level of performance he was at. Combine that with the fact a there was likely a good percentage of his competitors doping as well and his victories are still really impressive.

I'd never debate the fact that Armstrong's accomplishments are impressive or that he didn't work incredibly hard to achieve them, just the idea that he was somehow the only clean one in a sport full of cheaters yet managed to dominate it for the better part of a decade. It's implausible.


Both of these. Doping is frowned upon in part (or mainly, in my mind) because it is supposed to give some people an unfair advantage. If I learned anything from baseball and from the world of cycling, everyone is doping. Everyone. So if everyone is doping it's a level playing field. And for one person to dominate the way he did even with other people doping is a big accomplishment. Taking away the titles is a laughable attempt at cleaning up the sport. It won't happen. Doping will always be one step ahead of all the test because they don't know what they're testing for until years after the new methods are already in use. Let people do whatever they want. Any methods. That's the only way to ensure the playing field is leveled. Because if everyone is doping, the guy with the superior training and talent will still win.
 
2012-08-24 08:19:18 AM
Whoa, The Onion called this a year ago.

Don't get mad
 
2012-08-24 08:19:27 AM
cleveralthere SmartestFunniest 2012-08-24 07:46:49 AM


all i have to say is, "WHAR POSITIVE TESTS? WHARRRRR?"

seriously, the USADA keeps saying that they have these positive results and yet hasnt released them. and as for the people saying his lawsuit was thrown out monday, three days is more than enough time to release the test results, hell, they could have done it anytime before.

Armstrong is one of my personal idols (im a weekend cyclist) and I'd like to believe he is clean. Frankly, I'm going to keep believing he is until somebody shows me that one of his piss samples had something other than piss in it.




Santa and the Easter Bunny agree with you!
 
2012-08-24 08:25:36 AM

Carth: Seriously. I think some people believe steroids are some magical pill that instantly make you better without any effort. Even if he was doping Armstrong had to work insanely hard to reach the level of performance he was at. Combine that with the fact a there was likely a good percentage of his competitors doping as well and his victories are still really impressive.

It's time they throw out the antiquated doping rules and let adults make their own choices if they want to take the risks for increased performance.


"Everybody else is doing it" is never a good excuse for doing anything. As long as one cyclist was not doping, everybody else who did was cheating. And, if Lance Armstrong is still such an awesome cyclist, then it's more damning still if he was doping, as it would indicate he knew the right way to win, and just said, "Screw it. I'm above the law." It's still an unfair advantage, and it's still cheating, no matter how much hard work goes into it.
 
2012-08-24 08:28:11 AM
He'd have to move to the Midwest or Canada, but he could always change his name to "Johnny" and start a new career as a rodeo attendee.
 
2012-08-24 08:33:27 AM

apachevoyeur: [a.espncdn.com image 400x600]
Presenting Douchebag of the Century:
Travis Tygart, CEO, United States Anti-Doping Agency


Why is Hank Azaria in charge of Anti-Doping? I mean I know that show Free Agents he did only lasted like 4 episodes, but the money he has made off of The Simpsons should be enough where he doesn't need to take another job.
 
2012-08-24 08:35:52 AM
Armstrong might have done it, but I wouldn't be sad to read about Landis riding off a cliff sometime soon. What a jackass.
 
rka
2012-08-24 08:35:53 AM
USADA can't strip Lance of jack or shiat to do with the TdF. It's not their race.

The UCI is today asking why they should give two rat's asses what the USADA thinks about their race.

Now here's a funny twist. A International Body that governs a French race is telling the USADA to pretty much put up or shut up to protect an American rider.
 
2012-08-24 08:37:41 AM

EyeballKid: Carth: Seriously. I think some people believe steroids are some magical pill that instantly make you better without any effort. Even if he was doping Armstrong had to work insanely hard to reach the level of performance he was at. Combine that with the fact a there was likely a good percentage of his competitors doping as well and his victories are still really impressive.

It's time they throw out the antiquated doping rules and let adults make their own choices if they want to take the risks for increased performance.

"Everybody else is doing it" is never a good excuse for doing anything. As long as one cyclist was not doping, everybody else who did was cheating. And, if Lance Armstrong is still such an awesome cyclist, then it's more damning still if he was doping, as it would indicate he knew the right way to win, and just said, "Screw it. I'm above the law." It's still an unfair advantage, and it's still cheating, no matter how much hard work goes into it.



Anti dropping rules are more about mortality than safety. Like you said it creates the false impression that everyone is on a level playing field: with the amount of money involved in professional sports that just isn't the case. As long as some teams are able to spend millions of dollars to develop new equipment while others are forced to use off the rack parts there isn't going to be a truly level playing field.

If you want to compete at a professional level you need to at least keep pace with your competitors. If as many people in cycling are doping as is suspected the problem isn't with the athletics it is with the regulations. The people hurting the clean competitors aren't the ones doping it is the people who try to enforce unenforceable rules.
 
2012-08-24 08:38:59 AM
Obvious tag would have been more appropriate. Of course he was doping, just like many of us have said for years. I can't believe people still use the "OMG he never failed a test" excuse and still defend this guy. Pathetic.
 
2012-08-24 08:42:36 AM

Ebbelwoi: I'm not sure who they want to give the titles to if Lance is stripped. Basso, Ullrich, Klöde, Pantani? All of the 2nd and 3rd placers were dopers.


The titles just work their way down the line, until eventually that German Devil Guy gets them all.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-08-24 08:49:23 AM
Always knew he was too smug and too full of himself not to be a cheater.

Here's a guy who took deserved sympathy over his beating cancer and turned it into a platform from which to systemically cheat for years.

What a monument to human pride and greed that he could fumble away deserved sympathy and turn it into justified loathing.

Live Strong, fraudulent lying asswit.
 
2012-08-24 08:52:05 AM
www.alrdesign.com
 
2012-08-24 08:52:37 AM
Lance Armstrong: Cheater. Scam Artist. Texan. I can't decide which is worse.
 
2012-08-24 08:59:00 AM
The terrible thing is that this masks the selfless and courageous actions of those who struggle to raise money to fight diseases that they themselves are afflicted with
 
2012-08-24 09:01:53 AM
So, an organization with no authority over the Tour de France is stripping him of his titles? Furthermore they're doing it without disclosing any evidence. That makes sense.
 
2012-08-24 09:06:54 AM
My headline was "It takes balls to fight the USADA", was there a lot of those?
 
2012-08-24 09:07:14 AM
So the thing I get most loud and clear from this is: Bike Riders Are Self-Important Douchebags.

More confirmation of the truth already known.

What is it about spandex and a little tiny seat up your ass that turns you into a raving d-bag? Lets ask a cyclist. Mr. Cyclist, why are you better than everyone else?
 
2012-08-24 09:07:49 AM

Johnny Swank: Lance Armstrong: Cheater. Scam Artist. Texan. I can't decide which is worse.


Do I have to decide? Can't it be all three?
 
2012-08-24 09:08:17 AM

mikes73: So, an organization with no authority over the Tour de France is stripping him of his titles? Furthermore they're doing it without disclosing any evidence. That makes sense.


UCI has told USADA that they won't be stripping any titles until they produce the evidence and UCI is satisfied with it.
 
2012-08-24 09:14:26 AM
Looks like Lance is taking his ball and going home.
 
2012-08-24 09:18:47 AM
Over 500 clean tests, and Hincapie and Landis were going to be poor sports (ie losers) and claim he cheated, but with no evidence. It's like asking if Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. NO EVIDENCE.

It's probably pretty expensive to continue with this witch hunt. He shouldn't have to deplete his life's savings just because they were NEVER going to stop.
 
2012-08-24 09:18:48 AM

whatshisname: mikes73: So, an organization with no authority over the Tour de France is stripping him of his titles? Furthermore they're doing it without disclosing any evidence. That makes sense.

UCI has told USADA that they won't be stripping any titles until they produce the evidence and UCI is satisfied with it.


Time for USADA to pony up the bloodtests.
 
2012-08-24 09:19:14 AM
I don't understand why the default assumption isn't that everyone playing a sport that's televised is doping. Maybe not F1 and Nascar drivers, but the cars most likely are.
 
2012-08-24 09:19:41 AM
Plot twist: the head of the USADA is being blackmailed by cycling mobster Jan Ullrich!
 
2012-08-24 09:19:50 AM
having a ball with all these comments!

here's a sad thought... well, more tragic than sad... but, IIRC, many of his team suffered from testicular cancer. some thought that the use of the performance enhancing drugs were a significant factor in the development of the cancers.

so, he juiced to win, didn't win. got cancer, survived, went back to juicing, and then lost it all. so, I guess juicing wasn't that great of a choice... unless you like ball cancer and being defrocked of your titles.  although, maybe in the long run it was worth it, because he got a decade of being a hero, and now he's made enough money independently to not give a damn
 
2012-08-24 09:23:00 AM
I'd do it too if it meant I got to bang Kate Hudson.
 
2012-08-24 09:24:00 AM

jekostas: Confabulat: Michael Phelps can still smoke a bowl and swim circles around this guy anyway.

Pot isn't a PED unless there's a giant Hershey bar at each end of the pool (cheerfully stolen from Robin Williams)


If there's a "giant Hershey bar" in the pool, that's the last place i'd want to go swimming.
 
2012-08-24 09:28:06 AM
If there is evidence of doping, make it public and let the experts duke it out.

He is either guilty or he pissed off someone powerful. Not sure which one it is.
 
2012-08-24 09:36:05 AM
Baseball and cycling. Two sports that hero worship the guys of the past and do anything they can to discredit modern participants.
 
2012-08-24 09:36:12 AM

contrapunctus: Anyone genuinely upset about something like this is an utterly clueless moron who's not paying attention to the world we live in.

We all talk a good game about how "it's not whether you win or lose..." but we all know deep down that that's grade A bullshiat. The rewards we bestow upon sports winners are so excessive that it's not even remotely surprising that many of them cheat. The difference between a winner and a loser on the national stage can be measured in millions of dollars. If Usain Bolt left London with silver medals, his earning potential would be quite different right now.

So Armstrong cheated better than anyone in a field of cheaters. BFD.


But...but...the purity of the sport!!!
 
2012-08-24 09:41:06 AM
Oh well, the turd rode a bicycle. That's it. Why anyone cared anyhow is beyond me.
 
2012-08-24 09:41:54 AM
So, this guy wins 7 tours, they find little evidence against him, and improperly run an investigation.

Innocent. Whether or not he did, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. They failed to do so.
 
2012-08-24 09:46:03 AM

Marine1: So, this guy wins 7 tours, they find little evidence against him, and improperly run an investigation.

Innocent. Whether or not he did, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. They failed to do so.


Why beyond a reasonable doubt? It is not like he is in a criminal trial and he will go to jail if found guilty.
 
2012-08-24 09:47:04 AM
He quit fighting.

malvasiabianca.org
 
2012-08-24 09:49:38 AM

mechgreg: Marine1: So, this guy wins 7 tours, they find little evidence against him, and improperly run an investigation.

Innocent. Whether or not he did, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. They failed to do so.

Why beyond a reasonable doubt? It is not like he is in a criminal trial and he will go to jail if found guilty.


Because it's his freakin' life's work and reputation.
 
2012-08-24 09:51:04 AM
www.alrdesign.com

been saying it for years...of course he doped. he's a cyclist.
 
2012-08-24 09:57:28 AM

JWideman: I have just one question: whether he doped or not, why should I give a fark?


Because all of humanity's other ills have been cured, and all of its atrocities repented, so this is literally the last thing in the world to be outraged about. No, really.
 
2012-08-24 10:02:07 AM

Marine1: mechgreg: Marine1: So, this guy wins 7 tours, they find little evidence against him, and improperly run an investigation.

Innocent. Whether or not he did, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. They failed to do so.

Why beyond a reasonable doubt? It is not like he is in a criminal trial and he will go to jail if found guilty.

Because it's his freakin' life's work and reputation.


Which means he knew the rules going in, how they were investigated, and how this kind of thing would be handled. I mean with my company I know that they can fire me with cause for certain things, and there won't be any kind of trial or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt given. If you are doing something at an elite level you should know exactly how the rules are applied before you start competing.
 
2012-08-24 10:03:03 AM
Tour de France titles for Ullrich, Basso, Kloden, Beloki, and Zulle, who all certainly have never been caught taking drugs.

Cycling is hilarious.
 
2012-08-24 10:08:54 AM

mechgreg: Marine1: mechgreg: Marine1: So, this guy wins 7 tours, they find little evidence against him, and improperly run an investigation.

Innocent. Whether or not he did, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. They failed to do so.

Why beyond a reasonable doubt? It is not like he is in a criminal trial and he will go to jail if found guilty.

Because it's his freakin' life's work and reputation.

Which means he knew the rules going in, how they were investigated, and how this kind of thing would be handled. I mean with my company I know that they can fire me with cause for certain things, and there won't be any kind of trial or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt given. If you are doing something at an elite level you should know exactly how the rules are applied before you start competing.


Firing and stripping you of everything you ever did at that company are a little different, don't you think?
 
2012-08-24 10:09:42 AM
all cyclists dope
 
2012-08-24 10:14:44 AM
Keeping up the ruse for so long was nuts.
 
2012-08-24 10:14:57 AM
I hope all those self-righteous people with their "Livestrong" bracelets are happy
 
2012-08-24 10:25:24 AM
Heard this discussion on The Ticket (local sports station) this morning. The host (Junior) may be mistaken, he said only two entities have the right to strip Armstrong's titles: the UCI (which has always been in Lance's corner and therefore won't do it) and the Tour de France itself. And the Tour has no incentive to strip Lance of seven titles because the two runner-ups each year have either tested positive or admitted to using drugs.
 
2012-08-24 10:28:54 AM
Actually, no. The USADA has no authority to strip anyone of tehir TDF titles. He's never failed a test (passed 500 or more) & this is an arbitration hearing, not a trial. There's quite a big difference between the two.

And what? Strip Armstrong of his Tour Titles & elevate the #2 finishers? Sorry, but those cyclists failed tests & are are known dopers.

Okay, we'll give those titles to the #3 finishers, right? Not so fast. They are known dopers, too.

Did Armstrong use some sort of PED? Probably so, but you have to PROVE IT.
 
2012-08-24 10:31:34 AM

4NSpy: Sports talk radio is going to bust a nut over this news.


Imagine the kind of asshole that actually listens to that crap?
 
2012-08-24 10:31:56 AM
None of them ride clean. He was still the best tour cyclist at the time.
 
2012-08-24 10:36:39 AM

Blue_Blazer: I hope all those self-righteous people with their "Livestrong" bracelets are happy


Indeed. How dare they support overcoming odds like cancer and other diseases to become healthy and do great things with their lives? The sheer audacity of those people makes me want to foam at the mouth and bite someone.
 
2012-08-24 10:37:13 AM

Your Average Witty Fark User: Over 500 clean tests, and Hincapie and Landis were going to be poor sports (ie losers) and claim he cheated, but with no evidence. It's like asking if Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. NO EVIDENCE.

It's probably pretty expensive to continue with this witch hunt. He shouldn't have to deplete his life's savings just because they were NEVER going to stop.


You really think he is innocent?
 
2012-08-24 10:39:35 AM

atlfarkette: None of them ride clean. He was still the best tour DE FRANCE cyclist at the
time.


Fixed. There's some other grand tours. They been racing them a long time too. Just so you know there's more bike races than the one you know about.
 
2012-08-24 10:43:03 AM
O.K., laymens question here, if everyone in the sport is cheating, why does anyone pay any attention to it?
 
2012-08-24 10:49:34 AM

cantsleep: O.K., laymens question here, if everyone in the sport is cheating, why does anyone pay any attention to it?


More people paid attention to the perception and idea of a clean, cancer-surviving and ass-kicking Lance Armstrong than the sport itself. I'm not sure 70% of his biggest supporters have actually watched a sizable amount of the Tour de France, let alone the Tour de Botswana or whatever other goodamn events there are in cycling that largely no one domestically is even aware of.
 
2012-08-24 10:49:53 AM
A lot of people seem to not know that this was a guy that rode a thriathlon when he was 15, and beat the champions at it: video.

/DNRTWT
 
2012-08-24 10:51:11 AM

cantsleep: O.K., laymens question here, if everyone in the sport is cheating, why does anyone pay any attention to it?


Because, regardless of the doping, It is an incredible test of endurance.
 
2012-08-24 10:53:42 AM

atlfarkette: None of them ride clean. He was still the best tour cyclist at the time.


That's another point of view; we've had a big cycling cheater in our country (Johan Museeuw), but what the guy did is still considered phenomenal, doping or not.
 
2012-08-24 10:56:44 AM
Wouldn't the statute of limitations come into play here?
 
2012-08-24 11:01:27 AM

Science_Guy_3.14159: Wouldn't the statute of limitations come into play here?


Don't know if that would apply to a civil case in France.

I think Lance has an Olympic time trial medal or two, I wonder if the IOC will go after him.
 
2012-08-24 11:02:55 AM

cameroncrazy1984: JosephFinn: So he doesn't admit guilt, but just stops fighting the witch hunt. I'm OK with that.

Yes, that's it. He just got tired. A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

That's the ticket.

 
2012-08-24 11:03:14 AM
They just awarded an Olympic gold medal to a guy who got his entire team kicked out of the Tour, so who cares?
 
2012-08-24 11:05:47 AM

Dheiner: cantsleep: O.K., laymens question here, if everyone in the sport is cheating, why does anyone pay any attention to it?

Because, regardless of the doping, It is an incredible test of endurance.


In my view, the doping negates that.
I understand the appeal of watching people who have worked hard and made themselves into superior athletes, people who have taken the time and effort to become the best version of what genetics has given them. Using artificial enhancement to become more than what nature gave them does not appeal to me.
Goes for any sport, and is one of the reasons I've pretty much gave up on watching "sports".
 
2012-08-24 11:15:39 AM

WhyteRaven74: So they have no positive drug tests, they aren't in charge of the Tour, but they want to strip him of the titles. Uh ok.


Exactly; this is starting to sound like something out of Arthur Miller's "The Crucible."
 
2012-08-24 11:19:47 AM

Rev.K: Man up, Lance. Man the f*ck up and admit it. You know it, we know it. You're going to lose the titles anyway, if you want to be petty and not say anything out of spite, that's your choice, but you're going to be a title-less nobody and we all know why.




Man up Rev. K we know you like to rape 9 year old boys, even though you have never been caught and no 9 year old boy has ever come forward to accuse you. We have the confession of a man who rapes 9 year old boys that you and him used to rape 9 year old boys together. Just because we are giving this man a lighter sentence then you for his confession does not mean his confession is being coerced or paid for in any way.

No, just man up and admit you like to rape 9 year old boys.
 
2012-08-24 11:22:08 AM

Your Average Witty Fark User: Over 500 clean tests, and Hincapie and Landis were going to be poor sports (ie losers) and claim he cheated, but with no evidence. It's like asking if Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. NO EVIDENCE.

It's probably pretty expensive to continue with this witch hunt. He shouldn't have to deplete his life's savings just because they were NEVER going to stop.


Lance is worth approximately $125 Million. He can afford to have his attorneys carry on the fight. It would be expensive, but it wouldn't be a kick in the nut expensive.
 
2012-08-24 11:24:38 AM
Of course, USADA's own rules have an eight year statute of limitations.

So I guess vacate 2004 and 2005, and Lance is only a five-time winner.
 
2012-08-24 11:25:00 AM
On behalf of all Americans, I'd just like to thank USADA and WADA for turning the sport of cycling back to what it always was: an afterthought in the consciousness of American sport.
 
rka
2012-08-24 11:26:07 AM

you have pee hands: Don't know if that would apply to a civil case in France.


What does France have to do with anything?

The USADA is the body going after Armstrong. They're a US organization.

They have nothing to do with the UCI, the TdF or France for that matter. Their *actual* stated/funded job is to test US Olympic, ParaOlympic and Pan American athletes. They've also assumed US authority over athletes that compete under a US National Governing Body, so I guess that's where they think they can get Armstrong. If he wants to ride for a cycling sport that has a National Governing Body he has to adhere to their standards. The NFL does not abide by the USADA, neither do any of the other pro leagues in the US. MLB, nope, NBA, nope. MLS, nope.

Only the UCI can strip Lance of his TdF titles though. Not the USADA. UCI decides their own punishments and runs their own anti-doping program.
 
2012-08-24 11:32:07 AM
It's all a bunch of bullshiat.

I'm going for a ride.
 
2012-08-24 11:36:12 AM

rka: They have nothing to do with the UCI, the TdF or France for that matter. Their *actual* stated/funded job is to test US Olympic, ParaOlympic and Pan American athletes. They've also assumed US authority over athletes that compete under a US National Governing Body, so I guess that's where they think they can get Armstrong. If he wants to ride for a cycling sport that has a National Governing Body he has to adhere to their standards. The NFL does not abide by the USADA, neither do any of the other pro leagues in the US. MLB, nope, NBA, nope. MLS, nope.


They must be trying to get someone else who can take away previous titles/accolades to take another look. Otherwise, what's the point? Dude's over 40. Barring him from competition now is pretty meaningless.
 
2012-08-24 11:38:24 AM

Atomic Spunk: CommieTaoist: I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness..

no, they have a lot more witnesses than just Landis. Tyler Hamilton gave a scathing interview on 60 minutes. They also have several other witnesses who came forward as well.


what i don't get is how competing teammates could be reliable witnesses at all. wouldn't he be smart enough do his doping in private away from teammates' eyes?
 
2012-08-24 11:42:55 AM

wookiee cookie: Atomic Spunk: CommieTaoist: I don't really care but there still has been no clear evidence that he doped, the only thing they have is Landis who is hardly an impartial witness..

no, they have a lot more witnesses than just Landis. Tyler Hamilton gave a scathing interview on 60 minutes. They also have several other witnesses who came forward as well.

what i don't get is how competing teammates could be reliable witnesses at all. wouldn't he be smart enough do his doping in private away from teammates' eyes?


Not just that: Lance was once at death's door due to Cancer. Unless you love playing Russian Roulette, I can't think of anyone that would try to put some type of chemical in their body fully knowing that their immune system could be compromised and allowing big C to come back more aggressive than before.
 
rka
2012-08-24 11:47:11 AM

you have pee hands: They must be trying to get someone else who can take away previous titles/accolades to take another look. Otherwise, what's the point? Dude's over 40. Barring him from competition now is pretty meaningless.


The USADA contends that since they are a signatory to the World Anti-Doping agreement and that UCI is also a signatory that if the USADA says jump the UCI has to ask "How high".

The UCI rightly disagrees with this opinion.
 
2012-08-24 11:49:15 AM

crotchgrabber: It's all a bunch of bullshiat.

I'm going for a ride.


why? Lance never pedaled in August.
 
2012-08-24 11:51:28 AM
"THEY'RE ALL JUST JEALOUS HATERS!!! ALL OF THEM!!!"
 
2012-08-24 11:55:58 AM

WhyteRaven74: LeMond rode a 54x12 almost the whole way, that's 54 teeth in the chain ring up front and 12 for the gear in back. He did shift as he came up the Champs Elysees to an easier gear, 54x13. By way of comparison a regular road bike you can get at a local bike shop might have a top gear of 50x14 or if it's a bit more performance oriented 52x12, and while it doesn't seam like there's much different between a 50x14 and a 54x12, there's a good amount of difference. Also the average mere mortal will have their quads begging for mercy if they tried to really push a 54x12.


My road bike, which is at the entry level SRAM Apex set up, is 50/34 front, 11-32 rear. 50x11 is hard enough for me to pedal on flat road, and if I was in more beast mode I could have gotten a 53 up front. Doing hills on a double front cog is enough of a pain, hence the 32 rear (where most bike have a 28-30.)
 
2012-08-24 12:04:28 PM
theurge14 SmartestFunniest 2012-08-24 10:36:39 AM


Blue_Blazer: I hope all those self-righteous people with their "Livestrong" bracelets are happy

Indeed. How dare they support overcoming odds like cancer and other diseases to become healthy and do great things with their lives? The sheer audacity of those people makes me want to foam at the mouth and bite someone.




I know. I never cease to be inspired by the courage of people who raise money to fight the disease that they have.
 
2012-08-24 12:14:54 PM

cameroncrazy1984: whatshisname: cameroncrazy1984: A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

You don't win the Tour de France without help.

Alright, if you want to be pedantic: "without drugs"


Do they have proof he was using performance enhancers? I mean, besides a bunch of sour-grapes teammates and allegations from an agency so anti-dope they CALL themselves the Anti-Doping Agency? Armstrong passed every test he was ever given after the Tours, and there is NO EVIDENCE except some people saying they know he did it, years after the fact. Are there any dirty urine tests? Any evidence he was using steroids prior to getting cancer? No.

This is evil and wrong, and I can't believe they're doing it. I guess next up they strip Phelps of his gold medals because we know he smokes weed; and retroactively change the results of all World Series games where players who were later found to be doping were playing in those games.
 
2012-08-24 12:17:49 PM

WhyteRaven74: DrySocket: Part of the evidence against Lance says that the UCI helped Lance cover up a positive EPO test from 2001

I've heard that, yet seen nothing released.


If it turns out the UCI DID help cover up a positive--this gets suddenly much bigger than Lance Armstrong, as in "there may be a non-negligible chance the IOC is going to be giving a VERY hairy eye to the US Olympic Team in Rio" big. (UCI also enforces anti-doping regs in Olympic competition, and the IOC already has the USOC on its shiatlist due to the latter pretty much not even giving the Paralympics the regard it usually gives chopped liver.)
 
2012-08-24 12:29:31 PM
Hmm, it does seem like this mess makes cycling look like nothing but a joke. Its a shame that it looks like whatever proof the anti-doping agency had wont be released since Armstrong gave up. I still don't know what to make of it, but cycling has certainly been damaged greatly. Suppose it was building up to this, but still.
 
2012-08-24 12:41:47 PM

bbfreak: Hmm, it does seem like this mess makes cycling look like nothing but a joke. Its a shame that it looks like whatever proof the anti-doping agency had wont be released since Armstrong gave up. I still don't know what to make of it, but cycling has certainly been damaged greatly. Suppose it was building up to this, but still.


No this does not, surprisingly, the sport has a lot of talented clean riders and the completion is incredible this season, perhaps the best ever!
I think more MLB players were suspended than UCI this year.
 
2012-08-24 12:46:04 PM
I guess we can all go to Greg LeMond. He raced in the 80's. No way anyone was doping then. *sarcasm* This is what pisses me off about the whole thing. People have been using performance enhancing drugs since at LEAST the 60's. They didnt have the crazy testing then like they do now, and in a lot of cases it wasnt even against the rules, so more than likely tons of athletes were doing it. Everyone loves to vilify the modern guys but they totally give all the guys of yesteryear a pass and still act like they are heroes. People will always do whatever they can to get an edge in sports. McGwire, Bonds, Armstrong, these guys are just punching bags for the losers who never had a chance to compete at that level to begin with anyways.
 
2012-08-24 12:52:08 PM

fonebone77: I People will always do whatever they can to get an edge in sports. McGwire, Bonds, Armstrong, these guys are just punching bags for the losers who never had a chance to compete at that level to begin with anyways.

then there are some cyclist who were clean and suffered to climb with those who transfused blood before a major category climb, hopefully they can get some glory that they deserve now!
and Lance was not the only rider who is being punished, has any heard of the Operación Puerto doping case?
 
2012-08-24 01:09:24 PM

Your Average Witty Fark User: Over 500 clean tests, and Hincapie and Landis were going to be poor sports (ie losers) and claim he cheated,


You forgot a whole bunch of other guys. You can gloss over Landis as having an axe to grind. I suppose you can discount Hamilton if you want. But now you have four more teammates coming forward. Including Hincapie, Armstrong's chief super domestique for all seven tours and most trusted ally. Do you really think it's that easy to get all these people to tell the same lie - even as they were incriminating themselves? Please. At some point you just have to accept it. One by one Lance throws them under the bus to keep his good name. The whole statement was simply a calculated effort on his behalf so he didn't have to face his accusers/testimony/evidence at the arbitration hearing. What kills me is Lance eviscerated all these guys in the press but still has defenders who somehow excuse him for the exact same shiat they criticize the witnesses for. I've said it before and I'll say it again - I believe you could convince a buddy to tell a lie to save your neck. I don't think you could convince ten buddies to tell the same lie. George Hincapie would rather gouge his eyes out than hurt Lance Armstrong but he obviously drew the line at lying under oath and I don't blame him one bit. You can argue it's a waste of time. You can argue jurisdiction and good work for cancer. You can argue that everyone else was doing it. But what Lance has been selling, the one clean guy on tour kicking the dirty dopers butts, is a myth.
 
2012-08-24 01:15:38 PM
JohnBigBootay
excellent! (got my vote)
and that is why Lance and company did not appeal, he knows he has a strong following and will continue to make a ton of money. This seems to me that the the masses think the USADA is to blame, and that is the game plan. I don't know anyone on that assn, but know who lance is.
 
2012-08-24 01:18:06 PM
If he is innocent, which is very likely, considering how long they have been trying to nail him, I hope that after they damage him by stripping him of his titles, etc., and promotional opportunities, that he is is a real position to sue the committee for damages.

Up to now it has only been suspicion by the committee, which can't be translated into real dollars. However if they strip him of his winnings, then it becomes something that is concrete and can be calculated.

That means he can sue in a real court. have a real trial, and have the case heard by a real judge and jury where the person is assumed to be innocent until proved guilty. If he is innocent I hope he takes them for all that they have got! If not, we will all know the truth based on evidence, not on innuendo.
 
2012-08-24 01:23:33 PM
Many people have commented on there is no one to give the 7 titles to. This is true, every one of the top 5 from those 7 victories have been caught doping. Now we add every American cyclist since Andy Hampsten. The 10 US riders from Lance's teams have now admitted they doped and received 6 months suspensions instead of 2 years. That means a personal favorite George Hincapie is now an admitted doper. No wonder he was able to lead out NoNuts up the mountains and no wonder he announced his retirement after the article came out exposing them during this year's TdF. Fark them all! Thankfully, just because USADA gave them 6 month suspensions, does not mean they will ever race again in Europe. Hopefully every Grand Tour will ban them after UCI gets their admissions. They brought dishonor to a dishonest sport.
 
2012-08-24 01:25:48 PM
There is actual evidence that Armstrong doped. I recall from a couple of years ago a situation where rider samples had been saved and were retested years later using new technology. The problem was that, under the rules at the time of the races, the samples were to be either discarded after the races, or they could be retained for research purposes but the key to tying any particular sample to any particular rider was not to be retained. The samples were kept, as was the identification information. They went back and tested old Armstrong samples with new technology and found direct evidence of doping.

My belief is that everyone was doping just beyond the limits of the detection technology. I tend to believe those people who have said this for years. The sport was not clean, but at least it was fair. With everyone pushing their red blood levels to the same cut off ratios, they all had as equal a chance to success as each other. The final results had more to do with strategy and preparation. Lance has always said he tested clean and that he played within the rules at the time. These statements are both true. They also confirm that he doped in the same manner as everyone else who tested "clean." Again, the difference between the riders came down to preparation, training and organization.

Personally, my view is that the races are over for Lance. I don't care if he ever races again, and likely neither does he. He is retired. Close the book and go forward with testing in accordance with today's detection technology. It doesn't do any good to revisit Marco Pantani, Lance Armstrong or any one else. Let it go and move forward.
 
2012-08-24 01:26:57 PM

jimw: If he is innocent, which is very likely, considering how long they have been trying to nail him, I hope that after they damage him by stripping him of his titles, etc., and promotional opportunities, that he is is a real position to sue the committee for damages.

Up to now it has only been suspicion by the committee, which can't be translated into real dollars. However if they strip him of his winnings, then it becomes something that is concrete and can be calculated.

That means he can sue in a real court. have a real trial, and have the case heard by a real judge and jury where the person is assumed to be innocent until proved guilty. If he is innocent I hope he takes them for all that they have got! If not, we will all know the truth based on evidence, not on innuendo.


Uhhh, you know how I know you know nothing about athletics? The guy had cancer, went through chemo and lost a testicle. He was then, after his comeback, racing guys 10 years younger than him who trained just as hard as he did and had the same genetic gifts he did who WERE doping, and he beat them clean? So I bet you think Bonds was innocent, too, right? After all, he never failed a drug test!

Even though he was doping, too, it still doesn't take away his accomplishments (he still kicked cancers ass, then came and won one of the most grueling races on earth against guys younger than him who were doping, so it was a level playing field). But lying about it does.

There is no doubt he was doping.
 
2012-08-24 01:28:31 PM

jimw: If he is innocent, which is very likely, considering how long they have been trying to nail him, I hope that after they damage him by stripping him of his titles, etc., and promotional opportunities, that he is is a real position to sue the committee for damages.

Up to now it has only been suspicion by the committee, which can't be translated into real dollars. However if they strip him of his winnings, then it becomes something that is concrete and can be calculated.

That means he can sue in a real court. have a real trial, and have the case heard by a real judge and jury where the person is assumed to be innocent until proved guilty. If he is innocent I hope he takes them for all that they have got! If not, we will all know the truth based on evidence, not on innuendo.


I'd never predict that lance armstrong wouldn't sue someone - he's a pretty litigous person. But I'd bet my bike he won't initiate a court case that leaves open the possibility of subpoenaing Hincapie's testimony. Because he doesn't want anyone to see that. George is loyal and steadfast but he won't lie under oath.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/sports/cycling/hincapie-an-armstron g -teammate-seen-as-reluctant-but-reliable-witness.html?pagewanted=all

Looks like they haven't talked in a while. Maybe they had a falling out over who paid the bar tab or something? Yeah, that's probably what it is.
 
2012-08-24 01:29:41 PM

igosplat: Many people have commented on there is no one to give the 7 titles to.

Fran Mancebo finished 4th in 2000, and 2005 and is CLEAN!
/viva Banesto!
 
2012-08-24 01:40:35 PM

igosplat: Many people have commented on there is no one to give the 7 titles to. This is true, every one of the top 5 from those 7 victories have been caught doping. Now we add every American cyclist since Andy Hampsten. The 10 US riders from Lance's teams have now admitted they doped and received 6 months suspensions instead of 2 years. That means a personal favorite George Hincapie is now an admitted doper. No wonder he was able to lead out NoNuts up the mountains and no wonder he announced his retirement after the article came out exposing them during this year's TdF. Fark them all! Thankfully, just because USADA gave them 6 month suspensions, does not mean they will ever race again in Europe. Hopefully every Grand Tour will ban them after UCI gets their admissions. They brought dishonor to a dishonest sport.


That's what kills me about this whole thing. People question the legitimacy of college football titles all the time and they are even vacated after the fact. People question the SB titles of the Pats and the Saints after their scandals. But Armstrong supporters rail against Landis and Hamilton and Contador for doping but are seemingly just fine with Lance's tour wins despite the fact the entire team has admitted to doping. Whether or not you believe Lance did or not - and you have to have your head all the way under the sand at this point - every tour win is grossly tainted at best. George Hincapie was the only guy at his side for all of them and he's fessed up. Console yourself with Lance's personal myth if you want - but without EPO his teams don't win all those tours. It's a team sport and he was drugged up the those hills by a legion of dopers. I'd admire the guy one hell of a lot more if he'd fess up and take his medicine instead of leaving his friends to tell the truth in his stead.
 
2012-08-24 01:47:58 PM

JohnBigBootay: I'd admire the guy one hell of a lot more if he'd fess up and take his medicine instead of leaving his friends to tell the truth in his stead.


as did Bjarne Riis, i hated him for beating Indurain in 1996,
but he fess'd up to continue his career as a coach, so like him now.
 
2012-08-24 01:53:49 PM

Shrugging Atlas: cameroncrazy1984: JosephFinn: So he doesn't admit guilt, but just stops fighting the witch hunt. I'm OK with that.

Yes, that's it. He just got tired. A man who clearly won 7 Tour De France titles without help is tired.

That's the ticket.

Without having the evidence, and with all the uncertainty that surrounds each of these cases, I'm not even going to venture an opinion on whether or not he's guilty or innocent of doping.

But that said, I can buy this course of action as legit. I don't know if I do quite yet since I just heard about it, but it's at least plausible to me.

The accusations are never going to stop. He last won the Tour what, seven years ago and he first faced allegations in 1999 and he's still having to answer for it? I can see where a guy would finally be like "Fark it."

I'm not defending him....as I said I don't know all the details regarding all the allegations. But I can see a guy just tiring of pouring piles of money and time down a hole with no end in sight.


I would also like to add that this is NOT a court trial*, but a BINDING ARBITRATION by the USADA who is the judge and jury and had already determined he is guilty.

The real question is, since losing was a foregone conclusion, which would be worse for Lance - quitting and being found guilty or fighting and being found guilty (also without appellate recourse)?

* all of the evidence the USADA had, the feds had and the feds, who would have been bound by court rules, did not have enough to prosecute.
 
2012-08-24 01:57:04 PM
If you think Lance is innocent, but Barry is guilty, what does that say about you?


expobill: igosplat: Many people have commented on there is no one to give the 7 titles to.
Fran Mancebo finished 4th in 2000, and 2005 and is CLEAN!
/viva Banesto!



Prove he is clean.
 
2012-08-24 02:00:23 PM

chuggernaught: Prove he is clean.

I don't have to, He rode for Banesto and never doped.
 
2012-08-24 02:11:25 PM
http://youtu.be/rX7wtNOkuHo
 
2012-08-24 02:14:01 PM
Fuque the USADA and fuque Travis Tygart. The guy is long retired and they couldn't let it rest. Didn't even have enough evidence to charge him, went by this ridiculously low standard of proof as dictated by this farce of an organization. Basically, it is Floyd Landis, who really was caught cheating, saying, "well yeah, Lance cheated too". They have no hard evidence (i.e. failed drug test), just anecdotes from unscrupulous guys like Landis. Tygart is trying to make a name for himself by taking down Lance Armstrong and if I ever see him on the street, I am going to punch him in the face.
 
2012-08-24 02:14:19 PM
expobill - Fran Mancebo finished 4th in 2000, and 2005 and is CLEAN!
/viva Banesto!

Guess you forgot about Francisco Mancebo role in Operation Puerto and how he was not allowed to start the TdF in 2006 and never raced the TdF again... Doper!

/Victory Torker!
 
2012-08-24 02:15:55 PM

RedT: The real question is, since losing was a foregone conclusion, which would be worse for Lance - quitting and being found guilty or fighting and being found guilty (also without appellate recourse)?


Fighting and being found guilty. Because then he'd have to endure all of us see experts testify about his old samples checked with new testing methods. And he'd also have to watch four new teammates admit to doping with him including unassailable George Hincapie. That's why he quit - he didn't want us all to see that stuff.

And just stop it with the court recourse stuff. This ain't Perry mason. Contador and Landis and Hamilton and Ullrich didn't get jury trials either. It's a bike race, not a murder trial.
 
2012-08-24 02:17:40 PM

Pumpernickel bread: Fuque the USADA and fuque Travis Tygart. The guy is long retired and they couldn't let it rest. Didn't even have enough evidence to charge him, went by this ridiculously low standard of proof as dictated by this farce of an organization. Basically, it is Floyd Landis, who really was caught cheating, saying, "well yeah, Lance cheated too". They have no hard evidence (i.e. failed drug test), just anecdotes from unscrupulous guys like Landis. Tygart is trying to make a name for himself by taking down Lance Armstrong and if I ever see him on the street, I am going to punch him in the face.


Again, do you truly believe Lance didn't dope, or are you just naive?
 
2012-08-24 02:21:35 PM

Pumpernickel bread: Basically, it is Floyd Landis, who really was caught cheating, saying, "well yeah, Lance cheated too".


Well, that, and Tyler hamilton

and Levi Leipheimer

and Christian Vande Velde

and David Zabriskie

and longtime loyal best friend who rode every tour at his side, George Hincapie

But you go ahead and think of it as sour grapes by a disgraced ex-teammate if you want.
 
2012-08-24 02:26:38 PM

JohnBigBootay: Pumpernickel bread: Basically, it is Floyd Landis, who really was caught cheating, saying, "well yeah, Lance cheated too".

Well, that, and Tyler hamilton

and Levi Leipheimer

and Christian Vande Velde

and David Zabriskie

and longtime loyal best friend who rode every tour at his side, George Hincapie

But you go ahead and think of it as sour grapes by a disgraced ex-teammate if you want.


I repeat - not enough evidence to take to trial. Had to resort to this tactic years after he retired. It's just a farking witch hunt. Glad to hear Nike is still backing Livestrong.
 
2012-08-24 02:38:22 PM

igosplat: expobill - Fran Mancebo finished 4th in 2000, and 2005 and is CLEAN!
/viva Banesto!

Guess you forgot about Francisco Mancebo role in Operation Puerto and how he was not allowed to start the TdF in 2006 and never raced the TdF


he was linked, everyone cycling from iberia was linked- that did not prove anyone cheated tho.
heck even i was linked in that!
 
2012-08-24 02:38:39 PM

Pumpernickel bread: I repeat - not enough evidence to take to trial. Had to resort to this tactic years after he retired. It's just a farking witch hunt. Glad to hear Nike is still backing Livestrong.


Do you truly believe he is innocent? As in, a guy who beat cancer was beating guys 10 years younger than him who were doping, while clean?
 
2012-08-24 02:49:54 PM

Pumpernickel bread: I repeat - not enough evidence to take to trial. .


Don't care. It's a doping organization for sports, not a criminal matter. None of the other guys who've been busted had any more.

Had to resort to this tactic years after he retired.

Don't care. He isn't the first guy busted long after he cheated and he won't be the last. Dirty is dirty. I'd respect him more if he gave an honest statement about what goes on in his sport and on his own team. I'm happy to accept he was the best TDF rider as the whole pelleton was largely doped. Just don't ask me to believe he was riding clean the whole time and dominating all the dopers. For god's sake man the whole team has now admitted to doping except for him - there's not a 'clean' trophy in the bunch.

It's just a farking witch hunt.

It might be wasteful. And it might be unnecessary. But it's only a witch hunt if you are hounding the innocent. Armstrong is dirty.

Glad to hear Nike is still backing Livestrong

Me too. They do some good work - even if it has almost nothing to do with actual cancer research and probably not as much of your money goes to 'charity' as you think.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/athletes/lance-armstro n g/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html
 
2012-08-24 03:07:48 PM

expobill: igosplat: expobill - Fran Mancebo finished 4th in 2000, and 2005 and is CLEAN!
/viva Banesto!

Guess you forgot about Francisco Mancebo role in Operation Puerto and how he was not allowed to start the TdF in 2006 and never raced the TdF again.

he was linked, everyone cycling from iberia was linked- that did not prove anyone cheated tho.
heck even i was linked in that!


Tru dat yo! Damn Ferrari, should have used Porsche... 

/Victory Torker!
 
2012-08-24 03:16:32 PM
I find it odd that the USADA can find him guilty, but a grand jury didn't find enough evidence to charge him.
 
2012-08-24 03:23:57 PM
I admit I took PEDs. So farking what? I still won the Tour de France seven times beating other competitors who were also taking PEDs. You think I just stuck a needle in my ass and started winning races? I still had the training regimen of a world class athlete and had to have talent and drive to reach the pinnacle of the sport. And you know what else? I was good at taking PEDs. I pissed into hundreds of little plastic cups and each one came back clean. You think that just happened through luck? No. It took careful planning and practice. I mean, guys get caught ALL THE TIME in our sport and I was NEVER caught. Come to think of it, that's probably even more impressive than winning the TdF seven times. So you all can fark off for all I care. I'm just going to sit back in my enormous house, count my millions, and ponder which actress/model/singer I'm going to fark next. Or maybe I'll fire up the G4 and head to Aspen for the weekend. Either way, go fark yourselves.

Love,
Lance Armstrong
 
2012-08-24 03:31:08 PM

BGates: I find it odd that the USADA can find him guilty, but a grand jury didn't find enough evidence to charge him.


I for one, am quite content that there's a different level of evidence required by a sports doping agency and the US justice system that can indict any US citizen over criminal matters where the penalty is PMITA prison instead of 'you can't do bike races anymore because we think you cheated'. You'd have it different somehow?
 
2012-08-24 03:32:06 PM

iamskibibitz: I admit I took PEDs. So farking what? I still won the Tour de France seven times beating other competitors who were also taking PEDs. You think I just stuck a needle in my ass and started winning races? I still had the training regimen of a world class athlete and had to have talent and drive to reach the pinnacle of the sport. And you know what else? I was good at taking PEDs. I pissed into hundreds of little plastic cups and each one came back clean. You think that just happened through luck? No. It took careful planning and practice. I mean, guys get caught ALL THE TIME in our sport and I was NEVER caught. Come to think of it, that's probably even more impressive than winning the TdF seven times. So you all can fark off for all I care. I'm just going to sit back in my enormous house, count my millions, and ponder which actress/model/singer I'm going to fark next. Or maybe I'll fire up the G4 and head to Aspen for the weekend. Either way, go fark yourselves.

Love,
Lance Armstrong


If he'd have the ball to write something like that I'd respect the hell out of him. I might even buy one of those silly bracelets.
 
2012-08-24 03:33:44 PM

BGates: I find it odd that the USADA can find him guilty, but a grand jury didn't find enough evidence to charge him.


That's because the USADA pretty much makes it up as they go along.

Everyone knows the riders dope, even if we like to pretend they don't. However, the USADA is a day late and a dollar short since it doesn't matter any more. If they tested his B samples (which were supposed to be discarded) and with newer technology they found something that was banned at the time they are just too late. The fact that they went back to test these samples and were busy soliciting testimony from his teammates pretty much proves they're on a witch hunt rather than a quest for justice.

Let him keep his titles and focus on the current riders. Of course, if it reduces the number of those stupid wrist bands then maybe its not a bad thing after all...
 
2012-08-24 03:36:30 PM
Yeah, but if you're going to say "x is illegal" then come up with a solid method of detecting x or let it go. I know there are agents that can throw off the tests and it is a cat and mouse game to track those as well, but stripping wins from 99-05 seems like it ought to fall outside of some statute of limitations. Set the bar, test to it, and move forward. It won't catch everyone, but if the testing agencies are doing their jobs it should be fair enough. And it's just a bloody sport

So if in 95 you come in second to a guy you know was cheating, you just suck it up and don't cheat too? Do you suck it up the following year? The year after that?

If cheaters are not punished retroactively, what incentive does anyone today have not to cheat as well?
 
2012-08-24 03:44:38 PM

T-Boy:

Personally, my view is that the races are over for Lance. I don't care if he ever races again, and likely neither does he. He is retired. Close the book and go forward with testing in accordance with today's detection technology. It doesn't do any good to revisit Marco Pantani, Lance Armstrong or any one else. Let it go and move forward.


Um yeah, but Lance was looking to race at the Ironman Championship in Kona this year, and not just show up, but compete. Kinda disappointed we won't see him there.
 
2012-08-24 03:45:59 PM

machoprogrammer: Pumpernickel bread: I repeat - not enough evidence to take to trial. Had to resort to this tactic years after he retired. It's just a farking witch hunt. Glad to hear Nike is still backing Livestrong.

Do you truly believe he is innocent? As in, a guy who beat cancer was beating guys 10 years younger than him who were doping, while clean?


Inconsequential. Let's say it is true, apparently they were all doing it, so the playing field was level. he didn't have an advantage over anyone else and it doesn't make the accomplishment any less amazing. If they had leveled charges against him as it was going on,*and* had some hard evidence other than some dude said he saw him taking the spike, I could understand and even support stripping the title, but this years after the fact stuff with no hard evidence is just B.S. Some jerkoff just wants to make a name for himself, in his little regulatory circle by taking down Lance.
 
2012-08-24 03:49:57 PM

sprag: Everyone knows the riders dope, even if we like to pretend they don't.


Agreed. But it's not fair to the busted dopers (to say nothing of the actually clean riders) that the guy who won the most gets off scot free with his legacy intact when he was doing the same damn thing they have been vilified for.

Here's what shocks me - that there are still legions of people happy to believe that this control-freak had all these dopers right under his nose but didn't know it or participate. At best he sucks at his secondary responsibility of running a clean team. It was his team wasn't it? And one by one they've all confessed to cheating? But he didn't? THAT'S what you want me to believe? Like I said before, I believe you could get a guy to lie under oath. I don't for a second believe you could a whole bunch of guys to tell the same lie under oath. Especially when they are simultaneously admitting their own guilt. Landis or Hamilton maybe. (by the way - the crime they have been vilified for is doping, then turning on their employer - why then do you not hold armstrong to the same standard?) Zabriskie and Hincapie too? No farking way. The tooth fairy isn't real either. Agree or disagree with how it went down. Be troubled by the governing body if they bug you. But the question is, 'was armstrong doping?'
 
2012-08-24 03:52:57 PM

Pumpernickel bread: If they had leveled charges against him as it was going on,*and* had some hard evidence other than some dude said he saw him taking the spike, I could understand and even support stripping the title, but this years after the fact stuff with no hard evidence is just B.S. Some jerkoff just wants to make a name for himself, in his little regulatory circle by taking down Lance.


I suppose you do understand that the reason he quit is he prefers you don't see that evidence. Right? But mostly I think it's Hincapie's testimony. There's not a hardcore cycling fan out there who won't believe George. Lance is trying to make sure you don't get the opportunity.
 
2012-08-24 04:04:58 PM

Pumpernickel bread: Let's say it is true, apparently they were all doing it, so the playing field was level. he didn't have an advantage over anyone else and it doesn't make the accomplishment any less amazing.


Forgot this part... you've got to be kidding me. You don't think that a guy who is doping and beating all the other dopers is any less amazing than the only clean guy in the pelloton beating all the dopers? That's somewhat like thinking Usain Bolt winning the 100m in combat boots was NOT more amazing than doing it when wearing his track shoes. I'll just assume you misspoke. They dope because it works.
 
2012-08-24 04:24:15 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: CommieTaoist: The only thing that the public likes more than a hero is a fallen hero.

The only thing the public likes more than a hero is being the party that makes the hero fall. Everybody hates a winner and they take perverse pride in causing their demise. Public pressure from everybody that just "knew" he was doping, even though he passed every test, something that would require a conspiracy impossible to keep secret as he was the most scrutinized athlete in the world for the better part of a decade, people who somehow took it so personally that he was "getting over" on them, is what caused this. He would be dead or broke before this ended and the result would still have been the same.

It's like when you were a kid and you got grounded for something you didn't do, then because you were tired of being punished you confessed to your non-existent crime only to be punished for lying about it, even though you never did. There's no justice here, and that's what bothers me about the whole thing.


Amen. Somebody told the truth in this one.

// Unfortunately it isn't the USADA
// Armstrong is innocent.
 
2012-08-24 04:27:38 PM

Great Porn Dragon: IOC already has the USOC on its shiatlist due to the latter pretty much not even giving the Paralympics the regard it usually gives chopped liver.


Nice to see someone else is aware of this. Every time I bring that up at other times I feel like I'm the only person outside of the people involved who knows about it.
 
2012-08-24 04:38:44 PM

edgesrealm: Adolf Oliver Nipples: CommieTaoist: The only thing that the public likes more than a hero is a fallen hero.

The only thing the public likes more than a hero is being the party that makes the hero fall. Everybody hates a winner and they take perverse pride in causing their demise. Public pressure from everybody that just "knew" he was doping, even though he passed every test, something that would require a conspiracy impossible to keep secret as he was the most scrutinized athlete in the world for the better part of a decade, people who somehow took it so personally that he was "getting over" on them, is what caused this. He would be dead or broke before this ended and the result would still have been the same.

It's like when you were a kid and you got grounded for something you didn't do, then because you were tired of being punished you confessed to your non-existent crime only to be punished for lying about it, even though you never did. There's no justice here, and that's what bothers me about the whole thing.

Amen. Somebody told the truth in this one.

// Unfortunately it isn't the USADA
// Armstrong is innocent.


Right. Lance Armstrong and his Gulfstream IV, well known to be worth north of 100 million dollars, was gonna be rendered broke by the legal bills from an arbitration hearing. What's the punch line?
 
2012-08-24 04:53:15 PM

edgesrealm: Amen. Somebody told the truth in this one.

// Unfortunately it isn't the USADA
// Armstrong is innocent.


lol you REALLY believe he wasn't doping? You really think that a guy, in his mid 30s, who had suffered cancer and lost a testicle, could beat guys who were in their mid 20s, who were doping and who trained just as hard as he did with just as good genetics, while not doping? Do you still believe in Santa Clause, too?
 
2012-08-24 04:57:21 PM

chuggernaught: If you think Lance is innocent, but Barry is guilty, what does that say about you?


expobill: igosplat: Many people have commented on there is no one to give the 7 titles to.
Fran Mancebo finished 4th in 2000, and 2005 and is CLEAN!
/viva Banesto!


Prove he is clean.


He got tested 500 times, and was clean. Barry Bonds? Once...and because the MLBPA will get their panties in a bunch, those results will never be revealed.
 
2012-08-24 05:01:14 PM

machoprogrammer: edgesrealm: Amen. Somebody told the truth in this one.

// Unfortunately it isn't the USADA
// Armstrong is innocent.

lol you REALLY believe he wasn't doping? You really think that a guy, in his mid 30s, who had suffered cancer and lost a testicle, could beat guys who were in their mid 20s, who were doping and who trained just as hard as he did with just as good genetics, while not doping? Do you still believe in Santa Clause, too?


No that movie sucked.
 
2012-08-24 05:14:47 PM

Rwa2play: Barry Bonds? Once...and because the MLBPA will get their panties in a bunch, those results will never be revealed.


For those who don't know, Bonds has admitted to taking PED's. He just claims he didn't know what they were. And Landis and Hamilton also passed many a drug test. All but one in point of fact. Ullrich never tested positive either did he? Also, the four new guys who rolled, Vande Velde, Zabriskie, Leipheimer, and Hincapie (among others) haven't failed any tests. They just have a little more integrity than one-nut.
 
2012-08-24 05:15:32 PM

machoprogrammer: lol you REALLY believe he wasn't doping? You really think that a guy, in his mid 30s, who had suffered cancer and lost a testicle, could beat guys who were in their mid 20s, who were doping and who trained just as hard as he did with just as good genetics, while not doping? Do you still believe in Santa Clause, too?


His last victory was at 33 (he was probably still doping). Endurance athletes seem to hit their peak a little later than sprinters for whatever reason, so that's not really that old.
 
2012-08-24 05:18:40 PM

JohnBigBootay: Ullrich never tested positive either did he?


I believe Ullrich failed a test for ecstasy or something like it. I'm not sure if he ever failed a test for more, um, conventional PEDs.
 
2012-08-24 05:31:21 PM

Rwa2play: chuggernaught: If you think Lance is innocent, but Barry is guilty, what does that say about you?


expobill: igosplat: Many people have commented on there is no one to give the 7 titles to.
Fran Mancebo finished 4th in 2000, and 2005 and is CLEAN!
/viva Banesto!


Prove he is clean.

He got tested 500 times, and was clean. Barry Bonds? Once...and because the MLBPA will get their panties in a bunch, those results will never be revealed.


1. Lance Armstrong was never tested 500 times.
2. There are 38 samples from 2009-2010 TdFs that Armstrong competed in that are consistent with blood doping, and a 2001 sample that is consistent with EPO usage from the Tour de Suisse.

Please put this truly stupid argument to rest.
 
2012-08-24 05:36:29 PM

JohnBigBootay: Pumpernickel bread: If they had leveled charges against him as it was going on,*and* had some hard evidence other than some dude said he saw him taking the spike, I could understand and even support stripping the title, but this years after the fact stuff with no hard evidence is just B.S. Some jerkoff just wants to make a name for himself, in his little regulatory circle by taking down Lance.

I suppose you do understand that the reason he quit is he prefers you don't see that evidence. Right? But mostly I think it's Hincapie's testimony. There's not a hardcore cycling fan out there who won't believe George. Lance is trying to make sure you don't get the opportunity.


He let it go because (a) he knew it was a kangaroo court that would string him up with minimal evidence, so it was pointless to go down that road and (b) Livestrong had apparently secured the backing of Nike regardless of what happened here. This accusation never got to see the actual inside of a courtroom due to lack of evidence. And for the record, while I don't watch cycling as it is painfully boring, I am a cyclist. I've ridden my Cannondale literally from coast to coast and in a couple of Ironmans. You really seem to be relishing this. Are you French?
 
2012-08-24 05:42:40 PM

you have pee hands: I believe Ullrich failed a test for ecstasy or something like it. I'm not sure if he ever failed a test for more, um, conventional PEDs.


I don't think he failed a test - it's sort of like the armstrong thing, he was found guilty by the court of arbitration for sport after being linked to Operation Puerto and PED's. they actually raided his house for DNA. And in a similar vein he was retroactively stripped of all titles and banned (see, armstrong people, it ain't like Lance is getting some horrible treatment no one else ever got). I don't think he's ever admitted it verbatim, but he has apologized for his link with some doping doctor and said he made 'mistakes'. Whereas Lance has been linked with some doping doctor as well - two actually, as well as a trainer, but can't seem to bring himself to put on the big boy pants and tell the truth.
 
2012-08-24 05:47:21 PM

Pumpernickel bread: You really seem to be relishing this. Are you French?


Enjoying, no. Been expecting it for a long time, yes. And why do people keep perpetuating this odd French thing? They have actually been quite supportive of Armstrong. It's quite a large country you know. Sort of odd to lump an entire country into the same basket because of one of their magazines. You know that Armstrong and the president of france are big personal buddies, right?
 
2012-08-24 05:58:59 PM

Errk: Just another liar....


Which one?
 
rka
2012-08-24 06:00:38 PM

JohnBigBootay: Ullrich never tested positive either did he?


And his case is just as much of a farce as Armstrong's.

He gets kicked off of T-Mobile for essentially nothing other than the hysteria of "getting rid of dopers" that gripped cycling a few years back and the words of some doping expert that claimed that he was buying some absurd amounts of doping products every year. A claim that was never backed up by anyone. They kick 5 Astana riders out over the same thing (including Contador)...all of whom were subsequently pardoned. Spain dropped any and all cases against Ulrich, the IOC didn't find anything, he settled his case as "not guilty" in Germany. The Swiss dropped their case because Ulrich no longer raced under a Swiss license so the UCI appeals. And then finally, 4-5 years later the CAS finds him guilty...of??? Who knows? Who cares? Let's retroactively strip him of everything.

Justice is certainly not high on the list of priorities for these anti-doping bodies.

But here's the kicker. In Ulrich's case it was the UCI itself that was going after him, at least there is some basis to deal with any races under the UCI umbrella. In Armstrong's case the UCI is on his side.
 
2012-08-24 06:02:07 PM

expobill: chuggernaught: Prove he is clean.
I don't have to, He rode for Banesto and never doped.




He rode Banesto is not good enough. According to the USADA there's a culture of doping in cycling, and getting even base circumstantial evidence is damning to the point of a life ban. Clean results on available tests are no longer acceptable per this new precedent. So again: Prove he is clean.



Rwa2play:
He got tested 500 times, and was clean. Barry Bonds? Once...and because the MLBPA will get their panties in a bunch, those results will never be revealed.



Oh, I like this. Will have to remember for future discussions and see how it plays out.


jekostas:

1. Lance Armstrong was never tested 500 times.



Yeah, been following this all day. ESPN and Fox news radio both reporting 500 clean tests; CNN and NPR reporting hundreds of clean tests (they did not mention a specific number). One mention was on NPR in a question to Travis T. with the USADA and he did not refute the statement. So should I go with multiple reporting news agencies, or random dude on the web? If you have a source, I'd check it out.
 
2012-08-24 06:04:41 PM
Just put an asterisk by his records, like Barry Bonds. Worked for Cooperstown.
 
2012-08-24 06:17:27 PM

rka: He gets kicked off of T-Mobile for essentially nothing other than the hysteria of "getting rid of dopers" that gripped cycling a few years back


Yet they have a positive DNA match to blood bags taken from Dr. Dopers office and he apologized and all but admits he was guilty. Sort of a Mark McGwire style thing. Do you actually doubt he was dirty?
 
2012-08-24 06:28:35 PM

Gleeman: Just put an asterisk by his records, like Barry Bonds. Worked for Cooperstown.


Here's what's weird. Both Bonds and Clemens seem to have more fight than Mr. Armstrong, and they were fighting the actual feds. Bonds mostly won and Clemens got a complete acquittal. And just so you know, Armstromng could have sued had he lost his arbitration. Unfortunately the most litigious man in america (except for the dry cleaner guy I guess) didn't seem to like his chances in court ball the sudden..
 
2012-08-24 06:31:48 PM

chuggernaught: Yeah, been following this all day. ESPN and Fox news radio both reporting 500 clean tests; CNN and NPR reporting hundreds of clean tests (they did not mention a specific number). One mention was on NPR in a question to Travis T. with the USADA and he did not refute the statement. So should I go with multiple reporting news agencies, or random dude on the web? If you have a source, I'd check it out.


This just in - professional cyclists use masking agents. You may not have heard about this news but Hamilton and Landis and Contador all passed fark tons of drug tests when dirty.
 
2012-08-24 06:41:42 PM

Pumpernickel bread
2012-08-24 05:36:29 PM JohnBigBootay:
Pumpernickel bread: If they had leveled charges against him as it was going on,*and* had some hard evidence other than some dude said he saw him taking the spike, I could understand and even support stripping the title, but this years after the fact stuff with no hard evidence is just B.S. Some jerkoff just wants to make a name for himself, in his little regulatory circle by taking down Lance.

I suppose you do understand that the reason he quit is he prefers you don't see that evidence. Right? But mostly I think it's Hincapie's testimony. There's not a hardcore cycling fan out there who won't believe George. Lance is trying to make sure you don't get the opportunity.

He let it go because (a) he knew it was a kangaroo court that would string him up with minimal evidence, so it was pointless to go down that road and (b) Livestrong had apparently secured the backing of Nike regardless of what happened here. This accusation never got to see the actual inside of a courtroom due to lack of evidence. And for the record, while I don't watch cycling as it is painfully boring, I am a cyclist. I've ridden my Cannondale literally from coast to coast and in a couple of Ironmans. You really seem to be relishing this. Are you French?




No, he's just one of the majority of sane, rational people who aren't so deluded with hero worship that they can't see what is patently obvious.
You'll never be satisfied because Lance didn't want you to see the evidence. That's why he, um, QUIT.

It's over. He lost.
Hang out and biatch with the climate change deniers.
 
2012-08-24 06:50:25 PM
It is adorable how people think a clean test means someone isn't doping.
 
rka
2012-08-24 07:19:54 PM

JohnBigBootay: Do you actually doubt he was dirty?


Dirty of what though? Doping? Blood transfusions? Did they find evidence of PEDs in the blood or did they just find his blood?

Listen, I'm a big believer in the "better to let 10 guilty men go free than convict 1 innocent" so while I agree that these are not "beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt" type of proceedings I do think that cycling's doping bodies need to be a bit more "err on the side of caution" than they seem to be.

If the USADA have good evidence on Armstrong I'm sure they will have no problem in disclosing it openly to the UCI so the UCI can actually handle stripping Armstrong of his UCI race titles.
 
2012-08-24 07:50:37 PM

machoprogrammer: It is adorable how people think a clean test means someone isn't doping.


I think it's adorable how butthurt people are about Lance Armstrong, so much so that it's come to this and the Lance haters have monopolized the thread. All because he won a few races. Amazing.
 
2012-08-24 07:51:42 PM
And I believe the same thing in criminal trials, but this isn't a criminal trial. The dopers have simply been way ahead of the doing authorities for a very long time. I don't know ask the ins and outs of the squabbling between the various doping authorities but when part of the charges involve uci in being complicit in a cover up for Armstrong back in the day I'm not sure how illuminating that whole process will ultimately be.

And I don't know about you but I find a doping doctor storing a bunch of blood bags with a racers blood in them to be fairly damning. Good enough to send a guy to prison? Nah. But good enough to conclude you didn't compete fairly in a farking bike race? Sure it is.
 
2012-08-24 08:36:21 PM

JohnBigBootay: Gleeman: Just put an asterisk by his records, like Barry Bonds. Worked for Cooperstown.

Here's what's weird. Both Bonds and Clemens seem to have more fight than Mr. Armstrong, and they were fighting the actual feds. Bonds mostly won and Clemens got a complete acquittal. And just so you know, Armstromng could have sued had he lost his arbitration. Unfortunately the most litigious man in america (except for the dry cleaner guy I guess) didn't seem to like his chances in court ball the sudden..


More proof to the point, the feds didn't even feel they had enough evidence to take it to court, so if Bonds and Clemens are in the clear, Lance should be too.
 
2012-08-24 08:42:47 PM
So... since the USADA is an actual government agency, if someone were to make a request via the Freedom of Information Act asking exactly what physical evidence was used in making their determination to ban Lance Armstrong for life and 'strip' him of his TdF titles (which, in fact, only the UCI can do) -- wouldn't they have to comply?

/serious question here, late to the game thanks to too much travel today
 
2012-08-24 08:52:35 PM
The whole thing is BS. USADA couldn't do it on their own. Jeff Novitzky spends 2million plus investigating Armstrong and along the way interviews a bunch of Armstrong's teammates. Lying at this point is PMITA federal prison style so the omerta breaks and his teammates spill. Novitzky looks over everything he has and realizes there's no way to convict. So he gives all his evidence to USADA and say 'sic em' Which they do because they get federal dollars and we end up at this point where there literally is no winner.
 
2012-08-24 08:54:44 PM

just_intonation: So... since the USADA is an actual government agency, if someone were to make a request via the Freedom of Information Act asking exactly what physical evidence was used in making their determination to ban Lance Armstrong for life and 'strip' him of his TdF titles (which, in fact, only the UCI can do) -- wouldn't they have to comply?

/serious question here, late to the game thanks to too much travel today


I doubt they have any physical evidence, just a lot of sworn testimony given under duress. Good question as to whether they have to respond to a FOIA request
 
2012-08-24 09:07:52 PM
Wow. I did not expect to see so many posters with a hardon for Lance.

I did not think the USADA could manage to out douche Lance but they managed to pull it off.

I expect the court system to get involved now. That was why Lance took this step. Now he does have standing for the lawsuit.
 
2012-08-24 09:11:13 PM

Snort: Wow. I did not expect to see so many posters with a hardon for Lance.

I did not think the USADA could manage to out douche Lance but they managed to pull it off.

I expect the court system to get involved now. That was why Lance took this step. Now he does have standing for the lawsuit.


Armstrong already tried that route. It didn't work.
 
2012-08-24 09:33:59 PM

jekostas: Snort: Wow. I did not expect to see so many posters with a hardon for Lance.

I did not think the USADA could manage to out douche Lance but they managed to pull it off.

I expect the court system to get involved now. That was why Lance took this step. Now he does have standing for the lawsuit.

Armstrong already tried that route. It didn't work.


Dude, you need to back and read up. The judge agreed with a lot of what Lance said but that he had no standing as nothing had happened yet. Now it has. Now he has standing.

Get your popcorn. This is just act one.
 
2012-08-24 10:05:52 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: machoprogrammer: It is adorable how people think a clean test means someone isn't doping.

I think it's adorable how butthurt people are about Lance Armstrong, so much so that it's come to this and the Lance haters have monopolized the thread. All because he won a few races. Amazing.


So you really think that a clean guy with 1 testicle can beat guys that are doping? Do you think that Barry Bonds unknowingly was juicing, too?
 
2012-08-24 10:14:04 PM

machoprogrammer: Adolf Oliver Nipples: machoprogrammer: It is adorable how people think a clean test means someone isn't doping.

I think it's adorable how butthurt people are about Lance Armstrong, so much so that it's come to this and the Lance haters have monopolized the thread. All because he won a few races. Amazing.

So you really think that a clean guy with 1 testicle can beat guys that are doping? Do you think that Barry Bonds unknowingly was juicing, too?


For me, its the obvious glee that you take in ripping Tue guy.

He probably cheated but was not caught out according to the rules.

The USADA is cheating as well by going way past their mandate and probably coerced testimony.

There are no heroes here. There never were.
 
2012-08-24 10:32:48 PM

JohnBigBootay:

This just in - professional cyclists use masking agents. You may not have heard about this news but Hamilton and Landis and Contador all passed fark tons of drug tests when dirty.



No shiat, Sherlock. Thanks for that news flash. However, I believe both of your star witnesses have failed tests. Mr. Armstrong has yet to fail a test. Travis T. at the USADA stated today that as many as 4 tests looked "iffy", but were not clear fails.
 
2012-08-25 01:17:07 AM

chuggernaught: expobill: chuggernaught: Prove he is clean.
I don't have to, He rode for Banesto and never doped.



He rode Banesto is not good enough. Prove he is clean.

He never failed a drug test
why should he be guilty, due to Lance?
 
Ehh
2012-08-25 01:40:56 AM

you have pee hands: Tour de France titles for Ullrich, Basso, Kloden, Beloki, and Zulle, who all certainly have never been caught taking drugs.

Cycling is hilarious.


This could turn into a Monty Python joke.
The judges for last year's doping trial have all been sacked.
As have the previous winners of the following races...
 
2012-08-25 05:12:15 AM

cptjeff: And I'm supposed to care? You didn't catch him the first time around. Get over it and move on. There's a reason real laws usually have statutes of limitation for everything but the most major crimes. Acknowledge that everybody cheated, and try to fix it in the future.


THIS^

Statutes of Limitations prevent people from being hounded into the grave by prosecutors for all but the most heinous of crimes. I don't care whether he was doping or not. I get the feeling USADA had an axe to grind. Getting to the "Truth" can be a end in itself.
 
2012-08-25 06:03:16 AM
Is there any hard evidence at all that he did this?

I really can't believe someone is guilty of doping if all they have as evidence against him are hundreds of doping tests with no dope in them.
 
2012-08-25 10:43:16 AM

studebaker hoch: Is there any hard evidence at all that he did this?

I really can't believe someone is guilty of doping if all they have as evidence against him are hundreds of doping tests with no dope in them.


Supposedly they re-tested his samples with newer technology and found evidence of it. And everyone on his team is saying he was doping, including his best friend. And supposedly they have found that he wrote a 6-figure check to a doctor that was busted for dealing HGH and other PEDs to cyclists.
 
2012-08-25 12:33:35 PM

Snort: jekostas: Snort: Wow. I did not expect to see so many posters with a hardon for Lance.

I did not think the USADA could manage to out douche Lance but they managed to pull it off.

I expect the court system to get involved now. That was why Lance took this step. Now he does have standing for the lawsuit.

Armstrong already tried that route. It didn't work.

Dude, you need to back and read up. The judge agreed with a lot of what Lance said but that he had no standing as nothing had happened yet. Now it has. Now he has standing.

Get your popcorn. This is just act one.


I hope you're right. I, for one, can't wait to hear what George Hincapie has to say.
 
2012-08-25 01:48:53 PM
machoprogrammer

studebaker hoch: Is there any hard evidence at all that he did this?

I really can't believe someone is guilty of doping if all they have as evidence against him are hundreds of doping tests with no dope in them.

Supposedly they re-tested his samples with newer technology and found evidence of it.


I'd like to see their lab results. Have they been made public?
 
2012-08-25 07:20:13 PM

Harry_Seldon: Statutes of Limitations prevent people from being hounded into the grave by prosecutors for all but the most heinous of crimes. I don't care whether he was doping or not. I get the feeling USADA had an axe to grind. Getting to the "Truth" can be a end in itself.


USADA's non-Lance statute of limitations is eight years.
 
Displayed 524 of 524 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report